#67800 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 1:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Arahants and compassion egberdina Hi Joop, Thank you for continuing to prompt me to think about compassion. > > J: the distinguishment between 'love' and 'metta' I already know 45 > years ago, when it's was explained in my study pedagogics about child > rearing: eros vs agape (greek words) of which 'eros' is self-centered > and 'agape' altruistic. I think this is something else as the > distinguishment conventional versus ultimate language as I understand > you well. My view is: when 'compassion' is self-centered (for example > self-pitty) than it's not compassion. > > > We can continue the discussion. > Discussion about 'compassion' s such already runs: see Herman message > of yesterday I am coming to think that European / Christian notions of compassion are totally incompatible with Eastern notions of compassion. If I look at Eastern examples of compassion from a Western point of view, the notions are irreconcilable. There is the Udana story of the man, when his ex-wife puts their crying baby in front of him and leaves, saying "You look after him", he pays no attention to the baby, but slips off into a jhana. When questioned about it, the Buddha says the man was faultless. Also from the Udana ( I think), there is the story of the Buddha, when fed up with other people, goes into the forest for solitude and meets a bull elephant who is sick and fed up with being in a herd. It seems that physical and mental solitude are earmarks of Buddhist compassion, and it is just unfortunate that we use a word that in the West connotes being with other beings (com = with, in Latin) to also describe an act of deliberate solitude. KInd Regards Herman #67801 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 1:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] right effort egberdina Hi Nina, > Sound is only sound and it can be > heard, in the ultimate sense there is no person there. Do you think that in an ultimate sense there is a nama there? Kind Regards Herman #67802 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 9:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Gaps: Unecessary but Interesting upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 2/1/07 4:37:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > Could you go into some more detail as to how/why conditionality is > definitely a reality? > ===================== To me it is crystal clear that what happens now conditions what happens in the future and that nothing arises without cause. This is what I (seem to) see. I cannot prove that as a fact to you. I don't know what would constitute proof of that. Do you disbelieve in phenomena arise is dependence on other requisite phenomena, prior and co-occurring? With metta, Howard #67803 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 9:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Listening. upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 2/1/07 4:39:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I gather that you have had surgery lately, and that the issues are > causing quite some interruption in your life. I hope that things > settle down real soon. > > Kind Regards > > > Herman > > ====================== Ah, thanks! It was before your return to the list, I think. I had surgery - I *would* certainly describe it as minor [Guess I'm a crypto-female! LOL!] - on December 19. It involved grinding down a bone spur inside my shoulder, "decompressing" tissues in contact where there ought to have been space between them, and releasing & reattaching the bicep that had been hanging by a thread. It was minimally invasive, and the recovery was rapid. It's the over-zealous physical therapists who seem to have set me back a wee bit. Thanks for asking, Herman! :-) With metta, Howard #67804 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 9:20 am Subject: TYPO Re: [dsg] Gaps: Unecessary but Interesting upasaka_howard Hi again, Herman - In a message dated 2/1/07 5:15:10 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: > Do you disbelieve in phenomena arise is dependence on other > requisite phenomena, prior and co-occurring? > ===================== That unreadable mess was meant to be "Do you disbelieve in phenomena arising in dependence on other requisite phenomena, prior and co-occurring?" With metta, Howard #67805 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 2:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Gaps: Unecessary but Interesting egberdina Hi Howard, On 02/02/07, upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Herman - > > In a message dated 2/1/07 4:37:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, > hhofmeister@... writes: > > > Could you go into some more detail as to how/why conditionality is > > definitely a reality? > > > ===================== > To me it is crystal clear that what happens now conditions what > happens in the future and that nothing arises without cause. This is what I (seem > to) see. I cannot prove that as a fact to you. I don't know what would > constitute proof of that. Do you disbelieve in phenomena arise is dependence on other > requisite phenomena, prior and co-occurring? > All I experience is that one thing follows another. And when the same things follow other things again and again, one thing becomes associated with another. And this association is used to predict a future state of affairs. The fact that we all fail to accurately predict the future when it comes to details other than death and taxes, suggests that either we don't know enough to be able to make accurate predictions, or that it is the very nature of reality that defies prediction. The experience of consciousness is that it is free in the determination of whatever object it encounters, and not that the determination is given to it / determined. If the intentional content of any future consciousness is a given, then Buddhism is a dead duck :-) KInd Regards Herman #67806 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 2:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Listening. egberdina Hi Howard, On 02/02/07, upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Herman - > > ====================== > Ah, thanks! It was before your return to the list, I think. I had > surgery - I *would* certainly describe it as minor [Guess I'm a crypto-female! > LOL!] - on December 19. It involved grinding down a bone spur inside my shoulder, > "decompressing" tissues in contact where there ought to have been space > between them, and releasing & reattaching the bicep that had been hanging by a > thread. It was minimally invasive, and the recovery was rapid. It's the > over-zealous physical therapists who seem to have set me back a wee bit. > Thanks for asking, Herman! :-) > Thanks for the info. I'm glad to hear things are under control. As I mentioned, my wife is suffering various ailments at the moment. One is "frozen shoulder", and she has been instructed by the specialist to not let a physiotherapist near her, because they will only make it worse! Kind Regards Herman #67807 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 9:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Listening. upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 2/1/07 5:49:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > Thanks for the info. I'm glad to hear things are under control. As I > mentioned, my wife is suffering various ailments at the moment. One is > "frozen shoulder", and she has been instructed by the specialist to > not let a physiotherapist near her, because they will only make it > worse! > ====================== Keep that specialist!! LOLOL! With metta, Howard #67808 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 3:14 pm Subject: Re: Letters on Vipassana 6, no 2. philofillet Hi Nina > Should we not begin to develop a > little more understanding of different realities, such as feeling, > lobha or mettaa? Yes, we should. I appreciate your reminders. And I like " a little more understanding of different realities" better than "understand present realities," personally. Little bit by little bit. Metta, Phil #67809 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 3:22 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: A bit more about compassion philofillet HHi Herman > I agree with you. But I wonder, seriously, why we bother busying > ourselves with rare theoretical states that we wouldn't be able to > identify if we fell over them? Being interested in them, but not *too* interested. (Something Acharn Sujin said.) That's an interesting (but not *too* interesting) balance to play with. I think if we find ourselves often thinking about them during our daily lives we might be too interested. And I don't think we should put definite limits on what we would and wouldn't be able to identify. Who knows? As for compassion, there could be an experience of deep concern and aspiration for the wellbeing of others that was also free of sadness and also free of that sneaky pleasure about being a wonderfully compassionate person. It could come along and be identified. Not for me yet, but it could. It certainly did for the Buddha. Metta, Phil #67810 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 4:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing lbidd2 Hi Herman and Scott, H: "H: "Given the momentary nature of nama, and that nama is not the object it experiences, on what basis can anything be said about the im/permanence or otherwise of the object of nama?" L: My answer, nothing can be said about the object of consciousness, it is concept only. I'm sure Nina and all other abhidhammikas will disagree, but this view is not entirely unreasonable. In abhidhamma one dhamma is the object of every consciousness in a citta process and potentially the object of several, if not millions, of other processes. How could it not be a concept? You might say, but here I am looking at this white on black called an email. This is obviously the object of my consciousness. But that is only what we think. The white and black is only consciousness and interspersed with moments of this consciousness come moments of interpretation and other reactions. We paste it all together conceptually and get "me reading an email". In the abhidhamma system consciousness is a reaction to an object, but that object can only be inferred because all we know directly is consciousness. In my view experience is only consciousness, but consciousness is not a one dimensional phenomenon. A 5-door consciousness arises with a sensory impression plus 7 universal cetasikas and probably various numbers of other cetasikas. I believe that what gets noticed in this army of dhammas is determined by one of the predominance conditions. But whatever it is that gets noticed isn't the only thing there. That is why experience isn't as precise as we would like. Anyway, if you take the "consciousness only" wagon, that is where it leads you. Wouldn't it be nice to realize that the object of your desire or aversion is only a concept? Larry #67811 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 6:12 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing scottduncan2 Hi Herman, H: "...If I might, could we possibly steer the discussion towards the Suttanta perspective? Which I believe to be the gradual impermanence of form, not any momentary impermanence." By all means let's examine the suttas. As you likely know,I don't happen to take a 'sutta only' stance. If I add Abhidhamma or commentarial references it will only be as an excersise in learning for me, not as an effort at persuasion; I'd just rather not be handcuffed in a discussion. Can you show me, then, where in the suttas there is the notion of 'gradual impermanence of form'? I don't accept that way of seeing things right off the bat, sorry to say. Sincerely, Scott. #67812 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 6:35 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing scottduncan2 Dear Larry, Thank you. This is a well though-out response (forgive the elisions): L: My answer, nothing can be said about the object of consciousness, it is concept only...How could it not be a concept?...In the abhidhamma system consciousness is a reaction to an object, but that object can only be inferred because all we know directly is consciousness. In my view experience is only consciousness, but consciousness is not a one dimensional phenomenon. A 5-door consciousness arises with a sensory impression plus 7 universal cetasikas and probably various numbers of other cetasikas. I believe that what gets noticed in this army of dhammas is determined by one of the predominance conditions. But whatever it is that gets noticed isn't the only thing there. That is why experience isn't as precise as we would like...Wouldn't it be nice to realize that the object of your desire or aversion is only a concept?" This would be, I think, the 'nimitta' so oft referred to within DSG. I wonder, though, if you might be speaking of that which is available to the experience of those with relatively undeveloped pa~n~na. In your succinct exposition of the abhidhamma exegesis I think you left out the more or less linear aspect of the process. You very ably and nicely pointed out the multi-dimensional complexity of the moment of consciousness, I don't deny. I think, though, that this is also taught to follow a process with various citta complexes having various and inter-related functions, including javana, one after another, which also contribute to 'experience'. Do you think it is relevant to add this? Is it possible that, with increased pa~n~na, experience might come to include a more and more precise knowledge of the realities which, to us, seem as yet more or less conceptual ( in the sense of not yet being penetrated by consciousness with wisdom? In other words, can not one come to know realities as realities? Sincerely, Scott. #67813 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 6:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] right effort, and some Thailand impressions. buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Connie, James, > There is no provocation in discussions. When someone like James has > another opinion, I find it challenging, it is an occasion for > considering, and for the growth of confidence, I find. You mean to tell me that when I challenge your viewpoint that just makes you have more confidence in it?? OMG, that makes me feel sick to my stomach. I am not going to challenge you anymore. Metta, James #67814 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 7:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] right effort, and some Thailand impressions. philofillet Hi James I find this a bit surprising. When someone challenges the validity of meditation, or asks "what is meditation?", for example, doesn't that just increase your confidence in the importance of meditation? Doesn't Nina or others saying that there is no conventional right effort just increase your confidence in its importance? It certainly does for me. Why should it be any different for Nina? She has a lot of confidence in things you don't have confidence in. So what? It's not like Acharn Sujin's approach to Dhamma is sweeping thourgh the Dhamma world like a wildfire. As I said a couple of years ago, why not go after groups like Soka Gakkai that are doing really evil things to the Dhamma? On the other hand, continuing to peacefully challenge the incorrect aspects of Acharn Sujin's approach could bring very fruitful results for everyone involved... Just my two cents 'cuz I sense you are getting upset by DSG and I know that feeling.... Metta, Phil > You mean to tell me that when I challenge your viewpoint that just > makes you have more confidence in it?? OMG, that makes me feel sick to > my stomach. I am not going to challenge you anymore. #67815 From: "Andrew" Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 8:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Gaps: Unecessary but Interesting corvus121 Hi Howard A: The throwaway was > > essentially this - that the anatta doctrine only makes sense in > > combination with a 'momentary citta' theory. He didn't develop the > > argument (at least, not so far - I'm still reading) but I assume he > > is thinking that non-momentary citta is de facto atta. Have you > > heard this argument before? What do you think of it? H: I haven't heard the claim that not-self depends on (the assumption of) > mindstates being discrete. In my opinion discreteness isn't relevant, and > anatta depends solely on conditionality, which definitely is a reality. Thanks and point taken. I suppose what I was really pondering was the view often expressed here that the Buddha did not teach "momentary citta" as presented in the Abhidhamma. So, for example, impermanence is not a momentary thing but meant to be read more conventionally (life/health/happiness are impermanent etc). The author seemed to me to be suggesting that anatta cannot be read in such a conventional manner because ... what survives from moment to moment? Nothing (as you succinctly explained on the other list when you were discussing anatta with them). So anatta effectively *has* to be taken down to a momentary level ("the present"). If citta is not a momentary phenomenon, it must be something that can last from one "present" to another "present". That something defies momentary impermanence (but not necessarily conventional impermanence). But what can anatta apply to apart from "the present" reality? I'm thinking out loud here (always a dangerous thing to do) trying to work out the throwaway line point. Perhaps somebody who has a considered opinion that citta is *not* a momentary thing could help - what does anatta mean to you? [Howard, this question is not addressed to you but your reflections are always helpful, if you have any on this point]. Best wishes Andrew #67816 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 9:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing lbidd2 Hi Scott, Thanks for your reply: -------------------- L: "Wouldn't it be nice to realize that the object of your desire or aversion is only a concept?" S: "This would be, I think, the 'nimitta' so oft referred to within DSG." ------------------------ L: No, what I had in mind is a useless concept. Say I like you and you wear a red hat. So the red hat is a sign of you. But the moment of liking is just liking. There's no you there, either with or without a red hat. On a less theoretical level I often find myself stressed out about something, but a close examination reveals that that something is very _merely_ a conceptual construct. Totally empty of reality in the sense of present experience. But it is not because the conceptual construct is past. There never was, will be, or is an experience of a conceptual construct. This is what I am stressed about! ----------------------- S: "I think, though, that this [experience] is also taught to follow a process with various citta complexes having various and inter-related functions, including javana, one after another, which also contribute to 'experience'. Do you think it is relevant to add this?" ------------------------- L: I find it hard to equate citta process with experience. But someone else with sharper faculties may be able to. Although anyone can certainly find most of the elements of citta process in their experience, except the bhavanga cittas. What is difficult is that experience seems to be much more varied than the few models of citta process we have. For example, we are constantly being bombarded with feelings and it seems easier to explain that by means of predominance condition possibly arising in javana. --------------------------- S: "Is it possible that, with increased pa~n~na, experience might come to include a more and more precise knowledge of the realities which, to us, seem as yet more or less conceptual ( in the sense of not yet being penetrated by consciousness with wisdom? In other words, can not one come to know realities as realities?" ---------------------------- L: I would say the greater challenge is to know concept as concept. Reality is happening all the time. It can't be avoided, but of course we also conceptualize about it all the time. I think insight is just disillusionment in a very ordinary sense. Not a big deal. But it makes a big difference. Larry #67817 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 4:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Gaps: Unecessary but Interesting upasaka_howard Hi, Andrew - In a message dated 2/1/07 11:02:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, athel60@... writes: > Hi Howard > > A: The throwaway was > >>essentially this - that the anatta doctrine only makes sense in > >>combination with a 'momentary citta' theory. He didn't develop the > >>argument (at least, not so far - I'm still reading) but I assume he > >>is thinking that non-momentary citta is de facto atta. Have you > >>heard this argument before? What do you think of it? > > H: I haven't heard the claim that not-self depends on (the > assumption of) > >mindstates being discrete. In my opinion discreteness isn't relevant, > and > >anatta depends solely on conditionality, which definitely is a > reality. > > Thanks and point taken. I suppose what I was really pondering was the > view often expressed here that the Buddha did not teach "momentary > citta" as presented in the Abhidhamma. So, for example, impermanence > is not a momentary thing but meant to be read more conventionally > (life/health/happiness are impermanent etc). The author seemed to me > to be suggesting that anatta cannot be read in such a conventional > manner because ... what survives from moment to moment? Nothing (as > you succinctly explained on the other list when you were discussing > anatta with them). So anatta effectively *has* to be taken down to a > momentary level ("the present"). ------------------------------------------- Howard: The question is: "What is a moment?" I agree that paramattha dhammas have brief duration compared to the sequences of groups of such we identify as the usual, macroscopic, conventional objects. But 'brief' needn't mean "of zero duration", and there needn't be the assumption of no development in terms of varying intensity, nor need there be an assumption of pinpointable beginnings and endings - open intervals and fuzzy intervals are possible too. What *is* necessary is the assumption of impermanence. ------------------------------------------ > If citta is not a momentary phenomenon, it must be something that can > last from one "present" to another "present". That something defies > momentary impermanence (but not necessarily conventional > impermanence). But what can anatta apply to apart from "the present" > reality? ------------------------------------- Howard: Not following you here. Impermanence means nothing other than not remaining. I don't know what 'momentary impermanence' means. Some that has zero duration never exists at all, does it? And a mental activity such as knowing or feeling or recognizing that takes zero time never occurs at all, does it? ------------------------------------ > > I'm thinking out loud here (always a dangerous thing to do) trying to > work out the throwaway line point. Perhaps somebody who has a > considered opinion that citta is *not* a momentary thing could help - > what does anatta mean to you? [Howard, this question is not addressed > to you but your reflections are always helpful, if you have any on this > point]. > > Best wishes > Andrew > > ======================== With metta, Howard #67818 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 10:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing egberdina Hi Larry, This, in my my books, is a super post. There is a great deal to consider here. But I always look for the easy way out. What is there OTHER than concepts, which would justify your use of the word "only" in relation to it? Kind Regards Herman #67819 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 11:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Arahants and compassion jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" Hallo Herman Thanks for your supportive message. Still I'm not convinced that Eastern notion of compassion is a complete other one than the European/Christian one. There is not one Eastern notion but there are many. And there is a differance between living in solitude and the notion that one as a human being is connected to other beings: not only on a conventional level but also at ultimate (paramattha) one. Metta Joop #67820 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 11:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing egberdina Hi Scott, On 02/02/07, Scott Duncan wrote: > Hi Herman, > > H: "...If I might, could we possibly steer the discussion > towards the Suttanta perspective? Which I believe to be the gradual > impermanence of form, not any momentary impermanence." > > By all means let's examine the suttas. As you likely know,I don't > happen to take a 'sutta only' stance. If I add Abhidhamma or > commentarial references it will only be as an excersise in learning > for me, not as an effort at persuasion; I'd just rather not be > handcuffed in a discussion. My interest is in relating the experience of others, to my experience. If you have experienced something that correlates with how it is described in the Abhidhamma, by all means share it. > > Can you show me, then, where in the suttas there is the notion of > 'gradual impermanence of form'? I can, but am not going to :-). Because, to my way of thinking, something does not become true because it is written in a book. If you would accept something I said because it was also written in the Suttas, I would have to question your judgment. No book can be an arbiter of what is real, Scott. But certainly, much that is written in books is false. And that includes Buddhist books. But there is daily life, otherwise known as reality. You have children, and so do I. We acknowledge in daily life that from moment to moment our children deserve the same name. Presumably, not enough changes momentarily to warrant thinking in terms of a lack of continuity/identity. If you would like to tell me more about your momentary children, I am alll ears. KInd Regards Herman #67821 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 1, 2007 11:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Arahants and compassion sarahprocter... Dear Joop, Thank you for your kind comments. I also find it a useful discussion. --- Joop wrote: > J: This and other comments did convince me of the arahant's > compassion. > The question however is: what can we learn from this, how can we > (wordlings) practice compassion because we should not wait till we > got arahant? > Part of the answer must be: being mindful that when we think to > practice compassion, it's really without greed or hatred. Practice > compassion again and again and being mindful again and again. .... S: I think you've raised a good question and given a good answer. We need to consider more about compassion in daily life, rather than waiting til we'e arahants! As you suggest, it is only be being mindful (and understanding) what is and isn't compassion (i.e without greed or hatred or even mild unhappy feelings), that the 'pure' quality will develop. Even being attached to such a quality or wishing to be someone with lots of compassion is a hindrance for its development, don't you think? .... > > I think the view of the Buddha is well said in this quote: > "… that dhammas like lovingkindness and compassion can and do arise > in the mental continua of Buddhas and arahants, but that they differ > from those which arise in non-arahants in that they arise as > accompaniments to a special class of consciousnesses known as > operative or functional consciousness (kriyâ citta), so called on > account of their being neither kamma-generating nor kamma resultants." .... S: This reminds me of your comment/quote about 'punna' (merit) as well. The point being stressed is merely that in the case of arahants, the cittas are not referred to as 'kusala' and there is no new kamma being performed. The cittas are kiriya (inoperative) in this sense. This doesn't mean that the qualities of compassion and so on have different characteristics. Compassion is still compassion. (Of course, with no more subtle clinging of any kind, it is likely to be purer, firmer and more refined). ..... > > I sometimes have my doubts if reasoning in the way of "arahants have > this characteristics" or "arahants don't have any more of that …" is > very helpful. Because a too simple conclusion then can be: Oh, if we > want to be an arahants, we should try to have this .. or try > to 'destruct' that …; and that's doesn't work. .... S: No, that would be quite wrong, I agree. .... > > Applied to 'compassion'. I think as worldlings: should we try to have > compassion without 'empathy' because an arahants doesn't have that > any more? I think that's not wise. ... S: I don't think that's wise either. I think we can live normally, help others when we have opportunities and develop the mindfulness. By our further consideration and reflection and understanding, what is 'good' will be known and what is 'not good' will also be known. When we think of a special trying, again it's 'Self' and attachment to having certain qualities which is getting in the way, I think. How about you? .... > As I said to James some days ago: I agree with you, compassion > without equanimity is not good; but also there is a danger to have > equanimity without perfecting compassion, that is a kind of autism. > Said otherwise: when we, worldling try to do as a arahant, we behave > autistic. I think the reason is: nobody likes dukkha so there is a > temptation skip dukkha and get as soon as possible in a life without. > And that's of course: an illusion. .... S: Yes, an illusion and wrong view. As you say, imitating our idea of an arahant will take us off the path 'a kind of autism'. It's not the understanding of realities or the development of equanimity or compassion. .... <...> > To my surprise there is more consistency in the ideas arising in me > then I knew myself. Because this proposal an my emphasis on the > empathy-aspect is in fact the same: a human being is not an isolated > construction of aggegates. My statement still is: the Buddha has paid > attention to this social dimension but the Abhidhamma is only > describing a part of all this, is "individual psychology" a > soteriologic selection of the Teachings; but there is also a "social > psychology". And I still state: Theravadins has the tendency to > neglect this deep-rooted social dimension in all sentient beings; and > that is no good. .... S: The point is, I think, that we always think that we live in a world with people, but really we live alone with our thinking and ideas about other people and about ourselves - wishing to be the one with good qualities, the one that is praised and so on. In fact when we are more sincere about knowing our own mental states and developing more understanding of realities, it leads to more compassion and greater social care. ..... <...> My view is: when 'compassion' is self-centered (for example > self-pitty) than it's not compassion. .... S: Yes, well-said. Also, when there's attachment, there's no compassion. Or when there's 'roghteous' or any other kind of anger, such as when one feels others are being badly treated or when one thinks others are speaking/behaving harshly, for example. It always depends on our mental states, not on how others are behaving. Being concerned about a situation or 'rights' and 'wrongs' will not lead to compassion, as I see it. .... > We can continue the discussion. > Discussion about 'compassion' s such already runs: see Herman message > of yesterday .... S: I'll continue with the Bodhi comments separately then. Yes, we already have a lot to reflect on with regard to compassion and so on. As I said, thanks for bringing up this topic! I'm glad to see you and Herman are still discussing it together. Metta, Sarah ======= #67822 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 12:02 am Subject: Re: right effort, and some Thailand impressions. buddhatrue Hi Phil, Thanks for the considerate post. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi James > > I find this a bit surprising. When someone challenges the validity of > meditation, or asks "what is meditation?", for example, doesn't that > just increase your confidence in the importance of meditation? James: Well, it doesn't just increase my confidence because someone opposes meditation!! Someone needs to really show me evidence from the texts about something to change my mind. There have been many times when I changed my mind about a subject because someone pointed out to me the proper texts. Doesn't > Nina or others saying that there is no conventional right effort just > increase your confidence in its importance? It certainly does for me. > Why should it be any different for Nina? James: The only way that would increase my confidence is if I thought poorly about Nina- like "Oh, well if Nina thinks this it must be wrong!" But I don't think that way. I look at what is presented to me and evaluate it on its own merits. She has a lot of confidence in > things you don't have confidence in. So what? It's not like Acharn > Sujin's approach to Dhamma is sweeping thourgh the Dhamma world like a > wildfire. As I said a couple of years ago, why not go after groups like > Soka Gakkai that are doing really evil things to the Dhamma? James: I don't know who Soka Gakkai is?? And I am not a dhamma vigilante! Lol I just like to discuss the dhamma with those who are knowledgeable. > > On the other hand, continuing to peacefully challenge the incorrect > aspects of Acharn Sujin's approach could bring very fruitful results > for everyone involved... James: Well, I'm not so sure about that, but since you are a convert yourself maybe you have a point. I just felt really discouraged and disgusted to think that the more I try to demonstrate the flaws in the KS approach, the more Nina has confidence in it!! Goodness gracious! I am creating bad kamma for myself by posting to Nina! > > Just my two cents 'cuz I sense you are getting upset by DSG and I know > that feeling.... James: Thanks. I will probably get over it. > > > Metta, > > Phil Metta, James #67823 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 12:25 am Subject: B.Bodhi article (was: Arahants and compassion) sarahprocter... Dear Joop, (Pls keep in mind that I've only had a reather quick browse of the article. Feel free to re-quote any paras I've missed): > Most interesting then is the question of chapter IV: "How the Buddha > is distinguished from other arahants" Combined with the question of > chapter V: why "… in the Nikayas the Buddha is never seen teaching > others to enter a bodhisattva path." ? .... S: Surely, as stated over and over, the Buddha's aim is to help us find an end to Dukkha, an end to becoming and samsara, a complete eradication of all defilements. Also, I'm not sure that the 'bodhisattva path' is one that can/is taught? It is extremely rare (if we are talking about the samma-sambuddha bodhisatta path - there is another broader category of bodhisatta paths - again see U.P. on 'bohdisatta'). From the commentary to the Buddhava'msa, transl as 'Clarifier of the Sweet Meaning'(PTS): "..Our Bodhisatta, performing an act of merit in the presence of twenty-four Buddhas beginning with Dipankara, has come after four incalculables and a hundered thousand eons in addition. Now after Lord Kassapa [S: the Buddha before 'our' Gotama Buddha] there had been no other Buddha excepting this Fully Self-Awakened One. Thus the Bodhisatta received the declaration in the presence of twenty-four Buddhas beginning with Dipankara. And, having combined these that are eight things by means of making (his) resolve at the feet of Dipankara: - Human existence, attainment of the (male) sex, cause, seeing a Teacher [S: a Buddha], going forth, attainment of the special qualities, an act of merit, will-power - by combining these eight things the aspiration succeeds, and exerting himself.....and fulfilling these things (the perfections)...." .... BB:> " In the final analysis, I have to confess that I can't provide a > cogent explanation. In view of the fact that in later times, so many > Buddhists, in Theravada lands as well as in the Mahayana world, have > been inspired by the bodhisattva ideal, it is perplexing that no > teachings about a bodhisattva path or bodhisattva practices are > included in the discourses regarded as coming down from the most > archaic period of Buddhist literary history. For me, this remains an > incomprehensible puzzle." (p. 14) ..... S: I think we can all be inspired by the bodhisatta ideal, by the developement of the bodhisatta perfections and develop the perfections (with wisdom) in our daily life. I think we can read a lot about these - in the Jatakas, Cariya Pitaka commentary and so on. Also, there are suttas which refer to previous lives as a bodhisatta, previous Buddhas and so on. I think it's only an 'incomprehensible puzzle' if one has an idea of trying to find Mahayana teachings about 'bodhisattva practices' in the Pali canon. (I'm not sure 'archaic' is an appropriate word, btw!). Nina may have more to say on this - as she mentioned K.Sujin's book on 'Perfections' which Nina has translated is going to press at this time. Perhaps you'll read it if you haven't done so already. .... > There is another topic: the evolution of the thinking of Bhikkhu > Bodhi. When still in Sri Lanka, he never should have written an essay > as this. His view got broader. .... S: There have been definite changes in the views expressed and also in his ways of thinking. I agree. Whether this is 'broader' or 'narrower', I'm not sure! BB pre-Bodhi monastery and BB post-Bodhi monastery. Of course the move was made because it seemed appropriate for him at that time. (We chatted to him about it quite a bit, but I don't really think it's helpful to comment on further.) I will comment on one point I picked up in his article referring to what you call the 'broader' path, combining Mahayana and Theravada as being the harder (I forget the words). I don't see it like this. I see it as a lack of confidence in the teachings handed down to us in the Pali canon. .... > Another example of this (in my view positive) development is seen > when comparing two explanations of the Kalama Sutta. See my message > #65474 > So my question is: do you agree that interaction with other buddhist > traditions is good for ones spiritual development? .... S: I don't see any particular interactions as being good or bad for 'one's spirityual development'. I think it all comes down to the understanding of presently appearing dhammas, regardless of where we live or with whom we live. As I wrote in my last message, we always think we live and associate with others, but really we live alone, alone with our thinking, seeing, hearing, feelings and so on. We cannot share our thinking and seeing with anyone and actually it doesn't even belong to us. So the aim is to learn to really live alone, quietly and peacefully with present dhammas, no matter how we spend our day, no matter with whom we mix. As I mentioned, I'm happy to discuss any aspects of the article with you, Joop and now I'll adopt brace position for the 'sweeping comments about the orthodoxy' to come my way:-) Metta, Sarah ======== #67824 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 12:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Gaps: Unecessary but Interesting corvus121 Hi again Howard & Anyone > Howard: > The question is: "What is a moment?" Precisely. I think when we are talking ultimate reality Dhamma "a moment" is synonymous with "the present". The past has ceased to exist. The future has never existed. In the present, all that exists is "the All". I agree that paramattha dhammas > have brief duration compared to the sequences of groups of such we identify as > the usual, macroscopic, conventional objects. But 'brief' needn't mean "of > zero duration", and there needn't be the assumption of no development in terms of > varying intensity, nor need there be an assumption of pinpointable beginnings > and endings - open intervals and fuzzy intervals are possible too. Do we *need* to have answers for all these questions, I wonder? Apart from knowing that the Buddha said that citta changes so quickly that he couldn't come up with a suitable metaphor? Development is a form of change or variation and change is manifest. The more interesting question to me is - how change unfolds in an anatta system where nothing survives the present. Abhidhamma seeks to explain this, does it not? I'm wondering how those who reject Abhidhamma explain it and yet remain proponents of anatta? What *is* > necessary is the assumption of impermanence. Agreed. > > If citta is not a momentary phenomenon, it must be something that can > > last from one "present" to another "present". That something defies > > momentary impermanence (but not necessarily conventional > > impermanence). But what can anatta apply to apart from "the present" > > reality? > > ------------------------------------- > Howard: > Not following you here. Impermanence means nothing other than not > remaining. > I don't know what 'momentary impermanence' means. My term meaning the impermanence characteristic of the present reality as opposed to some conventional rendering about the "impermanence of Joe Blogg's life". Some that has zero > duration never exists at all, does it? And a mental activity such as knowing or > feeling or recognizing that takes zero time never occurs at all, does it? Scientifically, I wouldn't have thought so. A: Perhaps somebody who has a > > considered opinion that citta is *not* a momentary thing could help - > > what does anatta mean to you? To put this question another way - does anatta refer to "the All" in the present or to something else? And if to something else, I wonder what it could be? Best wishes Andrew #67825 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 12:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: right effort, and some Thailand impressions. sarahprocter... Hi James, Just briefly butting in and then butting out on this... --- buddhatrue wrote: > James: <...>I just felt really discouraged and > disgusted to think that the more I try to demonstrate the flaws in > the KS approach, the more Nina has confidence in it!! Goodness > gracious! I am creating bad kamma for myself by posting to Nina! .... S: I think there may have been a little misunderstanding. I understood Nina to be saying that by discussing the topics with you (and others), she considers them more deeply and reflects further. This helps her to have more confidence in the Teachings, whether she agrees with what you say or not. Helping others to question and reflect further and discussing dhamma with kind intentions is never bad kamma. Don't worry or feel discouraged! Metta, Sarah ========= #67826 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 12:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: right effort, and some Thailand impressions. nilovg Hi James, I could not help laughing, sorry. As Sarah said: we all study Dhamma and like to share what we studied with others. Why should posting disagreements be bad kamma? Do not feel discouraged or disgusted. Nina. Op 2-feb-2007, om 9:02 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > I just felt really discouraged and > disgusted to think that the more I try to demonstrate the flaws in > the KS approach, the more Nina has confidence in it!! Goodness > gracious! I am creating bad kamma for myself by posting to Nina! #67827 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 12:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha and the scientific approach!! sarahprocter... Hi Ramesh, Thx for your comments! --- Ramesh Wamanrao Patil wrote: > It is Vippassana that confirms the realization of the complete > cessation of suffering. Therefore, at the beginning, in the middle, > and at the end of the Buddhist path to liberation, the role of > Vippassana is essential. .... S: How do you define 'vipassana' and would you say a little more about how vipassana plays this role? ... > The cessation of suffering, can be verified, because through > cultivating the path, The craving and ignorance are eliminated and the > supreme happiness of nibbana is attained. It is experimental process > that is repeatable,in keeping with sound scientific practice: not only > did the Buddha attain the end of suffering but so, too, we can see > historically,did all those who followed his path to the end. .... S: I see your point. But I don't think the 'objective observation'you mentioned as part of the Buddha's path and scientific 'experimental process' are the same. Perhaps you can elaborate on this. You may also be interested to look at posts under 'Science' in 'useful posts' in the files section. Metta, Sarah p.s grateful if you'd sign off in your posts with 'Ramesh' and make it clear who you're addressing, even if it's just 'All'. TIA! ========== #67828 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 12:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing sarahprocter... Hi Herman (& Howard), > I think there is definitely a sense in the Canon in which dukkha > describes all phenomena, not just certain ones. In that sense dukkha > is the condition of being. It is not only certain qualities of > phenomena that determine whether there is dukkha, it is dukkha that > there are phenomena. All sentience in that sense is the "suffering" of > consciousness. The ending of suffering is not the end of certain > qualities, it is the ending of all qualities. > > That's the significance of dukkha as one the tilakkhana to me, anyway. .... S: I think this was nicely put! And yes, I got a laugh out of your mischievous anattaphobic post:-) "Treatment is difficult, if not futile". True, once one's seen the anattaphobic path is the only one, forget any 'treatment'! Metta, Sarah p.s On treatments, if you'd like me to ask our wonderful Chinese acupuncturist for any of his suggestions for Vicki, just send me brief details off-list. ======== #67829 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 12:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] right effort nilovg Hi Herman, Yes, nama and rupa that arise and fall away. Nina. Op 1-feb-2007, om 22:53 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > Do you think that in an ultimate sense there is a nama there? #67830 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 12:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] elements of experience sarahprocter... Hi Larry, --- LBIDD@... wrote: > Hi Sarah and Howard, > > Since you both agree on the nature of rupa am I correct in saying your > view is that the visible data we see is not external to the eye? If so, > what is the function of the eye? .... S: Howard already replied. The visible data we see is external to the eye. Metta, Sarah ====== #67831 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 1:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] elements of experience sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- Herman Hofman wrote: > > In other words, visible object seen is just that regardless of whether > > someone is color blind or anything else. As he said, no two people > ever > > see the same rupa and furthermore, the same rupa is never seen in > > subsequent eye-door processes. There are so many factors affecting > what is > > seen at any given moment - the eye-base, the age of the rupa, > temperature, > > kamma, light, phassa etc etc > > > > While you liked Howard's response to TG, you have yourself digressed > into a series of explanations for seeing, none of which can be the > subject of experience. One cannot see the eye seeing, one cannot see > kamma seeing, one cannot see phassa seeing etc ..... S: No, 'one' cannot do anything. However, what I wrote is exactly what is written in the texts and here I think TG and I are in agreement. He also appreciates the role of eye-base, temeperature, kamma, light, contact and so on as found in the suttas over and over again. (TG: "If no light source contacting the eye there is no sight. There must be contact...." Yes, they can be proved to some extent now and then confidence grows. It's like when you teach your child to read. When the child learns that what he can read (from your guidance) is 'correct' and makes good sense, he will then have more and more confidence when it comes to your instruction on more difficult passages which he hasn't fully grasped yet. I think it's good to question and question as you do, Herman, rather than to blindly just accept whatever one has heard. However, if I may use the reading analogy again, if the child continuously questions the value of the entire exercise during the reading session, he may never get to learn to read the passages. Metta, Sarah ========== #67832 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 1:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs (was: Meditation (again)) sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, --- ken_aitch wrote: > S: > However, by way of a useful reminder that it's really a question > in the end of understanding the cittas when they arise, rather than > just speculating about different situations, under the section on > 'killing' in the commentary, it says: "even when a laughing king > orders an execution it is with a hateful consciousness. " > ------- > > I'd like to make doubly sure of this, if you don't mind. With the > exception of the arahant's joyful citta (manovinnana-dhatu, > hasituppada-citta), can we say that smiling and laughing are pure > concepts? (Just like 'walking' and 'sitting?') .... S: Yes, I think that smiling, laughing (and crying) are concepts representing various cittas and rupas. I was going to say that these are citta-produced rupas (as they mostly are), but of course kamma, temperature and nutrition will also condition the rupas in question too. Some people look like they're smiling all the time, even when in a bad mood, for example. This is why in the end, I suggested we can only know our own cittas. .... > > I ask this because I think there is something called a "bodily > intimation rupa" that I have never got around to studying. Maybe it's > time I did? :-) .... S: Yes. There's always 'kayavinnati' in U.P. as a good place to start. Perhaps you can post anything you come across that's helpful to this thread? :-) Cittas indicate a meaning with the help of the rupas involved. So we smile or laugh or make gestures - just conditioned namas and rupas. We see the various visible objects and sanna marks these (even obvious to animals). But the bodily intimation rupa itself is not visible, however. A subtle rupa and tricky topic. Metta, Sarah ===== #67833 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 2:00 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: The Origin of Energy! (just having fun) dacostacharles To all, I think I am beginning to understand why: legend has it that Taomo, The Bodidharma, spent 9 years in a cave meditating after a discussion with the king. Yours truly, Charles DaCosta #67834 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 2:35 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: The arahant- and the bodhisattva-ideal The End dacostacharles Hi all, I think that there is something more to the core of differences between these two paths (i.e., Arhant and Bodhisattva in the Mahayana sense) then is being discussed. The path of the Arhant is more like the path of a loner, and the path of the Bodhisattva is much more social. I think both would act out of compassion when the need arises. A big difference is historically, when you went looking an Arhant you went to a cave. When you went looking for a Bodhisattva (as a young child) you went to someone's house (especially if they were unknown as a Bodhisattva). When you went looking for a Bodhisattva (as an adult) you went to a temple or monastery (especially if they were known as a Bodhisattva). It could be argued that the path of the Arhant is a path where "selves" don't really exist, but because of wisdom-&-compassion (i.e., understanding beings) the Arhant will try to avoid stepping on an insect as he goes from one thing to another. It could be argued that the path of the Bodhisattva is a path where "selves" do really exist (the Bodhisattva lives/exists in Samara - the domain of selves), but because of wisdom-&-compassion (i.e., understanding beings) the Bodhisattva will try to be selfless (not focus on I, me, or mine before considering other), and when the Bodhisattva is not selfless, depending on their level, the "I, me, or mine" is used for helping others. Yours truly, Charles DaCosta > J: I know you. Of course I have looked in UP before approaching you. > I'm afraid that wehen you say 'Theravda texts' you partly or totally > think on commentaties? .... S: Well, yes - as rehearsed at the various Councils and accepted from the outset by the Theravada (or Mahanama)monks. .... <.....> #67835 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 3:43 am Subject: On compassion jwromeijn Hallo eveybody, interested in compassion Read Compassion: Listening to the Cries of the World by Christina Feldman Metta Joop #67836 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 3:08 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Identifying Views. dacostacharles Hi colette Yes, "CAUSE & EFFECT" plays a part in a view. I like you seed analogy so I will continue it to prove the above. Your Question: "Touch, is touch conscious of either pleasure or pain or both?" My answer: Touch is not conscious, beings are. Beings have consciousness as a precondition therefore it is a CAUSE of beings. Your Question: Is this consciousness a CAUSE or is it an EFFECT? My answer: According to DO, it is both a CAUSE and an EFFECT. Your Question: Dirt will always be dirt and in garbage dumps not only do plants grow in garbage but they also grow in dirt. What gives birth to these plants? Is it the garbage or is it the dirt? My answer: it is obviously both, however they MAY be independent of each other. Your Question: Seeds you may consider, no? My answer: ok, yes. Your Question: How long did the seed spend in the place either the dirt or the garbage before it began it's transformation, it's existence? My answer: I don't know Your Question: Did it exist prior to the GERMAN-NATION in the dirt or the garbage? My Answer: The seeds existed before they were planted. Your Question: Is it pleasure or pain for this seed to germinate? My Answer: I would have to be one the Seeds to answer this question. However, if the seeds produce something good in my eyes, pleasure arises in my mind after seeing it. . "Remember one cannot remove themselves from the singularity of bodhicitta and decide to view this seed, this dirt, and this garbage, as being something other than the SELF." Well, it does sound like your view is driven by CAUSE and EFFECT :-) Yours truly, Charles DaCosta #67837 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 3:11 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Not-Self and "Rebirth" dacostacharles Hi Howard, Feeling are reborn, .... Yours truly, Charles DaCosta _____ ---------------------------------------- #67838 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 4:49 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing scottduncan2 Dear Herman, H: "...No book can be an arbiter of what is real, Scott. But certainly, much that is written in books is false. And that includes Buddhist books. But there is daily life, otherwise known as reality. You have children, and so do I. We acknowledge in daily life that from moment to moment our children deserve the same name. Presumably, not enough changes momentarily to warrant thinking in terms of a lack of continuity/identity. If you would like to tell me more about your momentary children, I am alll ears." I think I'll pass, if you don't mind. Sincerely, Scott. #67839 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 5:16 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing scottduncan2 Dear Larry, Thanks for clarifying: L: "No, what I had in mind is a useless concept...the moment of liking is just liking. There's no you there...There never was, will be, or is an experience of a conceptual construct. This is what I am stressed about!" Yeah, this is great. The question, then, is can this moment of 'liking' ever be known as 'moment of liking', as it arises and falls away? L: "I find it hard to equate citta process with experience...Although anyone can certainly find most of the elements of citta process in their experience, except the bhavanga cittas. What is difficult is that experience seems to be much more varied than the few models of citta process we have. For example, we are constantly being bombarded with feelings and it seems easier to explain that by means of predominance condition possibly arising in javana." I've likely got it wrong anyway, but I wasn't wanting to 'equate' the process of citta with experience. I was meaning to suggest that, by also factoring in a consideration of the linear process of multi-dimensionally complex and variegated cittas arising and falling away in series, one can even better account for the seeming variability of experience. I think that, along with predominance condition, one can also consider proximity, contiguity, and conascence conditions. Also, it seems to me, that some of the 'experience' of 'being constantly bombarded by feelings' is itself illusory, since the constancy and probably the bombardment are also conceptualisations and illusions of continuity. L: "I would say the greater challenge is to know concept as concept. Reality is happening all the time. It can't be avoided, but of course we also conceptualize about it all the time. I think insight is just disillusionment in a very ordinary sense. Not a big deal. But it makes a big difference." Yeah, I agree with 'the greater challenge' as you say. And you've broached a whole new point (almost) in getting me to think about whether or not 'insight' is an idealised reality. It does make a big difference, as you say. Sincerely, Scott. #67840 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 6:06 am Subject: right effort nilovg Hi James, returning to a post before you wrote, but you need not answer. I understand that you get tired to discuss the same thing over again. --------- James: This is not the definition of Right Effort as taught by the Buddha. In essence, you are saying that there is no Right Effort- Right Effort is no effort. --------- N: Right effort is nothing else but effort for > awareness right now and it arises because of its own conditions. ---------- James: Again, this is not the definition of Right Effort as taught by the Buddha. There are Four Right Exertions and none of them are 'just accept what arises now'. --------- N: not just accept, but: just study with awareness and right understanding. We have to keep the truth of anattaa in mind, also when we speak about effort. There is wrong effort arising with akusala citta and there is right effort, arising with kusala citta. We cannot create our thinking just now. We think at times with kusala citta, but mostly with citta rooted in attachment, aversion, ignorance. At such moments there is wrong effort. We cannot create kusala citta with right effort. When there are several condiitons concurring there can be the arising of kusala citta, but we cannot make it arise at will. The fourth right effort, according to the Commentary, pertains to the lokuttara citta and nibbaana. Who can make lokuttara citta arise at will? Nina. #67841 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 6:15 am Subject: Re: On compassion jwromeijn Hallo Sarah, Herman, Charles, all I did'nt mean to stop the 'compassion'-discussion, Sarah, only to make it less exclusive. And wanted to distinguish from the bodhisattva versus arahants discussion because that gave misunderstandings. We agreed about much, so no reason to repeat that parts. To me the core of the compassion-topic is: We all (that is: most DSG-participants) know that in ultimate sense an individual doesn' t exist: the anatta-doctrine With this knowledge we had to go further in two directions: (1) The first is the (at DSG) well-known atomistic direction: in ultimate language the individual is in fact the arising and falling away of phenomena, of nama and rupa; in Sutta language: the five khanda's. (2) The second is the deep-ecology direction. The "I" that thinks to be autonomic but is in fact part of a bigger organism. So I don't agree with Sarah who states: "The point is, I think, that we always think that we live in a world with people, but really we live alone with our thinking and ideas about other people and about ourselves" A human being is not a 'monad' (cf Leibnitz) , not somebody like Cousteau in a batiscaph in the ocean, looking through thick looking glasses to the world outside. There are nerves and synapses in our body but there are also (non- physical) Even if it has many New Age -nonsense, I think the Gaia idea (all living entities are in fact one organism) has a core of correctness. And I know this is harldy compatible with Buddhism, or more precise: not compatible with Abhidhamma. Compassion has for me to do with this idea. The same with mudita (Sympathetic Joy) a brahmavihara we often forget because stressing the problematic is always easier. Metta, karuna and mudita had to do at same same moment with (a) qualities we can practice and perfect; and (b) expressions of our being connected with other sentient beings, if we recognize that or not. Of course the question is if this Gaia-theory is important for the end of suffering, so"soteriologique" to use one of my favorite terms? I think it is but I'm not sure; this will be one of the topics of my contemplations the next years (if I live that long) Sarah, later about our Bhikkhu Bodhi-battle (you know I'm of the age that when seeing "BB", I'm thinking on Brigitte Bardot) Metta Joop #67842 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 1:39 am Subject: Correction/Andrew Re: [dsg] Gaps: Unecessary but Interesting upasaka_howard Hi again, Andrew - In a message dated 2/2/07 12:22:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: > I don't know what 'momentary impermanence' means. Some that has zero > duration never exists at all, does it? And a mental activity such as knowing > or > feeling or recognizing that takes zero time never occurs at all, does it? > ====================== My word "some"' was supposed to have been either '"something" or "some object". Sorry. With metta, Howard #67843 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 6:46 am Subject: Re: right effort rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >> The fourth right effort, according to the Commentary, pertains to the > lokuttara citta and nibbaana. Who can make lokuttara citta arise at > will? > Nina. > > > ______ Dear Nina do you have the details about what he commenatry says? with respect Robert #67844 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 6:54 am Subject: Re: On compassion Correction jwromeijn Something I typed (or wanted to type) got lost In the middle of 67841 one had to read … A human being is not a 'monad' (cf Leibnitz, for who has studied philosophy) , not somebody like Cousteau in a batiscaph in the ocean, looking through thick looking glasses to the world outside. There are nerves and synapses in our body but there are also (non- physical) connections with other beings. … Metta Joop #67845 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 6:58 am Subject: listening and the three rounds. nilovg Hi Howard, Before going on with the sutta (perhaps next week), I answer some questions. ---------- It is the matter of the testing it out where we seem to differ, Nina. It seems to me that you restrict that to "thinking about", whereas I consider that the testing out consists of far-reaching activities. ------------- N: No, I do not you restrict that to "thinking about". Thinking about a subject is only speculating. Pariyatti is not merely understanding the theory, it is studying with awareness the dhamma appearing at this moment. it always pertains to this moment. When we listen to explanations about seeing, the experience of what is visible, should there not be consideration of seeing right then, since our eyes are open and there is seeing? That is different from thinking about seeing. ---------- H: The Buddha taught many cultivational activities for overcoming ignorance. What is being suggested by Khun Sujin other than listening & thinking over? ------------ N: To overcome ignorance understanding is to be cultivated, and this is always, always at the present moment. At the same time we have to keep in mind that the Buddha taught us so that we shall have less clinging. Remember the sutta (an auspicious night) where we are taught not to cling to past experiences, nor to the future which has not come yet, but to attend to the present moment. We also read that death can come at any time (Maara and his army). There is urgency. I cling to past experiences, we all do. Past experiences and also dreams we had may have been happy ones, but past is past. Now there is the present moment that has to be studied with awareness. Really, this takes courage. We have to be sincere and realize what we do not know yet. ---------- H: there were specific events that were turning points for that. One was an early realization that the jhanas are real. Later ones were several "insight events" growing out of meditation practice and that verified Dhammic teachings, and a very basic one was seeing the reality, in my own life, of how the release of craving led to perfect equanimity in the face of apparent (but mistaken) prospects for death. The second noble truth was seen as a truth in that latter case, and it was then seen as more than just a theoretical proposition. So, certainly, having listened to and carefully considered the Dhamma sufficiently to accept it, I was able to apply it. ----------------- N: Yes, I remember you related your attitude towards death (the test you had and which seemed unfavorable at first) and I admired your equanimity. True. But now, we have to continue testing the meaning of the four noble Truths in our lives right now. I want to add something about this. We discussed with Kh Sujin the three rounds of knowing the four noble Truths: understanding of what is to be known: sacca ~naa.na; the 'practice' which is awareness and direct understanding of realities, kicca ~naa.na; the direct realisation of the truth, kata ~naa.na. This is based on the sutta 'Setting in Motion the Wheel of Dhamma' and its Commentary. Someone asked her about the first round pertaining to the second noble Truth, craving. She said: we always have to understand this in relation to this moment and she asked us: since this morning were you searching for something? The answer is: yes: we get up want things like breakfast, we want to see, to hear, we want to go on living. Most of the time we are getting things for ourselves, for our comfort. Perhaps this sounds futile, but it is important to realize such moments as they are. Then we begin to see the second noble Truth. So many, many moments with attachment (even slight) pass unnoticed. The first Truth: dukkha, is deep and difficult to see. We do not realize yet the arising and falling away of the dhammas at this moment. Then we do not really penetrate the second noble Truth. (I do not speak about suffering in general or other aspects of it.) So long as we have not understood the first noble Truth, it is not possible to really understand the second noble Truth. We also asked about the first round in relation to nibbaana, the third noble Truth. When we have more understanding of our clinging right now and all our defilements right now, we shall also have more understanding of the end of clinging and defilements. As to the Path: there must be firm understanding that this is the right Path: developing understanding of whatever dhamma appearing right now. No deviation from the right Path led by craving for a fast result. ******* Nina. #67846 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 2:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Gaps: Unecessary but Interesting upasaka_howard Hi, Andrew - In a message dated 2/2/07 3:34:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, athel60@... writes: > Hi again Howard &Anyone > > >Howard: > > The question is: "What is a moment?" > > Precisely. I think when we are talking ultimate reality Dhamma "a > moment" is synonymous with "the present". The past has ceased to > exist. The future has never existed. In the present, all that > exists is "the All". ------------------------------------- Howard: 'The present' is an equally vague, stretchable-sense, even multi-sense word. During the *zero-duration* present, nothing at all happens! At that point, all that can be truly said is that events are *in the midst of occurring*. ----------------------------------------- > > I agree that paramattha dhammas > >have brief duration compared to the sequences of groups of such we > identify as > >the usual, macroscopic, conventional objects. But 'brief' needn't > mean "of > >zero duration", and there needn't be the assumption of no > development in terms of > >varying intensity, nor need there be an assumption of pinpointable > beginnings > >and endings - open intervals and fuzzy intervals are possible too. > > > Do we *need* to have answers for all these questions, I wonder? ------------------------------------------- Howard: That is an excellent question! Anf my answer is that no, we do not! The fundamental matters of Dhamma do not depend on the answers to these issues, IMO. ------------------------------------------ > Apart from knowing that the Buddha said that citta changes so quickly > that he couldn't come up with a suitable metaphor? ----------------------------------------- Howard: That's certainly something to know, though the tilakkhana are even more important than that one-liner. BTW, it unclear to me whether the Buddha was referring to mindstates in general with that, or was referring, more specifically, to thinking. "Mind" has more than one sense in the Dhamma - one sense refers to the mind door, another specifically to consciousness, and a third specifically to thinking. There may be moresense yet. ----------------------------------------- > Development is a form of change or variation and change is manifest. > The more interesting question to me is - how change unfolds in an > anatta system where nothing survives the present. > ----------------------------------------- Howard: Abhidhamma and the commentaries don't quite say that - if, by "present, you mean this exact 0-duration instant. A rupa can last, they say, across 17 (my favorite prime number) mindstates! And the commentaries state that, I am told, a single mindstate has a tripartite division into a period of arising, followed by one of stasis, followed by one of decline, and is, thus, not instantaneous. ------------------------------------------- Abhidhamma seeks > > to explain this, does it not? I'm wondering how those who reject > Abhidhamma explain it and yet remain proponents of anatta? -------------------------------------------- Howard: Huh? First of all, anatta and anicca are not the same. All conditioned dhammas are anatta in that they are impersonal, they are uncontrolable by any alleged self, and they are utterly dependent on other equally empty phenomena. As for their being anicca, that merely means that they do not remain. At one moment there is experience of hardness, but very shortly there is not. That's it. Nothing more is required. -------------------------------------------- > > What *is* > >necessary is the assumption of impermanence. > > Agreed. --------------------------------------------- Howard: Yay! ;-) ---------------------------------------------- > > >>If citta is not a momentary phenomenon, it must be something that > can > >>last from one "present" to another "present". That something > defies > >>momentary impermanence (but not necessarily conventional > >>impermanence). But what can anatta apply to apart from "the > present" > >>reality? > > > >------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > Not following you here. Impermanence means nothing other > than not > >remaining. > > I don't know what 'momentary impermanence' means. > > My term meaning the impermanence characteristic of the present > reality as opposed to some conventional rendering about > the "impermanence of Joe Blogg's life". ------------------------------------------ Howard: To me, that is jargon masquerading as knowledge. ------------------------------------------ > > Some that has zero > >duration never exists at all, does it? And a mental activity such > as knowing or > >feeling or recognizing that takes zero time never occurs at all, > does it? > > Scientifically, I wouldn't have thought so. > > A: Perhaps somebody who has a > >>considered opinion that citta is *not* a momentary thing could > help - > >>what does anatta mean to you? > > To put this question another way - does anatta refer to "the All" in > the present or to something else? And if to something else, I wonder > what it could be? > > Best wishes > Andrew > ======================= With metta, Howard #67847 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 7:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: right effort, mundane and supramundane nilovg Dear Robert, I read this in the Perfections: footnote[5]: See the Commentary to the “Book of Analysis”, the “Dispeller of Delusion” II, Ch 8, 292. It is on page 4 and further, see also p. 14, 15. According to the Abhidhamma and the Questionnaire, the four right efforts have to be seen as supramundane only. According to the Suttanta: mixed mundane and supramundane. Nina. Op 2-feb-2007, om 15:46 heeft rjkjp1 het volgende geschreven: > The fourth right effort, according to the Commentary, pertains to > the > > lokuttara citta and nibbaana. Who can make lokuttara citta arise at > > will? > > Nina. > ______ > Dear Nina > do you have the details about what he commenatry says? #67848 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 2:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not-Self and "Rebirth" upasaka_howard Hi, Charles - In a message dated 2/2/07 6:55:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, dacostas@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Feeling are reborn, .... > > Yours truly, > > Charles DaCosta > ==================== Nope, not in my opinion. New feelings arise. The old feelings are gone. With metta, Howard #67849 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 2:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] listening and the three rounds. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 2/2/07 10:09:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > Before going on with the sutta (perhaps next week), I answer some > questions. > ---------- > It is the matter of the testing it out where we seem to differ, Nina. > It seems to me that you restrict that to "thinking about", whereas I > consider > that the testing out consists of far-reaching activities. > ------------- > N: No, I do not you restrict that to "thinking about". Thinking about > a subject is only speculating. Pariyatti is not merely understanding > the theory, it is studying with awareness the dhamma appearing at > this moment. it always pertains to this moment. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Are you talking about the ordinary daily experiencing all folks have, or are you talking about intentionally attending to the nature of whatever arises "in the moment". If you mean the latter, that is what I call the practice of "ongoing mindfulness", a practice that becomes improved the more one engages in it especially with a mind that has been made calm and clear by sila and samadhi. ------------------------------------------- When we listen to > > explanations about seeing, the experience of what is visible, should > there not be consideration of seeing right then, since our eyes are > open and there is seeing? ------------------------------------------- Howard: Actually, no. When we listen to explanations, we should be paying attention to those explanations. -------------------------------------------- That is different from thinking about seeing.> > ---------- -------------------------------------------- Howard: I think you are wrong in this, Nina. When listening, just listen (with keen attention). -------------------------------------------- > > H: The Buddha taught many cultivational activities for overcoming > ignorance. What is being suggested by Khun Sujin other than listening > &thinking > over? > ------------ > N: To overcome ignorance understanding is to be cultivated, and this > is always, always at the present moment. > ----------------------------------------- Howard: How is it to be cultivated? Are you suggesting anything other than listening and considering? ---------------------------------------- At the same time we have to > > keep in mind that the Buddha taught us so that we shall have less > clinging. Remember the sutta (an auspicious night) where we are > taught not to cling to past experiences, nor to the future which has > not come yet, but to attend to the present moment. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: That amounts to not getting lost in thought, but staying present. That is a fundamental element of meditating. ------------------------------------------ We also read that > > death can come at any time (Maara and his army). There is urgency. ------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes, practice is urgent. What do you practice? ------------------------------------------- > I cling to past experiences, we all do. Past experiences and also > dreams we had may have been happy ones, but past is past. Now there > is the present moment that has to be studied with awareness. > -------------------------------------------- Howard: Are you recommending ongoing midfulness here, Nina? Or are you using words without referring to anything any different than everyone always does? This is very important, it seem to me. --------------------------------------------- Really, > > this takes courage. We have to be sincere and realize what we do not > know yet. > ---------- > H: there > were specific events that were turning points for that. One was an early > realization that the jhanas are real. Later ones were several > "insight events" > growing out of meditation practice and that verified Dhammic > teachings, and a very > basic one was seeing the reality, in my own life, of how the release of > craving led to perfect equanimity in the face of apparent (but > mistaken) prospects > for death. The second noble truth was seen as a truth in that latter > case, and > it was then seen as more than just a theoretical proposition. So, > certainly, > having listened to and carefully considered the Dhamma sufficiently > to accept > it, I was able to apply it. > ----------------- > N: Yes, I remember you related your attitude towards death (the test > you had and which seemed unfavorable at first) and I admired your > equanimity. True. But now, we have to continue testing the meaning of > the four noble Truths in our lives right now. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Ys, indeed! We agree on this. ----------------------------------------- > > I want to add something about this. > We discussed with Kh Sujin the three rounds of knowing the four noble > Truths: understanding of what is to be known: sacca ~naa.na; the > 'practice' which is awareness and direct understanding of realities, > kicca ~naa.na; the direct realisation of the truth, kata ~naa.na. > This is based on the sutta 'Setting in Motion the Wheel of Dhamma' > and its Commentary. > > Someone asked her about the first round pertaining to the second > noble Truth, craving. She said: we always have to understand this in > relation to this moment and she asked us: since this morning were you > searching for something? The answer is: yes: we get up want things > like breakfast, we want to see, to hear, we want to go on living. > Most of the time we are getting things for ourselves, for our comfort. > Perhaps this sounds futile, but it is important to realize such > moments as they are. Then we begin to see the second noble Truth. So > many, many moments with attachment (even slight) pass unnoticed. > The first Truth: dukkha, is deep and difficult to see. We do not > realize yet the arising and falling away of the dhammas at this > moment. Then we do not really penetrate the second noble Truth. (I do > not speak about suffering in general or other aspects of it.) So long > as we have not understood the first noble Truth, it is not possible > to really understand the second noble Truth. > We also asked about the first round in relation to nibbaana, the > third noble Truth. When we have more understanding of our clinging > right now and all our defilements right now, we shall also have more > understanding of the end of clinging and defilements. As to the Path: > there must be firm understanding that this is the right Path: > developing understanding of whatever dhamma appearing right now. No > deviation from the right Path led by craving for a fast result. > ******* > Nina. > ====================== With metta, Howard #67850 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 11:32 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily LIfe, Ch 23, no 3, Lokuttara cittas. nilovg Dear friends, Only the right Path, the eightfold Path, can lead to enlightenment. If one develops the wrong path the goal cannot be attained. When one develops the wrong path one has diììhi, wrong view. In the Abhidhamma defilements are classified in different ways and also different kinds of wrong view are classified in various ways. For example, different kinds of wrong view are classified under the group of defilements which is clinging (upådåna). Three of the four kinds of clinging mentioned in this group are clinging to various forms of diììhi; these three kinds of clinging have been completely eradicated by the sotåpanna. One of them is: ``clinging to rules and ritual'' (sílabbatupådåna), which includes the wrong practice of vipassanå. Some people think that they can attain enlightenment by following some path other than the eightfold Path but this is an illusion. There are no other ways leading to enlightenment. The eightfold Path is developed by being mindful of the nåma and rúpa which appear in daily life, such as seeing, visible object, hearing, sound, thinking, feeling, attachment, anger or the other defilements which arise. If the eightfold Path is not developed by being mindful of all realities which appear in one's daily life, wrong view cannot be eradicated and thus not even the first stage of enlightenment, the stage of the sotåpanna, can be attained. Therefore, there is no way leading to enlightenment other than the development of right understanding of realities, which is the wisdom (paññå) of the eightfold Path. What is right understanding? The answer is: seeing nåma and rúpa as they are: impermanent, dukkha and non-self. Right understanding can be developed. When we still have wrong view, we take realities for self: we take seeing for self, we take visible object for self, we take feeling for self, we take saññå (remembrance or ``perception'') for self, we take thinking for self, we take defilements for self, we also take good qualities such as mindfulness and wisdom for self. In being mindful of the characteristics of nåma and rúpa which appear, the wrong view of self can be eliminated; then there will be right understanding. ****** Nina. #67851 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 11:40 am Subject: Letters on Vipassana 6, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, Someone wrote to me that conventional truth is still truth: citta, cetasika and rúpa constitute the whole of a person, a living being which really exists. He finds that at the moment we adopt the discipline of vipassanå, paramattha dhammas appear and at the moments we deal with our ordinary life in the world, conventional truth appears. I believe that we should not think in terms of the “discipline of vipassanå” as being separated from our daily life. There are conditions to think of concepts, of "wholes", we need conventional terms in order to communicate with other people. We should lead our daily life naturally, but we can develop understanding of citta, cetasika and rúpa in our daily life. One may believe that these are constituents of a whole, but where is that whole? It only exists in our thinking, it cannot be directly experienced. We think that we see people lifting their hands or walking, but in reality there are countless nåmas and rúpas arising and falling away. So long as we do not realize the arising and falling away of nåma and rúpa, we cling to the idea that what appears are people, women or men, or this or that thing. We cling to the concept of somebody or something. Khun Sujin writes in "A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas", in the section on "Concepts": “In order to know that concepts are not paramattha dhammas one should learn to discern the characteristics of the different paramattha dhammas which arise together. One should be aware of one characteristic at a time as it appears through one doorway at a time. The arising and falling away should be realized of rúpa which appears through one doorway at a time, so that the truth can be known. Each rúpa lasts only as long as seventeen moments of citta and then it falls away. Therefore rúpa which arises has no time to stand, walk or do anything. During the time one lifts one's hand already more than seventeen moments of citta have passed [1]. One sees people walking or lifting their hands but in reality the rúpas which arise fall away immediately and are succeeded by other rúpas. The rúpa which is visible object appears to cittas of the eye-door process and then, after there have been bhavanga-cittas in between, there are many mind- door processes of cittas. That is why one can see people walking or lifting their hands. Seventeen moments of citta pass away extremely rapidly. Thus one should consider what happens in reality. One should know that the rúpa which appears at this moment through the eyes only lasts seventeen moments of citta and that it must fall away before sound can be experienced through ears. It seems that there can be hearing and seeing at the same time, but in between the moment of hearing and the moment of seeing there is an interval of more than seventeen moments of citta. The visible object which appears through the eyes and lasts seventeen moments of citta must have fallen away before the citta which hears arises. ------------- [1] Rúpa does not fall away as rapidly as citta, but it still falls away very rapidly. Comparing the duration of rúpa with the duration of citta it has been explained that rúpa lasts as long as seventeen moments of citta. ********* Nina. #67852 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 1:12 pm Subject: Re: B.Bodhi article (was: Arahants and compassion) jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Joop, > > (Pls keep in mind that I've only had a reather quick browse of the > article. Feel free to re-quote any paras I've missed): ... Dear Sarah, There is one topic, that even BB did not raise: How did the Buddha in his former lifes as a bodhisatta prevent the distruction of his fetters and get sotapanna … arahants? Because in that case after a to quick arahantship he was not reborn any more and could not be born as Gotama, the Buddha-to-be. (Jan Nattier is calling this a skilful means). More general: can aryans (streamenterer, once-returner, no-returner, arahant) postpone Nibbana, so that they have more possibilities to teach the Dhamma to other beings? You are right that only very few Buddhas are needed in the future. But the discussion is not about quantity or time but about principles. And the question then is: do you agree with BB's conclusion (I do): " When we adopt this approach, we can truly venerate those practitioners who work diligently to realize the final goal of the Dhamma here and now, to reach nibbana, the extinction of suffering, by following the noble eightfold path to its very end. We can venerate those who glorify the teaching by showing that it truly leads to ultimate liberation, to the plunge into the unborn and unconditioned state, the deathless element, which the Buddha so often extolled, calling it the wonderful and marvelous, the peaceful purity, the unsurpassed liberation. Again, by taking this approach, we can also venerate those compassionate ones who vow to follow the route of the bodhisattva, and who make this vow as an act of supererogation, not because it is a necessary condition for their own true deliverance. We can revere and cherish their loving-kindness, their great compassion, their lofty aspirations, and their self- sacrificial service to the world. True Buddhism needs all three: Buddhas, arahants, and bodhisattvas. It needs Buddhas to discover and teach the path to liberation; it needs arahants to follow the path and confirm that the Dharma does indeed lead to liberation, adorning the teaching with examples of those who lead the purest holy life; it needs bodhisattvas to bring forth the resolve to perfect those qualities that will enable them at some point in the future, near or distant, to become Buddhas themselves and once again turn the unsurpassed Wheel of the Dharma." About the getting lenient in the last two decades I quote my 65474 The passage that has been cited so often runs as follows: "Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing, nor upon tradition, nor upon rumor, nor upon scripture, nor upon surmise, nor upon axiom, nor upon specious reasoning, nor upon bias toward a notion pondered over, nor upon another's seeming ability, nor upon the consideration 'The monk is our teacher.' When you yourselves know: 'These things are bad, blamable, censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them... When you yourselves know: 'These things are good, blameless, praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,' enter on and abide in them." In his 1988 essay BB's interpretation of the Kalama Sutta was: "The Buddha begins by assuring the Kalamas that under such circumstances it is proper for them to doubt, an assurance which encourages free inquiry. He next speaks the passage quoted above, advising the Kalamas to abandon those things they know for themselves to be bad and to undertake those things they know for themselves to be good. This advice can be dangerous if …" In the 2006 essay BB says: "Once one gains confidence in the Buddha by examining those aspects of his teaching that come into range of one's immediate experience, one can then place trust in him as one who speaks truthfully about things that lie beyond range of one's immediate experience. And on the basis of this trust one can devote oneself wholeheartedly to the practice of his teaching." In 1988 BB says: don't think the Kalama Sutta gives you permission to go outside the orthodoxy. In 2006 BB stresses trust. Metta Joop #67853 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 1:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] elements of experience egberdina Hi Sarah, > I think it's good to question and question as you do, Herman, rather than > to blindly just accept whatever one has heard. However, if I may use the > reading analogy again, if the child continuously questions the value of > the entire exercise during the reading session, he may never get to learn > to read the passages. What you are saying is no doubt true. But if the exercise is nibbana, a child that refuses to feed the papanca beast with all manner of views deserves full marks, no? Kind Regards Herman #67854 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 1:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing egberdina Hi Sarah, > p.s On treatments, if you'd like me to ask our wonderful Chinese > acupuncturist for any of his suggestions for Vicki, just send me brief > details off-list. Vicki has made quite a few visits to the acupunturist with her shoulder problem, and while the treatment provides relief, it is only very temporary. (a few hours) Recently she has had a cortisone injection into the joint, and this is proving to be more effective than anything else, to date. Thanks for your concern. Kind Regards Herman #67855 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 1:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Theriigaathaa - Sisters (11) egberdina Hi Nina and everyone, On 02/02/07, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Connie, > thank you very much. This always impresses me: heaping up good under > former Buddhas,.. > Or: age-enduring, for aeons. It shows how long it takes to listen, > consider, be aware of nama and rupa. How could it all be over in just > a short while? A theoretical question, for everyone. If an opportunity arose for it to be all over right now, would you take it? I certainly would not. Kind Regards Herman #67856 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 1:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Arahants and compassion egberdina Hi Joop, > > Thanks for your supportive message. > Still I'm not convinced that Eastern notion of compassion is a > complete other one than the European/Christian one. There is not one > Eastern notion but there are many. > And there is a differance between living in solitude and the notion > that one as a human being is connected to other beings: not only on a > conventional level but also at ultimate (paramattha) one. I am not an expert, but I do not think that other beings are even possible in paramattha dhamma theory. Kind Regards Herman Reply | Forward | Messages in this Topic (296) #67857 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 2:39 pm Subject: Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (11) philofillet Hi Herman Always good questions, challenges. My answer - I wouldn't either. We have to deepen our understanding of the First and Second Noble Truths before our answer can change. Or should I say our understanding has to deepen. No control over understanding, though we can set conditions that might help it to develop. Metta, Phil > > Or: age-enduring, for aeons. It shows how long it takes to listen, > > consider, be aware of nama and rupa. How could it all be over in just > > a short while? > > A theoretical question, for everyone. If an opportunity arose for it > to be all over right now, would you take it? > > I certainly would not. > #67858 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 4:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing lbidd2 Hi Herman, H: "What is there OTHER than concepts, which would justify your use of the word "only" in relation to it?" L: 'Consciousness only' usually means what we experience as rupa is really 5-door consciousness, but that consciousness is a reality, not a concept. That there is an external physical reality that causes that consciousness to arise is certainly reasonable but we can only get at it conceptually. Also the cetasikas that arise with a consciousness are considered realities. Not to mention nibbana ;-) Larry #67859 From: connie Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 4:44 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (12) nichiconn PRUITT: part 1 - 12. Dhammadinnaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 12. The commentary on the verse of Therii Dhammadinnaa Chandajaataa avasaayiiti dhammadinnaatheriyaa gaathaa. Saa kira padumuttarabuddhakaale ha.msavatiinagare paraadhiinavuttikaa hutvaa jiivantii nirodhato vu.t.thitassa aggasaavakassa puujaasakkaarapubbaka.m daana.m datvaa devaloke nibbattaa. Tato cavitvaa devamanussesu sa.msarantii phussassa bhagavato kaale satthu vemaatikabhaatikaana.m kammikassa gehe vasamaanaa daana.m pa.ticca "eka.m dehii"ti saamikena vutte dve dentii, bahu.m pu~n~na.m katvaa One should be eager, determinate is the verse of Therii Dhammadinnaa. She lived as someone else's dependent in the town of Ha.msavatii during the time of the Buddha Padumuttara. She first paid respects and honoured one of the chief disciples when he rose from the state of cessation, then gave him a gift. And she was reborn in the deva world. After dying there she journied on among devas and men. During the time of the Blessed One Phussa she made great merit through a gift made when she was living in the house of the superintendent for the Teacher's stepbrothers. On being told by her husband to give one [gift] she gave two. kassapabuddhakaale kikissa kaasikara~n~no gehe pa.tisandhi.m gahetvaa sattanna.m bhaginiina.m abbhantaraa hutvaa viisativassasahassaani brahmacariya.m caritvaa eka.m buddhantara.m devamanussesu sa.msarantii During the time of Buddha Kassapa, she obtained rebirth in the household of Kikii, King of Kaasi [Benares], one of seven sisters. She lived practising the holy life for twenty thousand years. During one interval between Buddhas, she journeyed on in the worlds of devas and men. imasmi.m buddhuppaade raajagahe kulagehe nibbattitvaa vayappattaa visaakhassa se.t.thino geha.m gataa. Athekadivasa.m visaakho se.t.thi satthu santike dhamma.m sutvaa anaagaamii hutvaa ghara.m gantvaa paasaada.m abhiruhanto sopaanamatthake .thitaaya dhammadinnaaya pasaaritahattha.m anaalambitvaava paasaada.m abhiruhitvaa bhu~njamaanopi tu.nhiibhuutova bhu~nji. During this Buddha era, she was reborn in the home of a [good] family in Raajagaha. When she came of age, she went to the house of the wealthy merchant Visaakha [as his wife]. Then one day, this wealthy merchant Visaakha went to the Teacher, and after hearing the doctrine became a Non-Returner. He went home and went up to the roof of the house where Dhamadinnaa was standing at the top of the stairs, but he did not take hold of her outstretched arm. Moreover, after going up to the roof, while eating, he ate in silence. Dhammadinnaa ta.m upadhaaretvaa, "ayyaputta, kasmaa tva.m ajja mama hattha.m naalambi, bhu~njamaanopi na ki~nci kathesi, atthi nu kho koci mayha.m doso"ti aaha. Taking note of this, Dhammadinnaa said to him, "Dear husband,why did you not lean on my arm today? And even while eating you did not say anything. Is it indeed because of some fault in me?" Visaakho "dhammadinne, na te doso atthi, aha.m pana ajja pa.t.thaaya itthisariira.m phusitu.m aahaare ca lolabhaava.m kaatu.m anaraho, taadiso mayaa dhammo pa.tividdho. Tva.m pana sace icchasi, imasmi.myeva gehe vasa. No ce icchasi, yattakena dhanena te attho, tattaka.m gahetvaa kulaghara.m gacchaahii"ti aaha. Visaakha replied, "There is no fault in you, Dhammadinnaa. But beginning with today, to touch a woman's body or to be greedy for food is unworthy of me. Such is the Doctrine that has been realized by me. But if you wish, stay in this house. If you do not wish that, take as much wealth as you need and go to your family's house." "Naaha.m, ayyaputta, tayaa vantavamana.m aacamissaami, pabbajja.m me anujaanaahii"ti. "My dear husband," [she replied,] "I will not swallow what you have spat out. Permit me to go forth." Visaakho "saadhu, dhammadinne"ti ta.m suva.n.nasivikaaya bhikkhuni-upassaya.m pesesi. Visaakha said, "Very good, Dhammadinna." And he sent her to the residence of the bhikkhuniis in a golden palanquin. Saa pabbajitvaa kamma.t.thaana.m gahetvaa katipaaha.m tattha vasitvaa vivekavaasa.m vasitukaamaa aacariyupajjhaayaana.m santika.m gantvaa, "ayyaa, aaki.n.na.t.thaane mayha.m citta.m na ramati, gaamakaavaasa.m gacchaamii"ti aaha. She went forth, took a meditation subject, and after living there for a few days, wanting to live in seclusion, she went to her teacher and preceptor and said, "Venerable ladies, I do not delight in a place that is full [of people], I shall go live in a residence in a village." Bhikkhuniyo ta.m gaamakaavaasa.m nayi.msu. Saa tattha vasantii atiite madditasa"nkhaarataaya na cirasseva saha pa.tisambhidaahi arahatta.m paapu.ni. Tena vutta.m apadaane (apa. therii 2.3.95-130)- The bhikkhuniis led her to a residence in a village. While she was living there, because in the past she had crushed the formations, she attained Arahatship together with the [four] discriminations after a very short time. #67860 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 5:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing lbidd2 Hi Scott, S: "The question, then, is can this moment of 'liking' ever be known as 'moment of liking', as it arises and falls away?" L: Sure, that's the way satipatthana works. You remember to be mindful of emotions. One arises. You notice it. Another arises. You notice it. The noticing is a completely discrete event, it seems to me. What is interesting is that the emotion isn't clung-to when noticing is interspersed. I believe predominance condition plays an especially important role in satipatthana, highlighting the moment of arising, for example. I'm not sure exactly what you are asking, but I would say nothing can be known without both concept and reality. S: "I've likely got it wrong anyway, but I wasn't wanting to 'equate' the process of citta with experience. I was meaning to suggest that, by also factoring in a consideration of the linear process of multi-dimensionally complex and variegated cittas arising and falling away in series, one can even better account for the seeming variability of experience." L: Sure, I agree, plus there's the speed of consciousness. I was kind of making a counter point to the idea of one consciousness with one object and the implication that this is simple. S: "I think that, along with predominance condition, one can also consider proximity, contiguity, and conascence conditions. Also, it seems to me, that some of the 'experience' of 'being constantly bombarded by feelings' is itself illusory, since the constancy and probably the bombardment are also conceptualisations and illusions of continuity." L: I like all the conditions, very helpful in understanding experience. I agree that conceptualisations and illusions are constantly happening. There's no 'pure' experience, at least not for me. But any semblance of 'being in the moment' always includes feeling. S: "Yeah, I agree with 'the greater challenge' as you say. And you've broached a whole new point (almost) in getting me to think about whether or not 'insight' is an idealised reality. It does make a big difference, as you say." L: Could you say more about this. How is insight an idealised reality? Larry #67861 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 5:46 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing scottduncan2 Hi Larry, L: "Could you say more about this. How is insight an idealised reality?" Well, I just got to thinking, when I read a portion of what you wrote in that last post: "...Insight is just disillusionment in a very ordinary sense. Not a big deal..." Just noticing my reaction - the way I experienced the statement - I realised that I seem to idealise insight. I sort of read you to be 'devaluing' this mental factor. And I felt a sort of shock, like, 'What's he saying, insight is ordinary?' I don't think this is what you were saying, mind you, but this is what lead to my thinking about the (my?) idealisation of insight. Its good though. I can see how the detachment isn't really there for me; how I must be subtly 'waiting for insight to arise', craving it, clinging to the idea of it. That's all I was getting at. Sincerely, Scott. #67862 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 6:04 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: right effort, and some Thailand impressions. buddhatrue Hi Sarah and All, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Helping others to question and reflect further and discussing dhamma with > kind intentions is never bad kamma. Don't worry or feel discouraged! Thanks for the little butt in ;-)). I really must apologize to everyone for that post. I wrote it on Friday, at the end of the day, during a week when I had to teach 25 classes with no official co- teacher present (an "English Camp" during Winter Break). I was exhausted, irritated, and not in the proper state of mind. As was mentioned in another post: Sarah, I agree with you when you told KS that it is difficult if not impossible to have metta when one is tired. I would go so far as to say that it is impossible to have metta, or any wholesome state, mindfulness, concentration, or wisdom when one is exhausted. And KS disagreed with you!! Really, what is wrong with that woman? Does she live in fantasy land? (don't answer that ;-)) The Buddha learned during his years of austerities that it is impossible to develop any type of wisdom whatsoever when one is exhausted, and yet here is KS saying that it can be done!! Well, good for her. She must be Wonder Woman! ;-)) I don't think I will get bad kamma by posting to Nina- even if she thinks I am a complete idiot and anything I write makes her believe KS even more strongly! Kamma comes from intention, and my intentions are good (or at least I think so). So, I will write again to Nina about her mixed up views concerning Right Effort. Stay tuned Wonder Woman fans!! ;-)) Metta, James #67863 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 6:42 pm Subject: Re: right effort buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: You rightly state according to the texts: Right Effort involves > guarding > the sense doors so that wholesome states will increase and > unwholesome states will decrease. > That is how I see it, it is right effort of the eightfold Path, > together with right mindfulness and right understanding. > If one hears unpleasant words from someone else and is about to > retort in an unpleasant way, there may be awareness of the dhammas > appearing through the six doors. Sound is only sound and it can be > heard, in the ultimate sense there is no person there. It is kamma > that produces the hearing of an unpleasant object. This is the way to > guard the six doors, and there is effort, but together with right > mindfulness and right understanding of realities appearing at the > present moment. No opportunity of blaming others or feeling sorry for > onself. > Nina. Nina, this post really made me chuckle to myself because it really shows what a one-track mind you have. To you, guarding the sense doors (Right Effort) is all about anatta! In reality, guarding the sense doors has absolutely nothing to do with anatta! Here is what the Buddha taught in regards to guarding the sense doors, AN 3:68: "There may be outsiders, O monks, who will ask you: "Now, friends, what is the cause and condition whereby unarisen greed arises and arisen greed becomes stronger and more powerful?" "An attractive object," they should be told. In him who gives unwise attention to an attractive object, unarisen greed will arise, and greed that has already arisen will become stronger and more powerful. "Now, friends, what is the cause and condition whereby unarisen hatred arises and arisen hatred becomes stronger and more powerful?" "A repulsive object," they should be told. In him who gives unwise attention to a repulsive object, unarisen hatred will arise and hatred that has already arisen will grow stronger and more powerful. "Now, friends, what is the cause and condition whereby unarisen delusion arises and arisen delusion becomes stronger and more powerful?" "Unwise attention," they should be told. In him who gives unwise attention, unarisen delusion will arise, and delusion that has already arisen will grow stronger and more powerful. "Now, friends, what is the cause and condition for unarisen greed not to arise and for the abandoning of greed that has arisen?" "A meditation object of impurity," they should be told. In him who gives wise attention to a meditation object of impurity, unarisen greed will not arise and greed that has arisen will be abandoned. "Now, friends, what is the cause and condition for unarisen hatred not to arise and for the abandoning of hatred that has arisen?" "Loving-Kindness that is a freeing of the mind," they should be told. In him who gives wise attention to loving-kindness that is a freeing of the mind, unarisen hatred will not arise and hatred that has arisen will be abandoned. "Now, friends, what is the cause and condition for unarisen delusion not to arise and for the abandoning of delusion that has arisen?" "Wise attention," they should be told. In him who gives wise attention, unarisen delusion will not arise and delusion that has arisen will be abandoned." Metta, James #67864 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 8:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing lbidd2 Hi Scott, Another thing to consider, both of our views are just concepts. Larry #67865 From: connie Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 8:36 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (12) nichiconn Friends, continuing with Dhammadinnaa: PRUITT: part 1 = #67859; part 2: As it is said in the Apadaana: "Padumuttaro naama jino, sabbadhammaana paaraguu; ito satasahassamhi, kappe uppajji naayako. "Tadaaha.m ha.msavatiya.m, kule a~n~natare ahu.m; parakammakaarii aasi.m, nipakaa siilasa.mvutaa. Padumuttara, the Conqueror who had reached the far shore of all phenomena, the Leader, was born one hundred thousand world cycles ago. At that time, I was in a certain [good] family in Ha.msavatii. I was a zealous servant, restrained through virtuous conduct. "Padumuttarabuddhassa, sujaato aggasaavako; vihaaraa abhinikkhamma, pi.n.dapaataaya gacchati. "Gha.ta.m gahetvaa gacchantii, tadaa udakahaarikaa; ta.m disvaa adada.m puupa.m, pasannaa sehi paa.nibhi. "Pa.tiggahetvaa tattheva, nisinno paribhu~nji so; tato netvaana ta.m geha.m, adaasi.m tassa bhojana.m. Sujaata, a chief disciple of the Buddha Padumuttara, came out of his lodgings on his alms round. I took a pot and was going along at that time as a water carrier. I saw him and gave a cake with my own hands, with my mind favourably disposed towards him. Having accepted [it], sitting down in that very place, he ate it. Then I led him to the house and gave him [more] food. "Tato me ayyako tu.t.tho, akarii su.nisa.m saka.m; sassuyaa saha gantvaana, sambuddha.m abhivaadayi.m. "Tadaa so dhammakathika.m, bhikkhuni.m parikittaya.m; .thapesi etadaggamhi, ta.m sutvaa muditaa aha.m. "Nimantayitvaa sugata.m, sasa"ngha.m lokanaayaka.m; mahaadaana.m daditvaana, ta.m .thaanamabhipatthayi.m. After that, my master, being pleased with me, made me his own daughter-in-law. I went with my mother-in-law and paid respects to the Fully Awakened One. Then, praising a bhikkhunii, he placed her as foremost of those [bhikkhuniis] who preach the Doctrine. Having heard that, I [felt] appreciative joy. I invited the Sublime One, the Leader of the World, together with the Order, and gave a great gift, aspiring to that place [of foremost preacher]. ------- to be continued, c. #67866 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 8:48 pm Subject: Energy: The Root Hero! bhikkhu5 Friends: Energy is The Chief Hero: Root of all Success! Your majesty, like a man might reinforce a house that was falling down with an extra piece of wood, & being thus strengthened that house would not collapse. Even so, your majesty, has energy (viriya) the characteristic of reinforcing support & consolidating strength. By energy are no advantageous states lost. The Questions of King Milinda: Milindapanha 36 http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebsut045.htm Energy is the prime state of a chief hero, a champion, a conqueror! Its characteristic is enthusiastic and forceful thrust of exertion. Its function is the supporting foundation of associated states. Its manifestation is a state of non-collapse of whatever is good. The proximate cause of energy is what stirs up & activates effort. Alternatively: Any source that stimulates and instigates energy. It is said by the Blessed One that one who is stirred and aroused by energy exerts and struggles properly. That leads to all success! Rightly instigated it should be seen as the root of all attainments! Visuddhimagga XVI 137 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=771100 Definition and Inspiration also at: http://what-buddha-said.net/drops/What_is_Right_Effort.htm http://what-buddha-said.net/drops/Enthusiastic_is_Energy.htm Energy: The Root Hero! Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Ceylon * <.....> #67867 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 10:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: right effort, and some Thailand impressions. sarahprocter... Hi James (Phil & all), An interesting topic - --- buddhatrue wrote: > As was mentioned in another post: Sarah, I agree with you when you > told KS that it is difficult if not impossible to have metta when one > is tired. I would go so far as to say that it is impossible to have > metta, or any wholesome state, mindfulness, concentration, or wisdom > when one is exhausted. And KS disagreed with you!! >Really, what is > wrong with that woman? ..... S: I don't think it was quite like that. The chat was a long time ago (20yrs?)and I believe it was a quiet chat we were having with K.Sujin at a time when I was continually exhausted from work. I used to send Nina copies of the tapes and as you know, it's always been Nina's habit to transcribe K.Sujin's (v.helpful, imho) comments from the Thai and English to use in her letters and books. I don't think I've ever thought or said it is impossible to have metta at such times, but observed it seemed less common at the end of a demanding teaching day (as you and Phil appreciate). I was also doing a lot of assessment and advisory work for schools and students at the time and supervising other teachers- sometimes 70hr work weeks! Accumulations! No one disagrees that metta is often lacking at such times, but often we forget there is only the present moment and no matter how tired or exhausted we may be, when we're concerned with our own woes, with our own lack of metta, with *ME* in any shape or form, this in itself is a condition for a lack of metta and a lack of undersanding right then and there. I remember more recently when Nina would ask K.Sujin about how to cope with her demanding father and mention all the difficulties in this regard. Again, the reminders were about having metta, about understanding our cittas (especially with regard to clinging to the self again) when we think in this way about 'ME' and my problems. Yes, the answers are always the same in this regard - they always come back to the understanding of the present dhammas rather than discussions about changing situations or 'shoulds'. ..... >Does she live in fantasy land? (don't answer > that ;-)) The Buddha learned during his years of austerities that it > is impossible to develop any type of wisdom whatsoever when one is > exhausted, and yet here is KS saying that it can be done!! Well, > good for her. She must be Wonder Woman! ;-)) .... S: To me, the response with the tough reminders about self-attachment are far more helpful and compassionate than the usual 'you poor thing, I sympathise' responses which just tend to feed our usual self-indulgent ways of thinking even more. Any moment, any moment at all, there are dhammas arising which can be known. This is just as true when we are exhausted or sick as at any other time. If we think these dhammas (including the dosa arising) cannot be objects of wisdom then and there, again we put off the path and never face up to our true accumulations. Instead of trying to find a way not to have unpleasantness in life, better to see whatever has arisen by conditions and to appreciate the value of kusala (such as the brahma viharas) right then and there. .... <...> >Kamma comes from intention, and my intentions > are good (or at least I think so). <....> Stay tuned Wonder > Woman fans!! ;-)) .... S: This is the point - we can only ever know our own intentions. We just share and help each other as best we can with our limited understanding to date. Whether we write or speak or not will come back to conditions at the time. Any dhamma at all appearing now can be the object of awareness. The aim isn't to have less dosa, but to become detached from taking realities for self and to cling less rather than more to *ME*. Gradually, in this way, we become less concerned about our difficulties and exhaustion and appreciate the value of studying 'Dhamma', rather than *ME* and my problems, I find. Thanks again for your comments. Metta, Sarah (No Wonder Woman ;-)) ======= #67868 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 10:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Gaps: Unecessary but Interesting corvus121 Hi Howard Thanks for your further comments. I don't think you really *got* what I was trying to say about anatta (my fault). Anyway, I'm away for a while now so will finish here. > > >Howard: > > > Not following you here. Impermanence means nothing other > > than not > > >remaining. > > > I don't know what 'momentary impermanence' means. > > > > My term meaning the impermanence characteristic of the present > > reality as opposed to some conventional rendering about > > the "impermanence of Joe Blogg's life". > > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > To me, that is jargon masquerading as knowledge. Just on the above, I do get what you are saying but ... this can be said about any language usage and we don't know the cittas of others to be identifying them as "jargon" or "true knowledge". That's the reason why I tend to avoid commenting upon other's personal "meditation experiences". Best wishes Andrew #67869 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 11:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: right effort, and some Thailand impressions. sarahprocter... Dear all, (inc. James & Phil), Further to my recent comments: Sarah: > Any dhamma at all appearing now can be the object of awareness. The aim > isn't to have less dosa, but to become detached from taking realities > for self and to cling less rather than more to *ME*. Gradually, in this way, we become less concerned about our difficulties and exhaustion and > appreciate the value of studying 'Dhamma', rather than *ME* and my > problems, I find. ..... S: I think Mike & Scott recently shared some helpful reflections along similar lines (#67732): Mike:".....Although there is much in the Dhamma that does alleviate domanassa, both temporarily and permanently, the goal is not this relief but the end of rebirth. Impossible to overstate the importance of this difference in my opinion." ... Scott: "I think that 'goals', unless understood properly (or rather considered from the point of view of anatta) can be misleading. If there is relief from domanassa stemming from an increasing understanding of things due to considering the Dhamma, this is just a natural consequence. Seeking to reduce 'lack of pleasure' is only seeking 'pleasure'. And seeing domanassa as 'mine' leads to misunderstanding the whole nature of things, which gives rise to ideas about 'my practise' and 'my influence' over 'my following' of 'my Path'. All wrong, methinks."< ****** Sarah: I'll look forward to any further reflections from anyone. Metta, Sarah ======== #67870 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 12:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: right effort, and some Thailand impressions. egberdina Hi James, I have followed your correspondence with interest. I understand your frustration. Both you and I know how to read, and this is what is to be read in AN 2.5 "Monks, I have known two qualities through experience: discontent with regard to skillful qualities and unrelenting exertion. Relentlessly I exerted myself, [thinking,] 'Gladly would I let the flesh & blood in my body dry up, leaving just the skin, tendons, & bones, but if I have not attained what can be reached through human firmness, human persistence, human striving, there will be no relaxing my persistence.' From this heedfulness of mine was attained Awakening. From this heedfulness of mine was attained the unexcelled freedom from bondage. "You, too, monks, should relentlessly exert yourselves, [thinking,] 'Gladly would we let the flesh & blood in our bodies dry up, leaving just the skin, tendons, & bones, but if we have not attained what can be reached through human firmness, human persistence, human striving, there will be no relaxing our persistence.' You, too, in no long time will reach & remain in the supreme goal of the holy life for which clansmen rightly go forth from home into homelessness, knowing & realizing it for yourselves in the here & now. "Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will relentlessly exert ourselves, [thinking,] "Gladly would we let the flesh & blood in our bodies dry up, leaving just the skin, tendons, & bones, but if we have not attained what can be reached through human firmness, human persistence, human striving, there will be no relaxing our persistence."' That's how you should train yourselves." Be an island, James. Kind Regards Herman #67871 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 1:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing egberdina Hi Scott, > I think I'll pass, if you don't mind. > By all means, feel free to abstain from repeating a dhamma theory you are particularly fond of to me. But please, feed you children with what they need. KInd Regards Herman #67872 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 1:24 am Subject: [dsg] Re: right effort, and some Thailand impressions. rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > Both you and I know how to read, and this is what is to > be read in AN 2.5 > > "Monks, I have known two qualities through experience: discontent with > regard to skillful qualities and unrelenting exertion. Relentlessly I > exerted myself, [> Be an island, James. > Dear Herman Am I right in thinking your position on studying the texts has changed and you take them as authoritative? If so I would like to discuss this sutta more and in relation to other suttas.. Robert #67873 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 1:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: right effort, and some Thailand impressions. egberdina Hi RobertK, On 03/02/07, rjkjp1 wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" > wrote: > > > Both you and I know how to read, and this is what is to > > be read in AN 2.5 > > > > "Monks, I have known two qualities through experience: discontent with > > regard to skillful qualities and unrelenting exertion. Relentlessly I > > exerted myself, [> Be an island, James. > > > > Dear Herman > Am I right in thinking your position on studying the texts has > changed and you take them as authoritative? If so I would like to > discuss this sutta more and in relation to other suttas.. > Robert > I'll happily answer your question if you will happily answer one I asked everyone earlier. If an opportunity arose for it all to be over right now, would you take it? Kind Regards Herman #67874 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 1:43 am Subject: [dsg] Re: right effort, and some Thailand impressions. rjkjp1 Dear Herman, Whether I answer yes or no to your hypothetical question, the only way it will ever be over is if the eighfold path is developed to attain parinibbana. When there is right understanding there is a step towards that goal, it does not come about by wishing..But only by repeated steps in the right direction. Robert In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > #67875 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 1:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: right effort, and some Thailand impressions. egberdina Hi RobertK, On 03/02/07, rjkjp1 wrote: > Dear Herman, > Whether I answer yes or no to your hypothetical question, the only way > it will ever be over is if the eighfold path is developed to attain > parinibbana. When there is right understanding there is a step towards > that goal, it does not come about by wishing..But only by repeated > steps in the right direction. I'm glad you've got causality/conditionality down pat. I won't answer your question either. Cheers Herman PS Perhaps you could test how well you understand causality by making a prediction, say, about Alex. Keep us informed. #67876 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 2:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing egberdina Hi Larry, On 03/02/07, LBIDD@... wrote: > Hi Herman, > > H: "What is there OTHER than concepts, which would justify your use of > the word "only" in relation to it?" > > L: 'Consciousness only' usually means what we experience as rupa is > really 5-door consciousness, but that consciousness is a reality, not a > concept. That there is an external physical reality that causes that > consciousness to arise is certainly reasonable but we can only get at it > conceptually. Also the cetasikas that arise with a consciousness are > considered realities. Not to mention nibbana ;-) > I am not speaking from any (theoretical) Buddhist perspective here, just my own, and from that perspective "consciousness only" means nothing. There is never consciousness without object, there is never object without consciousness. And the fundamental relationship that pervades the consciousness/object phenomena is negation/nothingness. "I am not this" is central to Buddhism of most flavours. I very much like your quip "Not to mention nibbana". So much so, I'm going to start a thread on nibbana. Kind Regards Herman #67877 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 2:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Arahants and compassion jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Joop, > > I am not an expert, but I do not think that other beings are even > possible in paramattha dhamma theory. > > Kind Regards > > Herman > Hallo Herman, Sarah, all In my mind I remember regularly the Big Bang theory of which I again and again think it is true because it is not really falisfied till now. In my mind I remember regularly the Evolutionary theory of which I again and again think it is true because it is not really falisfied till now. In my mind I remember regularly the Abhidhamma two truths theory of which I again and again think it is true although it's difficult to test. In my mind I remember regularly the Gaia theory of which I again and again think it is true although it's difficult to test. Because I'm trained in abstract thinking it's no problem that these theories exist together; the only problem is the communication about their relation. The theory that "other beings exist" (aspect of the Gaia theory) and the "paramattha dhamma theory" are difficult to reconcile. I know that but I can live with this cognitive dissonance. Maybe in the future a Abhidhamma interpretation evolves that is not only a individual psychology but also a social psychology in which at the same time "other beings exist" AND "other beings don't exist". It makes me think about the discussion during three centuries if "light" is a stream of particles OR a wave. Two theories of light that were impossible to reconcile. In the 20th century the conclusion was: "light" is both. Metta Joop BTW, have you ever read: The Four Sublime States Contemplations on Love, Compassion, Sympathetic Joy and Equanimity by Nyanaponika Thera ? One of the most beautiful texts I know The parapgraph on compassion starts with: " The world suffers. But most men have their eyes and ears closed. They do not see the unbroken stream of tears flowing through life; they do not hear the cry of distress continually pervading the world. Their own little grief or joy bars their sight, deafens their ears. Bound by selfishness, their hearts turn stiff and narrow. Being stiff and narrow, how should they be able to strive for any higher goal, to realize that only release from selfish craving will effect their own freedom from suffering? It is compassion that removes the heavy bar, opens the door to freedom, makes the narrow heart as wide as the world. Compassion takes away from the heart the inert weight, the paralyzing heaviness; it gives wings to those who cling to the lowlands of self. Through compassion the fact of suffering remains vividly present to our mind, even at times when we personally are free from it. It gives us the rich experience of suffering, thus strengthening us to meet it prepared, when it does befall us. Compassion reconciles us to our own destiny by showing us the life of others, often much harder than ours." #67878 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 2:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Arahants and compassion TYPO jwromeijn Hallo Where I typed "falisfied", I tried to type "falsified" (four times) Joop #67879 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 2:56 am Subject: Nibbana egberdina Hi all, Udana 8:1 There is that dimension where there is neither earth, nor water, nor fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception; neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And there, I say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor staying; neither passing away nor arising: unestablished, unevolving, without support (mental object).This, just this, is the end of stress. Udana 8:3 There is, monks, an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there would not be the case that emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated is discerned. Udana 8:4 One who is dependent has wavering. One who is independent has no wavering. There being no wavering, there is calm. There being calm, there is no desire. There being no desire, there is no coming or going. There being no coming or going, there is no passing away or arising. There being no passing away or arising, there is neither a here nor a there nor a between-the-two. This, just this, is the end of stress. Does anyone have a problem with the implication that nibbana IS, and that nibbana is the full extent of what it means TO BE? Further, does anyone have a problem with the implication that any consciousness is a denial of BEING? Cheers Herman #67880 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 3:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Theriigaathaa - Sisters (7) sarahprocter... Dear Nina (& Lodewijk), Many thanks for the very apt quote below: --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Sarah, > We read in the “Exposition of Jatukaùùin’s Questions” (Mahaa-Niddesa, > Khuddaka Nikåya) that Jatukaùùin had heard that the Buddha was > courageous and that he therefore was called a hero, víra. The > following passage gives the reasons why he was called a hero. There > is an association in meaning between the word víra, hero, and viriya, > which is the state of a strong man. All that is said in the passage > below refers to viriya cetasika. We read: > > “He had perseverance and was therefore called a hero. > He was valiant and was therefore called a hero. > He caused others to persevere and was therefore called a hero. > He had great capacities and was therefore called a hero. > He was brave and always progressing, he was not a coward, not > frightened, not fearful, he did not flee, he had eliminated fear and > cowardice, he was without any terror, and thus, the Exalted One was > courageous. <...> .... S: I've trimmed the rest of the quote (#67742), but it was most appropriate for our discussion on viira, viriya, courage and right effort. Somehow it's come alive for me much more this time - or perhaps I'd just forgotten this passage. Thank you! .... > BTW Alan is very much involved with the Perfections which may be > ready in about three weeks. Lodewijk is collecting addresses of > centers etc. and will be very active with the sending of the books, > also to Thailand. .... S: This is excellent news. I'm sure you are all very busy with the preparation for publication. I think it's a masterpiece and very, very inspiring. We'll greatly look forward to seeing the finished text. Anumodana to Lodewijk for his support and help. I know many people will greatly appreciate a copy. Metta, Sarah ========= #67881 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Feb 2, 2007 11:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Gaps: Unecessary but Interesting upasaka_howard Hi, Andrew - In a message dated 2/3/07 1:31:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, athel60@... writes: > >>My term meaning the impermanence characteristic of the present > >>reality as opposed to some conventional rendering about > >>the "impermanence of Joe Blogg's life". > > > >------------------------------------------ > >Howard: > > To me, that is jargon masquerading as knowledge. > > Just on the above, I do get what you are saying but ... this can be > said about any language usage and we don't know the cittas of others > to be identifying them as "jargon" or "true knowledge". That's the > reason why I tend to avoid commenting upon other's > personal "meditation experiences". > ===================== Pardon me, please. I may well have come across as rude. I simply meant that the phrase 'the impermanence characteristic of the present reality' strikes me as not conveying much. With metta, Howard #67882 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 4:46 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing scottduncan2 Hi Larry, L: "Another thing to consider, both of our views are just concepts." Too true. S. #67883 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 1:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 2/3/07 6:02:27 AM Eastern Standard Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > Hi all, > > Udana 8:1 > There is that dimension where there is neither earth, nor water, nor > fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor > dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of > nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception; > neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And there, > I say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor staying; neither > passing away nor arising: unestablished, unevolving, without support > (mental object).This, just this, is the end of stress. > > Udana 8:3 > There is, monks, an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If > there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there > would not be the case that emancipation from the born — become — made > — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an > unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, emancipation from the born > — become — made — fabricated is discerned. > > Udana 8:4 > One who is dependent has wavering. One who is independent has no > wavering. There being no wavering, there is calm. There being calm, > there is no desire. There being no desire, there is no coming or > going. There being no coming or going, there is no passing away or > arising. There being no passing away or arising, there is neither a > here nor a there nor a between-the-two. This, just this, is the end of > stress. > > Does anyone have a problem with the implication that nibbana IS, and > that nibbana is the full extent of what it means TO BE? -------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not clear on what you mean by "IS", particularly in caps. If you mean that nibbana is not fiction, I agree. I do not follow your intention in writing "nibbana is the full extent of what it means TO BE." Nibbana is just as much non-being as being. Actually, I think it is beyond all concept, including this fundamental ontological issue of being and non-being. Note that Udana 8.1. and 8.3 above consist only of negations. -------------------------------------------------- > > Further, does anyone have a problem with the implication that any > consciousness is a denial of BEING? -------------------------------------------------- Howard: I simply don't understand it! (I guess that's a "problem"! ;-) To me, nibbana is the actual nature of reality. It excludes nothing but also "in it" there is nothing reifiable. I find some of the language of Udana 8.4 interesting: "There being no passing away or arising, there is neither a here nor a there nor a between-the-two. This, just this, is the end of stress." Compare this with "When there is no you in terms of that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress." from the Bahiya Sutta. I interpret that sutta as urging the attainment of the state in which there are neither reified objects nor reified subject. For me, the nature of reality is neither being nor non-being, and neither reified consciousness nor reified objects of conscious, but the middle way, or, as one Zen master put it, "vast emptiness - nothing holy". ----------------------------------------------- > > > Cheers > > > Herman > > ======================== Withg metta, Howard #67884 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 7:24 am Subject: right effort nilovg Hi James, -------- J: I don't think I will get bad kamma by posting to Nina- even if she thinks I am a complete idiot and anything I write makes her believe KS even more strongly! Kamma comes from intention, and my intentions are good ----------- N: You misunderstood me, and Sarah has explained many things. I do not as a reaction to your posts believe more firmly in Kh Sujin. Anyway, believing in a person is not the Buddha's teaching. As Sarah said, when writing back one considers Dhamma more and this helps a person on the way. What you write makes sense and I appreciate your study of suttas and of abhidhamma I notice more and more with you lately. I remarked to Sarah in Bgk that you have studied thoroughly and can be a great help to the list. I noticed that you also studied Vinaya. I hope this straightens things out. ---------- Now about the sutta: J: Nina, this post really made me chuckle to myself because it really shows what a one-track mind you have. To you, guarding the sense doors (Right Effort) is all about anatta! In reality, guarding the sense doors has absolutely nothing to do with anatta! Here is what the Buddha taught in regards to guarding the sense doors, AN 3:68: "There may be outsiders, O monks, who will ask you: "Now, friends, what is the cause and condition whereby unarisen greed arises and arisen greed becomes stronger and more powerful?" "An attractive object," they should be told. In him who gives unwise attention to an attractive object, unarisen greed will arise, and greed that has already arisen will become stronger and more powerful. --------- This sutta is about unwise attention to an object that presents itself and wise attention. I read this sutta differently from you. Greed is an unwholesome mental factor, and it accompanies akusala citta. It happens all the time in daily life: akusala cittas tend to arise very often. But when there is more understanding of dhammas there can be wise attention and this again is a mental activity arising because of the appropriate conditions. Akusala citta, unwise attention, kusala citta, wise attention, mettaa, what else are these but mental phenomena? We cannot make them arise at will, they are elements devoid of self, as the Buddha taught time and again. With a one-track mind, Nina. #67885 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 7:29 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily Life, Ch 23, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, So long as one has not become a sotåpanna one may deviate from the right Path, there can be wrong practice. There is wrong practice when, for example, one thinks that there should be awareness only of particular kinds of nåma and rúpa, instead of being aware of whatever kind of nåma or rúpa appears. People may for example believe that lobha, dosa and moha should not or cannot be objects of mindfulness. However, akusala cittas are realities which arise because of their appropriate conditions, they are part of one's daily life. If one selects the objects of awareness, one will continue to cling to a concept of self who could exert control over one's life. Some people believe that vipassanå can only be developed when sitting in a quiet place, but then they set rules for the practice, and thus, they will not be able to see that mindfulness too is anattå. The sotåpanna has, apart from di.t.thi, also eradicated other defilements. He has eradicated doubt or vicikicchå. Doubt is classified as one of the ``hindrances''; it prevents us from performing kusala. We may doubt about the Buddha, the Dhamma, the Sangha, about the right practice. The sotåpanna has no more doubt. Another akusala cetasika, eradicated by the sotåpanna, is stinginess, macchariya. The Visuddhimagga (XXII, 52) mentions five kinds of avarice: The kinds of avarice are the five, namely, avarice about dwellings, families, gain, Dhamma and praise, which occur as inability to bear sharing with others any of these things beginning with dwellings. The Atthasåliní (Expositor, Book II, part II, chapter II, 374, 375) gives an explanation of these five kinds of avarice concerning the monk's dwelling-place, the family he is used to visiting in order to receive the four requisites (robes, food, shelter and medicines), the four requisites themselves (mentioned as ``gain''), knowledge of the Dhamma and praise (concerning personal beauty or virtues). It is explained that there is stinginess if one does not want to share any of these things with others. However, there is no stinginess if one does not want to share these things with someone who is a bad person or someone who would abuse these things. For instance, if one does not teach Dhamma to someone who will abuse Dhamma, there is no stinginess as to Dhamma. Thus we see that the eradication of stinginess does not mean sharing everything one has with anybody. The sotåpanna has eradicated stinginess; the five kinds of stinginess just mentioned do not arise anymore. Furthermore, the sotåpanna has eradicated envy, isså. Envy can arise with dosa-múla-citta (citta rooted in aversion). The Visuddhimagga (XIV, 172) states concerning envy: Envying is envy. It has the characteristic of being jealous of others' success. Its function is to be dissatisfied with that. It is manifested as averseness from that. Its proximate cause is another's success... ******* Nina. #67886 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 7:37 am Subject: Letters on Vipassana 6, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, (continuation of the quote from Kh Sujin's Survey of Paramattha Dhammas) "...It seems that there can be hearing and seeing at the same time, but these are different moments of citta experiencing different objects. Rúpas arise and fall away and succeed one another. Visible object appears through the eye-door and after there have been bhavanga-cittas in between it appears through the mind-door. Then there are many mind-door processes of cittas which think of concepts. That is why people who walk, lift their hands or move can appear.“ (end quote) We may have often heard that paramattha dhammas are not concepts and we may have repeated this for ourselves, but that is not enough. When right understanding of realities is being developed we can learn when the object of citta is a paramattha dhamma and when there is thinking of a concept. It depends entirely on conditions whether a paramattha dhamma appears and there can be awareness of its characteristic, or whether one thinks of a concept. We are inclined to cling to a self who develops satipatthåna and we want to hasten the arising of the stages of insight. If we have such desire it hinders the understanding of realities as anattå. The stages of insight can only arise when there are the right conditions for their arising, not because we try to direct their arising. Khun Sujin writes about mindfulness in "A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas", in the section on the "Stages of Insight": “Mindfulness is not easy and in the beginning it cannot often arise. The reason is that ignorance, clinging and all the other akusala dhammas have been accumulated for an endlessly long time in the cycle of birth and death. And also in this life, from the time we were born, defilements are being accumulated each day. When we correctly understand cause and effect of realities we know that we need great patience and perseverance so that we can listen to the Dhamma, study it carefully and consider it. Only thus can one have understanding of the realities which appear through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind-door. When the right conditions have been accumulated for the arising of satipatthåna, the characteristics of the realities which are appearing can be investigated by being directly aware of them. Thus, eventually, realities will be known as they are. Through the practice one shall directly understand the truth in accordance with what one has learnt and understood intellectually, namely, that all dhammas, and thus also satipatthåna and the eightfold Path, are anattå. Satipatthåna can arise when there are the right conditions, that is, when mahå-kusala citta accompanied by paññå has arisen time and again so that paññå can be accumulated. Then we shall not deviate anymore from the right Path. We shall not follow a practice which is other than being aware of, noticing and considering the nåma-dhammas and rúpa-dhammas which are appearing through the six doors.“ ********** Nina. #67887 From: connie Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 7:38 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (12) nichiconn Friends of Dhammadinnaa, [previous posts for Dhammadinna = #67859 & #67865]. In Pruitt's translation, the Apadaana (continues): "Tato ma.m sugato aaha, ghananinnaadasussaro; mamupa.t.thaananirate, sasa"nghaparivesike. "Saddhammassavane yutte, gu.navaddhitamaanase; bhadde bhavassu muditaa, lacchase pa.nidhiiphala.m. "Satasahassito kappe, okkaakakulasambhavo; gotamo naama gottena, satthaa loke bhavissati. "Tassa dhammesu daayaadaa, orasaa dhammanimmitaa; dhammadinnaati naamena, hessati satthu saavikaa. Then the Sublime One said to me, his voice resonant and pleasant sounding. "O you who delight in serving me, you who are the servant for me together with the Order, "you who are intent on hearing the true Doctrine, O you who are of a mature mind concerning what is right - feel appreciative joy, O noble lady. You will receive the fruit of your aspiration. "One hundred thousand world cycles from now, there will be reborn in the world the Teacher who will be named Gotama through his lineage, a descendant of the Okkaaka clan. "At that time there will be a disciple of the Teacher named Dhammadinnaa who will be an heir to the Doctrine, a legitimate offspring of the Doctrine." "Ta.m sutvaa muditaa hutvaa, yaavajiiva.m mahaamuni.m; mettacittaa paricari.m, paccayehi vinaayaka.m. "Tena kammena sukatena, cetanaapa.nidhiihi ca; jahitvaa maanusa.m deha.m, taavati.msamagacchaha.m. As soon as I heard this, I was filled with appreciative joy, and throughout my life I served the Leader, the Great Seer, with the requisites with my heart full of loving kindness. As a result of that virtuous deed and of my resolve and purpose, when I abandoned my human body, I went to the Taavati.msa realm. "Imamhi bhaddake kappe, brahmabandhu mahaayaso; kassapo naama gottena, uppajji vadata.m varo. "Upa.t.thaako mahesissa, tadaa aasi narissaro; kaasiraajaa kikii naama, baaraa.nasipuruttame. "Cha.t.thaa tassaasaha.m dhiitaa, sudhammaa iti vissutaa; dhamma.m sutvaa jinaggassa, pabbajja.m samarocayi.m. In this auspicious aeon, the Brahmaa Kinsman of Great Fame, Kassapa by name, the Best of Speakers, was born. At that time, the Great Sage's servant was the ruler named Kikii, who was the king of Kaasi in the great city Baraa.nasii. I was his sixth daughter, Sudhammaa by name, of great fame. Having heard the Doctrine of the Best of Conquerors, I had a strong inclination to go forth. "Anujaani na no taato, agaareva tadaa maya.m; viisavassasahassaani vicarimha atanditaa. "Komaaribrahmacariya.m raajaka~n~naa sukhedhitaa; buddhopa.t.thaananirataa, muditaa satta dhiitaro. "Sama.nii sama.naguttaa ca, bhikkhunii bhikkhudaayikaa; dhammaa ceva sudhammaa ca, sattamii sa"nghadaayikaa. "Khemaa uppalava.n.naa ca, pa.taacaaraa ca ku.n.dalaa; gotamii ca aha~nceva, visaakhaa hoti sattamii. "Tehi kammehi sukatehi, cetanaapa.nidhiihi ca; jahitvaa maanusa.m deha.m, taavati.msamagacchaha.m. At that time, our father did not give us permission [to go forth], [so] we seven daughters grew up in comfort as princesses, and unwearying we followed the holy life as virgins for twenty thousand years in our home, delighting in the service of the Buddha with appreciative joy. We were Samanii, Sama.naguttaa, Bhikkhunii, Bhikkhudaayikaa, Dhammaa, Sudhammaa, and, the seventh, Sa"nghdaayikaa. [In the present age we are] Khemaa, Uppalava.n.naa, Pa.taacaaraa, Ku.ndalaa, Gotamii, me [Dhammadinnaa], and, the seventh is Visaakhaa. As a result of those virtuous deeds and of my resolve and purpose, when I abandoned my human body, I went to the Taavati.msa realm. ====== more Apadaana on Dhammadinnaa coming up, c. #67888 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 8:38 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing scottduncan2 Dear Herman, I fear that a misunderstanding has intervened: H: "By all means, feel free to abstain from repeating a dhamma theory you are particularly fond of to me. But please, feed your children with what they need." I can't figure out the way in which you want to discuss these things. I don't wish to not discuss with you. If you can let me know how to give you what you need in a discussion with me, I'd appreciate it. Sincerely, Scott. #67889 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 11:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Theriigaathaa - Sisters (11) nilovg Hi Herman, Understanding has to develop to come to that moment. When arahatship has been reached one can answer this question with: Yes! But now we still cling to life and it is good to realize this. Nina. Op 2-feb-2007, om 22:51 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > A theoretical question, for everyone. If an opportunity arose for it > to be all over right now, would you take it? #67890 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 12:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: B.Bodhi article, perfections. nilovg Dear Joop, The Bodhisatta knew that he would have to develop all the perfections to the highest degree, the degree of future Buddhas. That is why ten perfections can be counted as thirty for him. There is a lower degree, a medium degree and the highest degree for each of the perfections. When we develop the perfections we develop them as those of a disciple, not in the same way as a future Buddha. The Bodhisatta needed so many more aeons and an incalcuble long period of time, longer than his disciples. Nina. Op 2-feb-2007, om 22:12 heeft Joop het volgende geschreven: > How did the Buddha in his former lifes as a bodhisatta prevent the > distruction of his fetters and get sotapanna … arahants? Because in > that case after a to quick arahantship he was not reborn any more and > could not be born as Gotama, the Buddha-to-be. #67891 From: "colette" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 8:49 am Subject: !~ ksheri3 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, > "buddhatrue" wrote: > > That's the problem with leading questions- there > is > > a lot of room for different interpretions. > > ?? ?? ?? colette: YOGACARA: the yogas of the mind. Planting seeds seems to be a good analogy here since another person caused the statement "there's a lot of room for different interpretions." which ilicited the answer "?? ?? ??", so this person questions the question as in what does that mean. Here we get into the OBSCURATION that will never be solved by the micro-manager consumed by their employment, consumed by their mortgage, insurance, bills, etc. they are fixated on MAINTAINING ILLUSIONS. They believe themselves to be something which is not. "the seeds then produce new seeds, with some seeds tainted by your actions, and others unaffected. Even after death, the impressions of deeds -- their karma -- linger on in the seeds of the alaya consciounsess." > > > But since you simply want to discuss the kusala/akusala aspects of > > Howard's experience, and leave Howard out of the matter, fine, I > can > > do that- it's kinda difficult, but I think I can do that. colette: you've done it! Now, manifest into reality that which you think. In a Western Theological forum I used to refer to this person as MY "Nadia" since I would, along with the assistance of others, bend and twist this guy a myriad of ways as if he was the putty or clay figure "Gumby" and still, he would always seemt to un-twist himself from the contortions we placed him in. You state that you want to examine HOWARD'S EXPERIENCE. How can you do that since you are not in Howard's shoes, paying Howard's bills, living Howard's life, feeling Howard's pain and pleasure, etc.? How can you even consider the concept of kusala/akusala without being Howard? You can imposed or dictate to Howard what YOU want to be but I do not see how it's possible for you to interpret kusala/akusala from Howard's POV, pair of shoes, since you are not Howard. gots ta go. toodles, colette <...> #67892 From: "colette" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 10:03 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Identifying Views. ksheri3 A Very Good Morning to you Charles DaCosta, I only read part of the first "my answer" and went into joyous laughter. In the public library that's not too considerate. However, allow me to relate. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles DaCosta" wrote: > > Hi colette > > > Yes, "CAUSE & EFFECT" plays a part in a view. > > I like you seed analogy so I will continue it to prove the above. > > Your Question: "Touch, is touch conscious of either pleasure or pain or > both?" > My answer: Touch is not conscious, beings are. Beings have consciousness as > a precondition therefore it is a CAUSE of beings. colette: does "precondition" = prerequisite? You see where I'm going here: It's a fact that I have to deal with my own predjudices/biases, etc. and one of them is that the son of G.H.W.Bush purchased the Judicial Branch of government as a means to obtain, possess, the Executive Branch of government, thus you can see my quirrey concerning the defintion of Prerequisite since the Bush family is a known dictatorship of OBEDIENCE. The Slave-Master relationship is all they know and have life by. You say that touch is not conscious thus I see it as you suggesting that this thing, this tactile sense, TOUCH, has an independent life of its own without the being and that is a distorion of the thought of Touch Consciousness. We are concerned with "the being" of the individual and TOUCH CONSCIOUSNESS is a factor in constructing that sense of BEING, existing, etc. When you say that touch is a precondition of a being then I recoil, since I see your reference here to the seeds (bija) of the alaya- vijnana, it seems that you intend on suggesting that Karma is all there is. Karma is everything and if the Bush family, as an oligarchic family in say the former USSR, can purchase constituents in a reality to pervert, THEN you must qualify Karma's existance, you must manifest karma so that I can quantify it and/or qualify it as "being". Thus I give you: Karma is here and now, look around you, let your Mind's Eye see karma in the future, IS KARMA MIS-LABELED? I'm going off here thinking off the top of my head, so don't worry if you feel slighted. I'm dealing with it too. I'm so enthuised by the reply, I've just gott go on for the few minutes I have left. ---------------------------------- Charles, I went on and read but I need time to play with those replies. They, the replies are good and valid, yet I only have a few seconds remaining here this weekend. toodles, colette #67893 From: "colette" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 9:26 am Subject: Re: Toodles! ksheri3 Good Morning Connie, I need to clarify some things here. You say: > your > Thera-Sarvasta cloak Now let me clarify YOUR imposition, I mean your label, your stereotyping, your descrimination, your... Theravadan I'm to pressume, no, not ASS-sume, deals with nothing less than "COMPLETE REALISM". So, what is REALISM? Help me out here since I've gotta deal with the card you spun out to me. I'm really stupid too, so, being down there in that hazardous brothel of dwelling known as Florida, you can shine the light on some of YOUR ambiguity . By, YOU, connie, actually doing the clarifying, then we can say that you possess a tendency to not be of the Madhyamika school where Emptiness and Nihilism domonate. Might I add, Nihilism in that Bible-Thumping state of consciousness called Florida puts you in a rather odd position, constantly at war with your neighbors. Maybe I should ask my friend Keith Hibler, an IBM exec. in Boca Raton, "mouth of the rat", or any of a number of our Jewish brethren about their feelins toward Nihilism? Can I have labels? Can my labels yet be placed on things which exist? toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > > Good Evening, Miss Labelled colette! > > I may have mistaken the directions thrown off the cuff of your > Thera-Sarvasta cloak from the Lost and Found (#63789). I hope you've got > the Yogacara and Madhyamaka things ironed out. In anticipation of the > successful conclusion, in spades, of your upsetting assignment, perhaps > there'll be moon pies by the apple cart at your celebration dinner. #67894 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 10:35 am Subject: "People" "Nama" "Rupa" All Delusional TGrand458@... Hi All In this group, we often read that a "person" (as an example) is not real but nama and rupa, etc. are realities. The justification for a "person" not being real is, as I understand it, that a "person" is considered to be a composite of other states. The thinking is...."there is no real state "person," but there are real states that make up the delusion of "person." This approach may be successful in rendering a mind to view there to be no-self in regards to "person," but it is unsuccessful in that the so-called "realities" that compose a "person" become to be seen a "self." Self view is thus not eliminate, it is just transferred. The actuality is ... that the so-called "realities" are also composites that are composed by something "other than what they are." Fundamentally, the so-called "realities" are no more real than "person." They might be more fundamental, but they are not fundamentally more real. We can speak of aggregates and elements so as to get a better view of conditionality and how things operate and what outcomes are occurring. I.E., impermanence, affliction, no-self. But these designations of aggregates and elements are just tools to help us think, they are not realities in and of themselves. These states we call aggregates and elements should not be held onto as the building blocks of reality; rather they are mere building blocks of thought. Aggregates and elements are also conditional, selfless, and hollow ... just like the concept of "person." Aggregates and elements are concepts to help us understand ... understand that they are empty and selfless and afflicting/suffering when held onto. In the final analysis, the aggregates and elements need to be ejected as delusional ... because they are not what they appear to be. They are mere relativities. TG #67895 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 3:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Letters on Vipassana 6, no 5. egberdina Hi Nina, On 04/02/07, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear friends, > Rúpas arise and fall away and succeed one another. Please tell me why you believe this to be the case. If you have no other reason than that it says so in a book, there is no need to reply :-) Kind Regards Herman #67896 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 10:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "People" "Nama" "Rupa" All Delusional upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 2/3/07 6:40:14 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: > The actuality is ... that the so-called "realities" are also composites > that > are composed by something "other than what they are." ======================= Conditioned by and utterly dependent on, yes - but not composed of or by. With metta, Howard #67897 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 11:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "People" "Nama" "Rupa" All Delusional TGrand458@... In a message dated 2/3/2007 4:57:44 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: > The actuality is ... that the so-called "realities" are also composites > that > are composed by something "other than what they are." ======================= Conditioned by and utterly dependent on, yes - but not composed of or by. With metta, Howard Hi Howard I fail to see the significance of that distinction. TG #67898 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 5:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana egberdina Hi Howard, Thanks for your comments. > > Does anyone have a problem with the implication that nibbana IS, and > > that nibbana is the full extent of what it means TO BE? > > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I'm not clear on what you mean by "IS", particularly in caps. If you > mean that nibbana is not fiction, I agree. I do not follow your intention in > writing "nibbana is the full extent of what it means TO BE." Nibbana is just as > much non-being as being. Actually, I think it is beyond all concept, including > this fundamental ontological issue of being and non-being. Note that Udana > 8.1. and 8.3 above consist only of negations. > -------------------------------------------------- I wrote IS in caps merely to highlight it. "Is", and other derivatives of the verb "to be", is one of the easiest words to roll of the tongue, or the keyboard. Yet, when pressed, it is not so easy for me to come up with something coherent when it comes to explaining what it means for something "to be". So I am starting this thread in the hope that others will help me clarify the business of being. I would very much like to understand what you mean when you say that nibbana is as much non-being as being. In which way is nibbana non-being? I agree that being is beyond concepts, but I would rather say that being precedes all concepts. Being is. Nibbana is, isn't it? :-) Yes, you are quite right, Nibbana is described negatively. It is not this or that or anything else. But it is. Nibbana is, or simply, being is. But descriptions of nibbana are not actually descriptions of nibbana at all, they are descriptions of a relationship consciousness - nibbana. And that is a whole different kettle of fish. Because while nibbana is the full positivity of featureless being, all consciousness is a negation of that nibbana/being. Which I will explain further below. But first there is an immediate problem. We are using "is" to refer to nibbana, and we are using "is" to refer to consciousness. And without an understanding that the being of nibbana is not at all like the being of consciousness, we are going to end up with some very convoluted thinking. So we must differentiate between the being of being and the being of consciousness. And that leads to another vital word, which also is very easy to roll of the tongue and the keyboard. And that word is "not". > > > > Further, does anyone have a problem with the implication that any > > consciousness is a denial of BEING? > > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I simply don't understand it! (I guess that's a "problem"! ;-) > To me, nibbana is the actual nature of reality. It excludes nothing > but also "in it" there is nothing reifiable. I agree wholeheartedly. Nibbana does not have a point of view on itself. And this is where consciousness as negation comes in. All consciousness is a point of view. And all points of view are external to, or other than, their object. There are two negations here. The first negation is that the basic relation between consciousness and it's object is that consciousness is NOT it's object. The second negation comes from the necessity of all consciousness having to be consciousness of something, an object. Something is a negation of everything. Everything is, as featureless undifferentiated totality. But consciousness is not consciousness of everything, it is consciousness of something. It is consciousness of this, or that object. And this object is this object by virtue of not being that object. Things are defined by what they are not. All determinations are negations. From a featureless ground, consciousness makes things to be, by a negation of everything. > I find some of the language of Udana 8.4 interesting: "There being no > passing away or arising, there is neither a here nor a there nor a > between-the-two. This, just this, is the end of stress." Compare this with "When there is > no you in terms of that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, > you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the > end of stress." from the Bahiya Sutta. I interpret that sutta as urging the > attainment of the state in which there are neither reified objects nor reified > subject. For me, the nature of reality is neither being nor non-being, and > neither reified consciousness nor reified objects of conscious, but the middle way, > or, as one Zen master put it, "vast emptiness - nothing holy". > ----------------------------------------------- I like this interpretation very much. Because, and please correct me if I have misread you, it denies the essential being of both the object, and the point of view on the object. The object IS NOT, and consciousness IS NOT. Where I would disagree with you is that for me, nibbana is essential being. And it is this essential being which functions as ground for consciousness to do its merry negating round, and play at being. But never the twain ie nibbana and consciousness, shall meet. Kind Regards Herman #67899 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 5:06 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: right effort, and some Thailand impressions. buddhatrue Hi Herman and RobertK, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi RobertK, > > On 03/02/07, rjkjp1 wrote: > > Dear Herman, > > Whether I answer yes or no to your hypothetical question, the only way > > it will ever be over is if the eighfold path is developed to attain > > parinibbana. When there is right understanding there is a step towards > > that goal, it does not come about by wishing..But only by repeated > > steps in the right direction. > > I'm glad you've got causality/conditionality down pat. I won't answer > your question either. Hi Herman and Robert, I think you have both got it wrong. ;-)) Herman, your question is wrong because it is based on a fallacy in view. Robert, your answer is wrong because it is based on the same fallacy. Herman, you ask, "If an opportunity arose for it all to be over right now, would you take it?" I assume that you believe you are asking if people are willing to become enlightened and cease to be reborn, but actually you are asking people if they are suicidal! LOL! There exists the desire for existence and the desire for non-existence, and both of these desires keep people in samsara. Right now, we all have the wrong view of self so if any of us had the desire for "it to all to be over right now" that would be the desire for non-existence, or suicide. If we were enlightened, it wouldn't be a matter of "it all to be over right now" for we would realize that there is no self to be over and that samsara is illusion. Robert, you answer Herman's question by stating that it will all be over at paranibbana. That is annihilation belief and the Buddha specifically taught against that. Metta, James ps. Thanks Herman for your encouraging post. I do try to be an island- just not a deserted one. ;-)) #67900 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 5:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing lbidd2 Hi Herman, H: "I am not speaking from any (theoretical) Buddhist perspective here, just my own, and from that perspective "consciousness only" means nothing. There is never consciousness without object, there is never object without consciousness. And the fundamental relationship that pervades the consciousness/object phenomena is negation/nothingness. "I am not this" is central to Buddhism of most flavours." L: What do you mean by "object of consciousness"? If there is a desire for an answer is the answer the object of desire or is desire the object of consciousness, or both, or neither? Larry #67901 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 12:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "People" "Nama" "Rupa" All Delusional upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 2/3/07 7:16:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: > In a message dated 2/3/2007 4:57:44 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, > upasaka@... writes: > > > The actuality is ... that the so-called "realities" are also composites > >that > >are composed by something "other than what they are." > ======================= > Conditioned by and utterly dependent on, yes - but not composed of or > by. > > With metta, > Howard > > > > Hi Howard > > I fail to see the significance of that distinction. > > TG > > ========================== There is sunlight, dispersed rain droplets, and seeing eyes. All of them together together are not a rainbow. But without them there is no rainbow. With metta, Howard #67902 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 5:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (11) egberdina Thanks Phil, I much appreciate your reply. > > We have to deepen our understanding of the First and Second Noble > Truths before our answer can change. Or should I say our > understanding has to deepen. No control over understanding, though > we can set conditions that might help it to develop. > Do you think anyone in their right mind would pursue an understanding of the First and Second Noble Truth? :-) I don't. It's very unattractiveness must count as proof of it's truth. Nobody would seek to know it. But the truth of the matter does rather thrust itself upon one. Still, it's not bad enough to warrant seeking a way out. I say that fully realising that if I believed in rebirth a la the very superstitious Asians, it would be a different matter. That's a very scary concept indeed. I suppose I should now say, it's very unattractiveness must count as proof of it's truth. But that's going to far. The idea of literal rebirth has never thrust itself upon me. Anyway, hope you didn't mind me prattling away here. Cheers, KInd Regards and best wishes to Naomi Herman #67903 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 5:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing egberdina Hi Larry, On 04/02/07, LBIDD@... wrote: > Hi Herman, > > H: "I am not speaking from any (theoretical) Buddhist perspective here, > just my own, and from that perspective "consciousness only" means > nothing. There is never consciousness without object, there is never > object without consciousness. And the fundamental relationship that > pervades the consciousness/object phenomena is negation/nothingness. "I > am not this" is central to Buddhism of most flavours." > > L: What do you mean by "object of consciousness"? If there is a desire > for an answer is the answer the object of desire or is desire the object > of consciousness, or both, or neither? > By object of consciousness I mean the something that there is consciousness of. I don't believe there is value in analysing percepts/concepts into elemental components. That would be denying that the meaning of a situation comes from it's unity, it's wholeness. Just like the meaning of CAT is not to be found in C, or A, or T. In your case, if there is desire for an answer, that's the object of consciousness. I hope that doesn't sound like I'm fobbing you off, because that's not my intention :-) Kind Regards Herman #67904 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 5:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "People" "Nama" "Rupa" All Delusional lbidd2 Hi TG, I disagree with a key part of your thesis: TG: "This approach may be successful in rendering a mind to view there to be no-self in regards to "person," but it is unsuccessful in that the so-called "realities" that compose a "person" become to be seen a "self." Self view is thus not eliminate, it is just transferred." L: Is eye ever considered to be I? Is there any part of your body or mind that you ever think of as "I"? Granted, all our parts are considered to be mine but I don't think we can identify the owner. So "mine" is simply a misconception. However, I agree with your conclusion insofar as analysis is endless. Analysis divides and division is an infinite regression. You might say that there is no part of the eye that is the eye but *who* cares when there is no I? Larry #67905 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 12:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 2/3/07 8:06:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > I wrote IS in caps merely to highlight it. "Is", and other derivatives > of the verb "to be", is one of the easiest words to roll of the > tongue, or the keyboard. Yet, when pressed, it is not so easy for me > to come up with something coherent when it comes to explaining what it > means for something "to be". So I am starting this thread in the hope > that others will help me clarify the business of being. > > I would very much like to understand what you mean when you say that > nibbana is as much non-being as being. In which way is nibbana > non-being? I agree that being is beyond concepts, but I would rather > say that being precedes all concepts. Being is. Nibbana is, isn't it? > :-) ---------------------------------------- Howard: It is as much like one as the other in being like neither! Being and non-being are a pair of opposites. I believe nibbana to be beyond all such pairs. Have you ever seen the film The Secret Garden? If you do get to see it you'll get a glimmer of what I understand nibbana to be. In Ch'an they call it "the empty field". ---------------------------------------- > > Yes, you are quite right, Nibbana is described negatively. It is not > this or that or anything else. But it is. Nibbana is, or simply, being > is. But descriptions of nibbana are not actually descriptions of > nibbana at all, they are descriptions of a relationship consciousness > - nibbana. And that is a whole different kettle of fish. Because while > nibbana is the full positivity of featureless being, all consciousness > is a negation of that nibbana/being. > ----------------------------------------- Howard: A consciousness separate from its object negates that object. A consciousness that is the mere presence of the object does not. ----------------------------------------- Which I will explain further> > below. But first there is an immediate problem. We are using "is" to > refer to nibbana, and we are using "is" to refer to consciousness. And > without an understanding that the being of nibbana is not at all like > the being of consciousness, we are going to end up with some very > convoluted thinking. So we must differentiate between the being of > being and the being of consciousness. And that leads to another vital > word, which also is very easy to roll of the tongue and the keyboard. > And that word is "not". > > > >> > >>Further, does anyone have a problem with the implication that any > >>consciousness is a denial of BEING? > > > >-------------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > I simply don't understand it! (I guess that's a "problem"! ;-) > > To me, nibbana is the actual nature of reality. It excludes nothing > >but also "in it" there is nothing reifiable. > > I agree wholeheartedly. Nibbana does not have a point of view on > itself. And this is where consciousness as negation comes in. All > consciousness is a point of view. And all points of view are external > to, or other than, their object. There are two negations here. The > first negation is that the basic relation between consciousness and > it's object is that consciousness is NOT it's object. The second > negation comes from the necessity of all consciousness having to be > consciousness of something, an object. Something is a negation of > everything. Everything is, as featureless undifferentiated totality. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: That last sounds static and lifeless me. That is not a nibbana that interests me. I prefer the moon-reflected-in-a-cool-mountain-lake imagery of Ch'an. --------------------------------------------- > But consciousness is not consciousness of everything, it is > consciousness of something. It is consciousness of this, or that > object. And this object is this object by virtue of not being that > object. Things are defined by what they are not. All determinations > are negations. From a featureless ground, consciousness makes things > to be, by a negation of everything. > > > > I find some of the language of Udana 8.4 interesting: "There being no > >passing away or arising, there is neither a here nor a there nor a > >between-the-two. This, just this, is the end of stress." Compare this with > "When there is > >no you in terms of that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, > >you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is > the > >end of stress." from the Bahiya Sutta. I interpret that sutta as urging the > >attainment of the state in which there are neither reified objects nor > reified > >subject. For me, the nature of reality is neither being nor non-being, and > >neither reified consciousness nor reified objects of conscious, but the > middle way, > >or, as one Zen master put it, "vast emptiness - nothing holy". > >----------------------------------------------- > > I like this interpretation very much. Because, and please correct me > if I have misread you, it denies the essential being of both the > object, and the point of view on the object. The object IS NOT, and > consciousness IS NOT. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: We're close, but not on the exact same page. -------------------------------------- Where I would disagree with you is that for me,> > nibbana is essential being. And it is this essential being which > functions as ground for consciousness to do its merry negating round, > and play at being. But never the twain ie nibbana and consciousness, > shall meet. > > Kind Regards > > > > Herman > > ========================= With metta, Howard #67906 From: connie Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 5:54 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (12) nichiconn Friends, Continuing (from #67859; #67865; & #67887) on to the 4th Dhammadinnaa installment from Pruitt's translation, there is more from the Apadaana: "Pacchime ca bhave daani, giribbajapuruttame; jaataa se.t.thikule phiite, sabbakaamasamiddhine. "Yadaa ruupagu.nuupetaa, pa.thame yobbane .thitaa; tadaa parakula.m gantvaa, vasi.m sukhasamappitaa. "Upetvaa lokasara.na.m, su.nitvaa dhammadesana.m; anaagaamiphala.m patto, saamiko me subuddhimaa. "Tadaaha.m anujaanetvaa, pabbaji.m anagaariya.m; nacireneva kaalena, arahattamapaapu.ni.m. "Tadaa upaasako so ma.m, upagantvaa apucchatha; gambhiire nipu.ne pa~nhe, te sabbe byaakari.m aha.m. "Jino tasmi.m gu.ne tu.t.tho, etadagge .thapesi ma.m; bhikkhuni.m dhammakathika.m, naa~n~na.m passaami edisi.m. "Dhammadinnaa yathaa dhiiraa, eva.m dhaaretha bhikkhavo; evaaha.m pa.n.ditaa homi, naayakenaanukampitaa. And now, in my last existence, I was born in the magnificent town of Giribbaja [Raajagaha] in the family of a wealthy merchant, prosperous and surrounded by all sensual pleasures. Then, endowed with beauty, established in the flower of my youth, I went to another family [in marriage] and I lived there full of happiness. My husband approached the Refuge of the World, heard a discourse on the Doctrine, and thoroughly possessing wisdom, attained the fruition state of a Non-Returner. Then I obtained permission to go forth to the homeless state, and in a very short time, at the right moment, I obtained Arahatship. Then this lay follower came to me and asked questions that are deep and subtle. I answered them all. The Conqueror was pleased with this quality and established me as foremost of the bhikkhuniis in preaching the Doctrine. [He said,] "I do not see another who is equal to Dhammadinnaa in regards to knowledge of the Doctrine; bear this in mind, bhikkhus." So I am wise, favoured by the Leader. "Parici.n.no mayaa satthaa, kata.m buddhassa saasana.m; ohito garuko bhaaro, bhavanetti samuuhataa. "Yassatthaaya pabbajitaa, agaarasmaanagaariya.m; so me attho anuppatto, sabbasa.myojanakkhayo. "Iddhiisu ca vasii homi, dibbaaya sotadhaatuyaa; paracittaani jaanaami, satthusaasanakaarikaa. "Pubbenivaasa.m jaanaami, dibbacakkhu visodhita.m; khepetvaa aasave sabbe, visuddhaasi.m sunimmalaa. I have attended on the Teacher, I have done the Buddha's teaching. I have put down the heavy burden; everything that leads to renewed existence has been rooted out. The aim for which one goes forth from the home to the homeless state, that aim has been attained by me - all bonds are destroyed. I have mastery of the supernormal powers. By means of the divine ear, I know the thoughts of others. I comply with the teaching of the Teacher; I know my previous lives; my divine eye has been purified. Having destroyed all the taints, I am pure, completely freed of impurity. "Kilesaa jhaapitaa mayha.m {, bhavaa sabbe samuuhataa; naagiiva bandhana.m chetvaa, viharaami anaasavaa. "Svaagata.m vata me aasi, buddhase.t.thassa santike; tisso vijjaa anuppattaa, kata.m buddhassa saasana.m. "Pa.tisambhidaa catasso, vimokkhaapi ca a.t.thime; cha.labhi~n~naa sacchikataa,} kata.m buddhassa saasanan"ti. My defilements are burnt out, {all [future] births are completely destroyed. Having severed my bonds like an elephant, I live without taints. Welcome indeed was the presence of the Best of Buddhas to me. I have attained the three true knowledges. I have done the Buddha's teaching. The four discriminations and also the eight liberations are mine. I have realized the six direct knowledges.} I have done the Buddha's teaching. ===== c. #67907 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 12:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "People" "Nama" "Rupa" All Delusional TGrand458@... Hi Larry In a message dated 2/3/2007 6:43:40 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi TG, I disagree with a key part of your thesis: TG: "This approach may be successful in rendering a mind to view there to be no-self in regards to "person," but it is unsuccessful in that the so-called "realities" that compose a "person" become to be seen a "self." Self view is thus not eliminate, it is just transferred." L: Is eye ever considered to be I? Is there any part of your body or mind that you ever think of as "I"? Granted, all our parts are considered to be mine but I don't think we can identify the owner. So "mine" is simply a misconception. TG: Actually, it sounds like you are agreeing with "my" thesis. However, the point you are discussing seems slightly off topic. However, I agree with your conclusion insofar as analysis is endless. Analysis divides and division is an infinite regression. TG: Interesting... here where you say you do agree, you make a point that isn't to the point of my article. I probably was woefully unclear. Thanks for the comments though. You might say that there is no part of the eye that is the eye but *who* cares when there is no I? Larry TG #67908 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 5:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing egberdina Hi Scott, On 04/02/07, Scott Duncan wrote: > Dear Herman, > > I fear that a misunderstanding has intervened: > > H: "By all means, feel free to abstain from repeating a dhamma theory > you are particularly fond of to me. But please, feed your children with > what they need." > > I can't figure out the way in which you want to discuss these things. > I don't wish to not discuss with you. If you can let me know how to > give you what you need in a discussion with me, I'd appreciate it. > In my life, just about everything I do is predicated on a belief that change is gradual. That belief is the foundation for my act of naming objects, and writing this post to you, for example. But if you honestly don't attribute any continuity/identity to all the forms you encounter in daily life, and don't behave as though you do, then I have to accept that, I guess. I do find it incredibly hard to believe, though. Kind Regards Herman #67909 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 6:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing lbidd2 Hi Herman, H: "if there is desire for an answer, that's the object of consciousness." L: I think you are saying there is no contentless consciousness. No "pure" consciousness. If so, my reply is that there is a difference of opinion on that among the mahayana commentators. Some might liken it (pure consciousness) to mindfulness. Be that as it may, I was using "object of consciousness" in a more technical, analytical sense which evidently isn't your cup of tea. That's fine, but you miss out on an interesting insight. The insight is that there really isn't anything to be upset about. You can actually see that directly in a way that 'hits home'. Larry #67910 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 6:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "People" "Nama" "Rupa" All Delusional lbidd2 Hi TG, TG: "I probably was woefully unclear. Thanks for the comments though." L: No, it was I who was woefully unclear. I really did disagree where you thought I agreed, and agreed where you thought I disagreed. I'll leave it to you and Howard to sort out ;-) Larry #67911 From: connie Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 7:25 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (12) nichiconn dear reader, the fifth, and last, installment from Pruitt for Dhammadinnaa, with Mrs R-D's verse translation included: Arahatta.m pana patvaa "mayha.m mana.m matthaka.m patta.m, idaani idha vasitvaa ki.m karissaami, raajagahameva gantvaa satthaara~nca vandissaami, bahuu ca me ~naatakaa pu~n~naani karissantii"ti bhikkhuniihi saddhi.m raajagahameva paccaagataa. And having attained Arahatship, she thought, "My mind has attained the summit. Now what shall I accomplish by living here? I will go to Raajagaha and pay homage to the Teacher, and many of my relatives will perform meritorious deeds because of me." So she returned to Raajagaha accompanied by the bhikkhuniis. Visaakho tassaa aagatabhaava.m sutvaa tassaa adhigama.m viima.msanto pa~ncakkhandhaadivasena pa~nha.m pucchi. Dhammadinnaa sunisitena satthena kumudanaa.le chindantii viya pucchita.m pucchita.m pa~nha.m vissajjesi. Visaakho sabba.m pucchaavissajjananaya.m satthu aarocesi. Satthaa "pa.n.ditaa, visaakha, dhammadinnaa bhikkhunii"ti-aadinaa ta.m pasa.msanto sabba~n~nuta~n~naa.nena saddhi.m sa.msandetvaa byaakatabhaava.m pavedetvaa tameva cuu.lavedallasutta.m (ma. ni. 1.460) a.t.thuppatti.m katvaa ta.m dhammakathikaana.m bhikkhuniina.m agga.t.thaane .thapesi. Visaakha heard of her return. In order to find out her [level] of attainment, he asked her a question concerning the five aggregates and so forth. Dhammadinnaa answered whatever question was asked as if cutting a lotus stalk with a sharp knife. Visaakha told the Teacher about all the questions and answers, and the Teacher praised her, beginning by saying "Visaakha, the bhikkhunii Dhammadinnaa is wise..." Using his omniscience, he made known her answer, taking the occasion of the Cuulavedalla Sutta, and he ranked her as in the foremost position among the bhikkhuniis in discoursing on the Doctrine. Yadaa pana saa tasmi.m gaamakaavaase vasantii he.t.thimamagge adhigantvaa aggamaggatthaaya vipassana.m pa.t.thapesi, tadaa- 12. "Chandajaataa avasaayii, manasaa ca phu.taa siyaa; kaamesu appa.tibaddhacittaa, uddha.msotaati vuccatii"ti.- Ima.m gaatha.m abhaasi. But when she was still living in that village residence, after having attained the lowest path, she established insight in order to gain the highest path. At that time she spoke this verse: 12. One should be eager, determinate, and suffused with mind. One whose thought is not attached to sensual pleasures is called "one who goes upstream". {{ MRS R-D: In whom desire to reach the final rest Is born suffusing all the mind of her, Whose heart by lure of sense-desire no more Is held - BOUND UPSTREAM: - so shall she be called. *104 (12) }} Tattha chandajaataati aggaphalattha.m jaatacchandaa. Avasaayiiti avasaayo vuccati avasaana.m ni.t.thaana.m, tampi kaamesu appa.tibaddhacittataaya "uddha.msotaa"ti vakkhamaanattaa sama.nakiccassa ni.t.thaana.m veditabba.m, na yassa kassaci, tasmaa padadvayenaapi appattamaanasaa anuttara.m yogakkhema.m patthayamaanaati ayamattho vutto hoti. Manasaa ca phu.taa siyaati he.t.thimehi tiihi maggacittehi nibbaana.m phu.taa phusitaa bhaveyya. Kaamesu appa.tibaddhacittaati anaagaamimaggavasena kaamesu na pa.tibaddhacittaa. Uddha.msotaati uddhameva maggasoto sa.msaarasoto ca etissaati uddha.msotaa. Anaagaamino hi yathaa aggamaggo uppajjati, na a~n~no, eva.m avihaadiisu uppannassa yaava akani.t.thaa uddhameva uppatti hotiiti. Dhammadinnaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa ni.t.thitaa. 12. There, eager (chanda-jaataa) means desirous (jaata-cchandaa) of the highest fruition state [ie, Arahatship]. Determinate (avasayii) means it is called [coming to] the end (avasaayo), the finish (avasaana.m), the ending (ni.t.thaana.m) of it. The fact of being called one who goes upstream for anyone is to be understood as the ending of the duty of a recluse. Therefore, in both parts of this phrase, the meaning is said to be that she has not obtained mental perfection and that she is [still] searching for unsurpassed rest fro mexertion. And one sould be (siyaa) suffused (phu.taa) with mind means one should be (bhaveyya) suffused like rain drops with thoughts of the three lower paths of quenching. One whose though is not attached (appa.tibaddha-cittaa) to sensual pleasures means one whose thought is not attached (na pa.tibaddha-cittaa) to sensual pleasures through having entered the path of Non-Returner. One who goes upstream (uddha.msotaa) means: one who goes up the stream of the path (uddha.m eva magga-soto) and up the stream of continued existence (sa.msaara-soto), she indeed is one who goes upstream. For just as a Non-Returner comes to the highest path and no other, in the same way, for one reborn in the Aviha [Brahmaa world], etc, rebirth is only upwards to the Akani.t.tha [Brahmaa world]. Here ends the commentary on the verse of Therii Dhammadinnaa. ====== peace, c. #67912 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 8:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "People" "Nama" "Rupa" All Delusional egberdina Hi TG, I agree with just about everything you have written. Make that, everything you have written. Needless to say, that makes it a very nice post :-) > ... > Spot on. Kind Regards Herman #67913 From: connie Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 8:51 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (13) nichiconn Dear Friends, moving on to the 13th verse: 13. Visaakhaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 13. The commentary on the verse by Therii Visaakhaa TEXT: Karotha buddhasaasananti visaakhaaya theriyaa gaathaa. Tassaa vatthu dhiiraatheriyaavatthusadisameva. Saa arahatta.m patvaa vimuttisukhena viitinaamentii- 13. "Karotha buddhasaasana.m, ya.m katvaa naanutappati; khippa.m paadaani dhovitvaa, ekamante nisiidathaa"ti.- Imaaya gaathaaya a~n~na.m byaakaasi. MRS R-D: Her story is similar to that of the Sister Dhiiraa. After winning Arahantship she pondered on the bliss of emancipation, and thus announced A~N~NAA: The Buddha's will be done! See that ye do His will. And ye have done it, never more Need ye repent the deed. Wash, then, in haste Your feet and sit ye down aloof; alone. (13) PRUITT: Do the Buddha's teaching is the verse of Therii Visaakhaa. Her story is just the same as the story of Therii Dhiiraa. After attaining Arahatship, she spent her time in the happiness of freedom and made clear her perfect knowledge with this verse: 13. Do the Buddha's teaching. Having done it one does not repent. Wash your feet quickly and sit down on one side. TEXT: Tattha karotha buddhasaasananti buddhasaasana.m ovaada-anusi.t.thi.m karotha, yathaanusi.t.tha.m pa.tipajjathaati attho. Ya.m katvaa naanutappatiiti anusi.t.thi.m katvaa kara.nahetu na anutappati takkarassa sammadeva adhippaayaana.m samijjhanato. Khippa.m paadaani dhovitvaa, ekamante nisiidathaati ida.m yasmaa saya.m pacchaabhatta.m pi.n.dapaatapa.tikkantaa aacariyupajjhaayaana.m vatta.m dassetvaa attano divaa.t.thaane paade dhovitvaa raho nisinnaa sadattha.m matthaka.m paapesi, tasmaa tattha a~n~nepi niyojentii avoca. Visaakhaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa ni.t.thitaa. MRS RD: Thus she admonished others to follow her example. PRUITT: 13. There, Do the Buddha's teaching means: Do the Buddha's teaching, his admonition and instruction. The meaning is: enter into it in accordance with what has been taught. Having done it, one does not repent means: having followed the instruction, one does not suffer as a result of doing it; the one who does is successful through having proper intentions. Wash your feet (padaani) quickly and sit down on one side means: here, since she herself, after returning from the alms round, after eating, having paid the proper respects to her teacher and preceptor, after washing her feet, in her daytime quarters, sat down apart, she brought her own aim to its culmination. She therefore spoke, urging on others too. Here ends the commentary on the verse by Therii Visaakhaa. ====== c. #67914 From: connie Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 8:51 pm Subject: Re: Toodles! nichiconn dear colette, colette: Theravadan I'm to pressume, no, not ASS-sume, deals with nothing less than "COMPLETE REALISM". So, what is REALISM? connie: shrug. who is asking? let's throw that other cloak back into the Lost and Found (#63789); we've still got the eggshell one. Not sure what you mean by domination. Off the cuff, I'd say the tilakkhana and four perversions might rule. That would be the status quo, too, i believe. An avowed lable lover myself, i can't say enough about The Pitaka Disclosure. :) Or The Guide or any of the other wonderful books Nina's writings / TA Sujin's talks quote and discuss. Some play "Keep Away" and lose. But I mentioned those two books because there's a lot of precision in the proper way of speaking, and I fall far short of the mark. Why care what I have to say, my warped thoughts? Better we look at the texts themselves, or as near as we can get; for me, text(s) = pali (tradition). But do we read in terms of what is real now? Oh, wait, that's what you said ;) As for assuming, the Pitaka Disclosure has plenty to say, << [and] < How many ideas must be given attention by one who desires to verify the fruit of Stream-Entry? > the Blessed One said < The Five Categories for assumption > >> This next quote is a bit long, but beautiful: 79. 7. Herein, what is the type of Thread Dealing with Corruption, Dealing with Penetration, and Dealing with the Adept? [Verse example:] < This world is born to anguish and subject to painful contact, It is sickness that it calls self; For however it conceives [it], 'Tis ever otherwise than that. Maintaining its being other than that, The world clings to being, expectantly relishing only being, [But] what it relishes brings fear, And what it fears is pain. Now this divine life under the Blessed One is lived in order to abandon being. Whoever have declared escape from being [to come about] through [love of] non-being, none of them, I say, escape from being. Whoever have declared liberation from being [to come about] through [love of some kind of] being, none of them, I say, are liberated from being. It is by depending on the essentials of existence that this suffering has actual being: with exhaustion of assuming in all ways suffering has no actual being. [27] See this wide world subjected to ignorance, Which is, which delights to be, never freed from being: [Yet] whatever the kinds of being that occur in any way, anywhere, All these are determinations, impermanent, pain[-haunted], inseparable from the idea of change. So when a man thus sees With right understanding how it is, Craving for being is abandoned, He no more expectantly relishes non-being. [That is the utter exhaustion of all craving, That is the remainderless fading, cessation, that is extinction.]. That bhikkhu being quenched through not assuming, His being come no more to a renewal, Transcended is Death's being, the battle won, One such as this outstrips all [modes of] being (cf Ud 32-2). [Now as to the words] "This world is born to anguish ... down to ... [And what it fears is] pain" is corruption by craving (see §82). [The passage] "Whoever have declared escape from being [to come about] through [love of some kind of being], none of them, I say, is liberated from being" is corruption by view (see §82). That corruption by view and corruption by craving are both corruption. Then to go back again, [the words] "Now this divine life under the Blessed One is lived in order to abandon being ... down to ... With exhaustion of assuming in all ways [suffering] has no actual being" are penetration. [28] [The words] "That bhikkhu being quenched ... down to ... One such as this outstrips all [modes of] being" deal with the Adept. [Prose example: ] < Four kinds of persons > (A ii 5), (i) "One who goes with the stream" is corruption, (ii) "One who has steadied himself" and (iii) "One who goes against the stream" are penetration, and (iv) "One who ... stands of firm ground" is the Adept's plane. peace, c. #67915 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 9:17 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,130 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 130. As to the remaining nineteen ((42)-(49) and (56)-(65)), there is none that does not occur as a rebirth-linking (a) appropriate to it (see par. 133). But in the course of an individual existence, firstly, two, namely, profitable-resultant and unprofitable-resultant root-causeless mind-consciousness elements ((41) and (56)) occur accomplishing four functions, that is to say, the function of 'investigating' in the five doors (j) next after profitable-resultant and unprofitable-resultant mind element, the function of 'registration' (m) in the six doors in the way already stated, the function of 'life-continuum' (b) that continues after rebirth-linking given by themselves, as long as there is no thought-arising to interrupt the life-continuum, and lastly the function of 'death' (n) at the end [of the course of an existence]. And so these two are invariable as to [possession of heart-] basis, and variable as to door, object, position, and function. ********************* 130. sesesu ekuunaviisatiyaa na ki~nci attano anuruupaaya pa.tisandhiyaa na pavattati. pavattiya.m pana kusalaakusalavipaakaa taava dve ahetukamanovi~n~naa.nadhaatuyo pa~ncadvaare kusalaakusalavipaakamanodhaatuuna.m anantaraa santiira.nakicca.m, chasu dvaaresu pubbe vuttanayeneva tadaaramma.nakicca.m, attanaa dinnapa.tisandhito uddha.m asati bhava"ngupacchedake cittuppaade bhava"ngakicca.m, ante cutikicca~ncaati cattaari kiccaani saadhayamaanaa niyatavatthukaa aniyatadvaaraaramma.na.t.thaanakiccaa hutvaa pavattanti. #67916 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 6:58 pm Subject: Craving causes Pain! bhikkhu5 Friends: Craving for Sense Pleasure is the cause of Pain! The Blessed Buddha once said: Truly, due to craving for sense pleasure, conditioned by sensuous craving, compelled by craving for sense pleasure, entirely pushed by craving for sense pleasure, kings fight with kings, princes fight with princes, priests with priests, citizens with citizens; mother quarrels with son, son with mother; father with son, son with father; brother with brother, brother with sister, sister with brother, friend fights even with his friend. Thus, lost in conflict, quarrelling, & hostilities, they attack one another with fists, sticks, or weapons. And thereby they suffer death or deadly pain. And further, due to this craving for sense pleasure, people break into houses, rob, plunder, pillage whole villages, commit highway robbery, seduce the wives of others. Then the rulers have such people caught and inflict on them various forms of punishment. And thereby they meet death or deadly pain! This is the misery of sensuous craving: The accumulation of pain in this present life, due to craving for short & trivial sense pleasure... Furthermore, one accepts evil modes of action, speech, & thought! Thus, at the break-up of the body after death, one fall into a bad state of existence, a state of suffering, into perdition, even into the inferno of hell. All this misery results from sensuous craving... Such is the heaping up of future suffering caused by craving for sense pleasure... Craving causes Suffering! Source: The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha. Majjhima Nikaya MN 13 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=25072X http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/index.htmla Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Ceylon * <....> #67917 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Feb 3, 2007 9:31 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing scottduncan2 Dear Herman, You won't like my answer, I fear, but I give it in hopes that you will understand me: H: "In my life, just about everything I do is predicated on a belief that change is gradual. That belief is the foundation for my act of naming objects, and writing this post to you, for example. But if you honestly don't attribute any continuity/identity to all the forms you encounter in daily life, and don't behave as though you do, then I have to accept that, I guess. I do find it incredibly hard to believe, though." I know you are smarter than to actually be as obtuse about these matters as you wish to appear - you know, these comments about my children, or your pretending to know how I behave. I can observe the appearance of continuity and identity as easily as you can. What I believe you are missing is a capacity for faith, and I don't mean to be insulting when I say this. The Buddha teaches that this continuity is only apparent and that identity is illusory. Experience has allowed me to trust these teachings. It isn't otherwise for me. Things are indeed not as they seem. No one can give that to you. You return to this forum for reasons only you can understand. I like to imagine that it is to find something you have yet to find. I hope you can. I hope you can accept this answer in the way it is given. Have you thought of what you need from me yet so we can discuss these things together? Sincerely, Scott. #67918 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 12:13 am Subject: [dsg] Re: B.Bodhi article, perfections. jwromeijn Dear Nina Thanks for your information, what are your sources? Not the Tipitaka I suppose. If I understand you well, then the answer to my question can better be given on the mythological than on the factual level. (By 'factual level' I mean: when exact had the Bodhisatta- the Buddha of the future - in his aeons during 'career' destructed the ten fetters?) You said: "When we develop the perfections we develop them as those of a disciple, not in the same way as a future Buddha." J: Why not? The ideal of a Buddha does attract me - in all modesty - more than the ideal of a disciple, I think that is the same as 'the ideal of the arahant'. Especially because the ideal of the Buddha, and before that stage the ideal of the Bodhisatta, is formulated more positive, more other- directed. That the Bodhisatta needed much more time than his disciples is no problem: time is a concept, is not a paramattha dhamma. See again my Bhikkhi Bodhi quote: " The formula for the arahant … Now all these epithets are true for the Buddha as well, but the Buddha is not described in this way; for these terms emphasize the attainment of one's own liberation, and the Buddha is extolled, not primarily as the one who has attained his own liberation, but as the one who opens the doors of liberation for others. That is, even in the archaic suttas of the Nikayas, an "other- regarding" significance is already being subtly ascribed to the Buddha's status that is not ascribed to the arahant." Metta Joop #67919 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 2:22 am Subject: Mind and Control christine_fo... Hello all, We had our monthly get-together in a Brisbane park today ~ five of us ~ and we studied chapter II of "What the Buddha Taught" by Venerable Dr. W. Rahula on The First Noble Truth: Dukkha. Those of us who are familiar with discussions on DSG were interested to read the comments of Ven. Rahula on the subject of "mind (manas)". "Mind is only a faculty or organ (indriya) like the eye or the ear. It can be controlled and developed like any other faculty, and the Buddha speaks quite often of the value of controlling and disciplining these six faculties." (p.21) I'm wondering what 'can be controlled and developed' means in the context of there being, as I understood it, no control of conditioned dhammas? metta Chris #67920 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 2:36 am Subject: Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (11) philofillet Hi Herman > > We have to deepen our understanding of the First and Second Noble > > Truths before our answer can change. Or should I say our > > understanding has to deepen. No control over understanding, though > > we can set conditions that might help it to develop. > > > > Do you think anyone in their right mind would pursue an understanding > of the First and Second Noble Truth? :-) I don't. It's very > unattractiveness must count as proof of it's truth. Nobody would seek > to know it. But the truth of the matter does rather thrust itself upon > one. Ph: But there are so very many mechanisms, strategems whatever of the mind to dodge the truth of it. On the other hand, the Buddha offers a lot of counter-strategems to encourage us to face it often. I think of the daily recollections on old age, sickness and death, and loss of loved ones the Buddha says all people, of all stripes, should "often" do. I do it every morning. Reflect on it to various depths. And when I wake up in the middle of the night, and there is that 4 a.m fear that comes along, I don't dodge it - I do the recollections. Really grovel in the truth that my darling Naomi will lie in a death bed, if she's lucky, body wracked in pain, mind lost to me, and so will I. I really soak in the misery of that. Why? I guess it's meant to spark samvega, a sense of urgency, but if I'm honest what it probably does is make me cling even stronger to the good times, to value them even more. So I appreciate your comments. On the other hand, since there is faith in the principles of kamma and rebirth, there is a certain urgency to add a lot of water to that bucket that contains the salt of evil deeds, to keep my slate as clean as possible by doing good deeds so that there can be a favourable rebirth. Supersitious? Sure. Clinging to becoming? Yes. I don't pretend otherwise. >Still, it's not bad enough to warrant seeking a way out. I say > that fully realising that if I believed in rebirth a la the very > superstitious Asians, it would be a different matter. That's a very > scary concept indeed. I suppose I should now say, it's very > unattractiveness must count as proof of it's truth. But that's going > to far. The idea of literal rebirth has never thrust itself upon me. Me neither. But I like the idea of it and certainly I do believe in the principle of kamma, that deeds bear results. Rebirth? The Buddha taught it so I'll go with it. As I wrote in another post, faith is an important ingredient, even blind faith. You're not into that, and that's fine. Herman, by the way, may I use you as an example of wrong view? Please don't take that the wrong way, but it seems that some people say that wrong view is failing to penetrate the vipallasas, almost akin to saying that wrong view is a failure to be sotapanna. I would like to refer to some of your posts to point to a more basic kind of wrong view, not believing in rebirth, believing there are beings, perhaps not believing that all the bad things that happen to us are the result of our deeds, etc. (I don't know if you believe that, but I wouldn't be surprised.) And not only having these views at times, but holding to them, maintaining them in debate. I think this is the kind of wrong view that is wrong view that the Buddha meant for worldlings to consider. Since you don't identify yourself as a Buddhist I trust you won't be insulted by that. And I apologize in advance if you are. May I use your views as examples of this kind of wrong view? I know that sounds obnoxious but I mean it in a perfectly friendly way.It might help me help others consider whether or not they are being too demanding in their definition of right view. Metta, Phil #67921 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 2:46 am Subject: Re: Mind and Control philofillet Hi Christine How's it going? First of all I have to apologize to you because some months ago (a year ago?) I made obnoxious comments about your not "getting it" because you constantly brought up questions about the value of metta meditation and meditation in general during the Bangkok talks and now I see that you were (are?) very wise and energetic and patient in insisting on bringing up these things. > "Mind is only a faculty or organ (indriya) like the eye or the ear. It > can be controlled and developed like any other faculty, and the Buddha > speaks quite often of the value of controlling and disciplining these > six faculties." (p.21) > > I'm wondering what 'can be controlled and developed' means in the > context of there being, as I understood it, no control of conditioned > dhammas? I think the similes that are used in Dhammapada and elsewhere about the mind being as difficult to control as a fish that is flapping around, or the beautiful lines about farmers who channel water, and carpenters who do something or other get at the difficulty of controlling the mind, and the importance and nobility (in a conventional sense) of making the effort. Personally, I find that I am reminded every day in my meditation that I cannot control the mind, but the patient effort in bring the attention back again and again to the meditation object brings very fruitful results in daily life, in terms of guarding the sense doors and resultant deepening of sila. My hindrances are so gross and obstructive that that is enough for me. Other people will have something more refined to say about control that is involved or not involved in attainments. Metta, Phil #67922 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 2:51 am Subject: Are all the bad things that happen to us results of our deeds?(wasRe: Theriigaa) philofillet Hi all I wrote this to Herman, then wondered. Did the Buddha teach this, or did he only teach that all the bad things we do bring bad results? Did he teach that all the bad things that happen to us are results of our own deeds? Thanks in advance. Metta, Phil >not believing that all the bad things that happen to us are > the result of our deeds, etc. #67923 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 3:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mind and Control sarahprocter... Hi Chris, Good to hear about your get-together and topic of discussion in Brisbane. You raise some good points: --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > We had our monthly get-together in a Brisbane park today ~ five of us ~ > and we studied chapter II of "What the Buddha Taught" by Venerable Dr. > W. Rahula on The First Noble Truth: Dukkha. Those of us who are > familiar with discussions on DSG were interested to read the comments of > Ven. Rahula on the subject of "mind (manas)". .... S: Several non-Theravada terms and ideas have been introduced into the text. For example, see his footnote on p.23 on citta, manas and vijj~naana and also aalaya-vij~naana is introduced. I think it's confusing and wrote on some of these terms before: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15902 Sticking to the texts, citta, mano and vi~n~naana refer to the same naama: ... "But that which is called Citta and Mano and Vinnana arises as one thing and ceases as another by day and night." Samyutta 12:61 (Bodhi transl). .... > "Mind is only a faculty or organ (indriya) like the eye or the ear. It > can be controlled and developed like any other faculty, and the Buddha > speaks quite often of the value of controlling and disciplining these > six faculties." (p.21) .... S: Rather, I would say that indriyas (faculties) are 'leaders' or 'controllers' of other dhammas. See 'Indriya'(faculties) in the Nyantiloka dictionary. Mind (mano)is mental, i.e a naama. 22 faculties are given. Even when in the suttas (e.g. in Indriyasamyutta, SN), 6 indriyas only are given, it is not a question of 'controlling' these faculties, but of understanding the controlling or dominating power of these dhammas (on other dhammas): .... "Bhikkhus, there are these six faculties. What six? The eye faculty.....the mind faculty. "When, bhikkhus, a noble disciple understands as they really are the gratification, the danger, and the escape in the case of these six faculties, then he is called a noble disciple who is a stream-winner, no longer bound to the nether world, fixed in destiny, with enlightenment as his destination." (SN 48:26 (Bodhi transl) ..... [note 208: Spk: It is the eye and a faculty in the sense of controlling or dominating the phenomena arisen in the eye door, thus the 'eye-faculty.' The same method in regard to the ear, etc.] ... Also, see ch XV1 in the Vism 'The Faculties and the Truths' and for a clear explanation, ch 13, Faculty condition (Indriya paccaya) in 'Conditions' by Nina. Here's a quote from it: "The Pali word "indriya" means strength, governing or controlling principle. Indriyas are "leaders" for the associated dhammas, but they are leaders each in their own field. In the case of indriya-paccaya, faculty-condition, the conditioning dhamma (paccaya dhamma) has leadership, great control, over the conditioned dhammas (paccayupanna dhammas). Some indriyas are rupa and some are nama. We read in the Visuddhimagga (XVI, 1) that there are twenty-two indriyas." <....> "As regards the five faculties which are the senses, they control the strength or weakness of the cittas dependent on them. The eye faculty, for example, controls seeing; keen and bad eyesight are due to the quality of the eye faculty and it is the same with the other four sense faculties. The heart-base does not in this way control the cittas which are dependent on it since it is not a faculty. As regards mind faculty, manindriya, all eighty-nine types of citta are mind faculty. This faculty, unlike the five sense faculties, arises together with the realities it conditions by way of faculty-condition, indriya-paccaya. Citta is the "leader" in cognizing an object, in this field it rules over the associated dhammas. The accompanying cetasikas share the same object, but they do not cognize it in the same way as citta which is the leader. If there would be no citta, cetasikas could not arise; citta is the basis and foundation for the cetasikas. Citta conditions the accompanying cetasikas and also the rupa it produces by way of conascent faculty-condition. " ***** > I'm wondering what 'can be controlled and developed' means in the > context of there being, as I understood it, no control of conditioned > dhammas? .... S: In the context of the indriyas, it is these dhammas that perform the function of 'controlling'. Vism XV1,5: "...the function of the mind faculty [S:manindriya] is to make conascent states subject to its own mastery." As regards to any developing, this can only be a development of right understanding of these indriyas and other dhammas for what they are. Again from the SN quote above: "....understands as they really are the gratification, the danger, and the escape in the case of these six faculties....". [In another context of indriya condition, not to be confused with the above, we also read about the development of the five indriyas (spiritual faculties: i.e. confidence, energy, mindfulness, concentration and understanding, included in the bodhipakkiya dhammas.] By understanding more about the power of the 22 or 6 indriyas above, it helps to appreciate that there really is no atta, no self that can control or discipline anything at all. Thanks again for your report and helpful comments! Metta, Sarah ====== #67924 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 5:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mind and Control nilovg Dear Christine, How good to hear from you. I was wondering whether you still had Dhamma get togethers and I am happy to see that you have. We had many discussions here about control. I can perhaps add something. Sarah explained about indiriyas, controlling faculties. Understanding can 'control' the six doorways when there is mindfulness and understanding of an object presenting itself through one of these doorways. James quoted a good sutta: We then read that when there is wise attention, there will be kusala citta. In a way this is control, but also this is a conditioned dhamma, no self who controls. If we see it in this way there is no dilemma as to control versus anatta. Nina. Op 4-feb-2007, om 11:22 heeft Christine Forsyth het volgende geschreven: > "Mind is only a faculty or organ (indriya) like the eye or the ear. It > can be controlled and developed like any other faculty, and the Buddha > speaks quite often of the value of controlling and disciplining these > six faculties." (p.21) > > I'm wondering what 'can be controlled and developed' means in the > context of there being, as I understood it, no control of conditioned > dhammas? #67925 From: connie Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 6:26 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (14) nichiconn Dear Friends: 14. Sumanaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 14. The commentary on the verse by Therii Sumanaa VRI / TEXT: Dhaatuyo dukkhato disvaati sumanaaya theriyaa gaathaa. Tassaa vatthu tissaatheriyaa vatthusadisa.m. Imissaapi hi satthaa obhaasa.m vissajjetvaa purato nisinno viya attaana.m dassetvaa- 14. "Dhaatuyo dukkhato disvaa, maa jaati.m punaraagami; bhave chanda.m viraajetvaa, upasantaa carissasii"ti.- Ima.m gaathamaaha. PRUITT: Seeing the elements as pain is the verse by Theri Sumanaa. Her story is the same as the story of Therii Tissaa. For her too the Teacher sent forth his radiance and appeared as if he were seated in front of her and said this verse: 14. Seeing the elements as pain, do not come to birth again. Discarding desire for existence, you will wander, stilled. MRS R-D: Hast thou not seen sorrow and ill in all The springs of life? Come thou not back to birth! Cast out the passionate desire again to Be. So shalt thou go thy ways calm and serene. (14) VRI / TEXT: Saa gaathaapariyosaane arahatta.m paapu.ni Tattha dhaatuyo dukkhato disvaati sasantatipariyaapannaa cakkhaadidhaatuyo itaraapi ca udayabbayapa.tipii.lanaadinaa "dukkhaa"ti ~naa.nacakkhunaa disvaa. Maa jaati.m punaraagamiiti puna jaati.m aayati.m punabbhava.m maa upagacchi Bhave chanda.m viraajetvaati kaamabhavaadike sabbasmi.m bhave ta.nhaachanda.m viraagasa"nkhaatena maggena pajahitvaa. Upasantaa carissasiiti sabbaso pahiinakilesataaya nibbutaa viharissasi. PRUITT: At the end of the verse she attained Arahatship. 14. There, seeing (dhaatuyo) the elements as pain means: seeing with the eye of knowledge the elements such as the eye, etc, (cakkaadidhaatuyo) which constitute one's own continuity, and other [elements] too, as pain because of the oppression of rise and fall, etc. Do not come to birth again means: do not go to birth, to renewed existence in the future again. Discarding desire (chanda.m) for existence means: abandoning by means of the path, which is called absence of passion, the desire and craving (ta.nhaa-chanda.m) for all existence beginning with existence dominated by sensual pleasure. You will wander, stilled means you will live, quenched, through thorough elimination of the defilements. VRI / TEXT: Ettha ca "dhaatuyo dukkhato disvaa"ti iminaa dukkhaanupassanaamukhena vipassanaa dassitaa. "Bhave chanda.m viraajetvaa"ti iminaa maggo, "upasantaa carissasii"ti iminaa sa-upaadisesaa nibbaanadhaatu, "maa jaati.m punaraagamii"ti iminaa anupaadisesaa nibbaanadhaatu dassitaati da.t.thabba.m. Sumanaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa ni.t.thitaa. PRUITT: And here, seeing the elements as pain means: insight is shown by the knowledge of this pain. Discarding desire for existence means: by this path. You will wander, stilled means: the element of quenching with [the result of past] attachment still remaining. Do not come to birth again means: the element of quenching without [the result of past] attachment remaining is shown. Thus should it be understood. Here ends the commentary on the verse by Therii Sumanaa. ======= c. #67926 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 3:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 2/4/07 12:33:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: > The Buddha teaches that this continuity is only apparent and that > identity is illusory. ===================== What you say here is not without some ambiguity, IMO. The Buddha taught that continuity in the sense of an unchanging essence or core or identity is only apparent, I agree.. But a *stacatto development of 0-duration phenomena was never taught or implied by the Buddha either. Explicitly, the Buddha taught the tilakkhana: NON-SELF: Nothing personal, substantial, or independent existing. No ownership, self-existent core, own-being/essence or identity in anything. NON-REMAINING: No condition lasting indefinitely. UNSATISFACTORINESS: No condition being a true source of satisfaction, and craving & clinging to things being the direct basis for suffering. * It is true that nothing remains unchanged for even a moment. Denying staccato development is not a denial of that. At any moment, the object of consciousness is in the process of change, namely a varying in intensity that involves a repeated crescendo and decrescendo development, and simultaneously, complex, concomitant mental operations are in effect in support of consciousness, and they are not simple, unchanging events. Recognition, feeling, attention, and so on are far from being unchanging, 0-duration events. #67927 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 3:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Are all the bad things that happen to us results of our deeds?(wasR... upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - In a message dated 2/4/07 5:52:19 AM Eastern Standard Time, philco777@... writes: > Did > he [the Buddha] teach that all the bad things that happen to us are results > of our > own deeds? > ========================= No. :-) With metta, Howard #67928 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 10:47 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily lIfe, Ch 23, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, The sotåpanna is an ariyan, a ``noble person'', although not all defilements are eradicated by him. He is an ariyan, because at the moment of enlightenment, when the magga-citta arose, he became a different person; he is no longer a ``worldling'', puthujjana. There are no more latent tendencies of wrong view, di.t.thi, and doubt, vicikicchå, accumulated in the citta, and there are no more inclinations to stinginess, macchariya, or envy, isså. What is a latent tendency? When we desire something we have lobha. When the lobha-múla-cittas have fallen away, there are other kinds of citta which are not accompanied by lobha. However, the lobha which arose before has been accumulated, it remains latent. When there are conditions for its arising, it can arise again with the akusala citta. Latent tendencies lie dormant in every citta, even in the bhavanga-citta (life-continuum) which does not experience an object through one of the sense-doors or the mind-door. The question may occur whether the latent tendency of diììhi is eradicated gradually or all at once. The answer is that in the course of the development of right understanding diììhi is gradually eliminated until all latent tendencies are eradicated at the attainment of enlightenment. One cannot attain enlightenment without having cultivated the right conditions. We see that in the Buddha's time some people could attain enlightenment quickly, even during a discourse; some could attain enlightenment after a more detailed explanation of the truth, whereas others had to develop the eightfold Path for a longer time before they could attain enlightenment. It all depends on how much wisdom has already been accumulated, also during previous lives. As to the attainment of enlightenment in the present time, the right conditions have to be cultivated; enlightenment cannot occur all of a sudden. If there is awareness of all kinds of nåma and rúpa appearing in daily life, paññå can investigate their characteristics and in this way it can gradually develop. We cannot expect a great deal of sati and paññå in the beginning. However, each moment of right awareness is fruitful, because it can condition further moments of awareness and thus it can be accumulated. When paññå realizes a phenomenon which appears as nåma or rúpa, clinging to the concept of self is gradually eliminated, until finally all latent tendencies of di.t.thi are eradicated by the magga-citta (lokuttara kusala citta) of the sotåpanna. Then di.t.thi will never arise again. ****** Nina. #67929 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 10:52 am Subject: Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing scottduncan2 Hi Howard, Thanks for the reply: H: "What you say here is not without some ambiguity, IMO. The Buddha taught that continuity in the sense of an unchanging essence or core or identity is only apparent, I agree.. But a *stacatto development of 0-duration phenomena was never taught or implied by the Buddha either. Explicitly, the Buddha taught the tilakkhana..." I understand that the arising and falling away of dhammas is to be considered as occuring 'without a gap'. I don't think that 'staccato' (which is at least understandable) and for sure 'zero duration' are accurate representations of this process. The consciousness moment (citta-kkhana), for example, is said to have its uppaada, thitti, and bhanga 'phases' and is therefore not of 'zero-duration'. I think the real difficulty we face in trying to discuss this might have to do with the use of commentarial clarifications, which some go by (me) and others do not. For example, ANI,v,8: "No other thing do I know, O monks, that changes so quickly as the mind. It is not easy to give a simile for how quickly the mind changes." The first sentence, in the Paali: "Naaha.m, bhikkhave, a~n~na.m ekadhammampi samanupassaami ya.m eva.m lahuparivatta.m yathayida.m citta.m." Bh. Bodhi, in footnote 12: "AA explains this as meaning that the mind (i.e. a moment of consciousness) arises and vanishes very rapidly, but the same expression is used elsewhere in the canon in a context that suggests the intended meaning is the mind's vulnerability to quick changes in intentions and preferences..." I think, even here, that while Bh. Bodhi makes note of the commentarial point of view, he demonstrates his own lack of certainty about this, perhaps putting forward a less, say, strong interpretation on it. The A.t.thakathaa notes, regarding the first of the two senses suggested by Bh. Bodhi: "A.t.thame eva.m lahuparivattanti eva.m lahu.m uppajjitvaa lahu.m nirujjhanaka.m." Uppajjati is "to arise, originate, be produced, be born, appear"; nirujjhati is "to cease, perish, be destroyed, or annihilated". It is clear to me what the commentator had in mind. H: "It is true that nothing remains unchanged for even a moment. Denying staccato development is not a denial of that. At any moment, the object of consciousness is in the process of change, namely a varying in intensity that involves a repeated crescendo and decrescendo development, and simultaneously, complex, concomitant mental operations are in effect in support of consciousness, and they are not simple, unchanging events. Recognition, feeling, attention, and so on are far from being unchanging, 0-duration events." Again, I cannot agree with the use of intensity-variability descriptions, nor the crescendo-decrescendo development since these both suggest a lastingness which I don't think is present and, more problematic, a changingness over time of a single arising, as if one thing can become different things during a single arising. This may not be what you are saying, however... Sincerely, Scott. #67930 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 10:53 am Subject: Letters on Vipassana 6, no 6 nilovg Dear friends, We may pay attention to different realities and we may remember that seeing is nåma, that it is different from visible object which is rúpa. The direct experience of nåma as nåma and of rúpa as rúpa, without any idea of self is another step which has to be taken. Nobody else can show us exactly how the truth can be directly experienced, because paññå develops according to its own conditions. Seeing arises and we have learnt that seeing is nåma, but so long as paññå has not eradicated the idea of self, we still have an idea of self who sees. When paññå has been developed to the degree that the first stage of insight, vipassanå ñåùa, arises, characteristics of nåma and rúpa appear clearly, one at a time, through the mind-door. Their different characteristics are clearly distinguished from each other. At that moment there is no idea of self who experiences and there is no idea of a "whole" or of the world. There is "anattå-saññå", the perception of non-self, instead of "attå-saññå", the perception of self. Only nåma and rúpa are appearing one at a time. If we really understand that there must be anattå-saññå at the moment of vipassanå ñåùa, we shall not try to create conditions for the arising of vipassanå ñå.na, because then there is an idea of self. This would be counteractive to the development of vipassanå. When the moments of vipassanå ñå.na have fallen away, the world appears as before, as it used to appear, as a "whole" or a conglomeration of things, Khun Sujin explained. We may be surprised that realities appear as anattå only at the moment of vipassanå ñå.na, and that after that the world appears as usual, as a "whole". Has nothing changed? We may think that it is already an achievement to have reached the first stage of vipassanå ñå.na but it is not enough. The accumulated clinging to a self is very persistent, it cannot be eradicated by the first vipassanå ñå.na. One has to apply the knowledge one has gained at the moments of vipassanå ñå.na and go on developing understanding of all nåmas and rúpas which appear. It is only at the fourth stage of insight, which is the first stage of "principal insight" [1], that the arising and falling away of nåma and rúpa can be realized. --------- footnote: [1] The first three stages of vipassanå ñå.na are beginning stages, they are called “tender insight”, taru.na vipassanå. The fourth stage is the first stage of mahå-vipassanå ñå.na. Mahå means great. The objects of insight are the nåma and rúpa which appear, and as insight develops their characteristics are penetrated more. ******* Nina. #67931 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 10:59 am Subject: re Letters on Vipassana 6,5 nilovg Hi Herman. --------- H Rúpas arise and fall away and succeed one another. Please tell me why you believe this to be the case. If you have no other reason than that it says so in a book, there is no need to reply ---------- N: If there was not the arising and falling away of the rupas of the body, you would not notice that the body changes and grows old. It seems that rupas last but they fall away instantly, and so long as there are conditions for them to be replaced, new rupas arise. Rupas of the body originate from kamma, citta, nutrition and temperature from birth to death. Nina. #67932 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 11:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (11) nilovg Hi Phil, It is an impressive sutta. I like to hear it often. Can you give your reflections on it? Nina. Op 4-feb-2007, om 11:36 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > think of the daily recollections on old age, sickness and death, > and loss of loved ones the Buddha says all people, of all stripes, > should "often" do. I do it every morning. Reflect on it to various > depths. #67933 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 6:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 2/4/07 1:56:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: > Again, I cannot agree with the use of intensity-variability > descriptions, nor the crescendo-decrescendo development since these > both suggest a lastingness which I don't think is present and, more > problematic, a changingness over time of a single arising, as if one > thing can become different things during a single arising. This may > not be what you are saying, however... > ===================== This is my understanding of the arising, stasis, and declining aspects brought out in the commentaries. It is wave development, and it is a rather universal pattern found at all levels of experience. With metta, Howard #67934 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 6:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (11) upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Phil) - In a message dated 2/4/07 2:09:01 PM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Phil, > It is an impressive sutta. I like to hear it often. Can you give your > reflections on it? > Nina. > Op 4-feb-2007, om 11:36 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > > >think of the daily recollections on old age, sickness and death, > >and loss of loved ones the Buddha says all people, of all stripes, > >should "often" do. I do it every morning. Reflect on it to various > >depths. > ======================= I reflect on this very, very often. I don't do it as planned activity. It is just something I do - a lot. In fact, especially after one has lived to a certain age, and I'm still relatively young at 66, old age, sickness, and death are constant companions. They must be seen, and seen clearly. Nothing can be held onto - neither persons nor states. At every level of experience there is loss. We can fight it and suffer, or, as best we can, by various means, learn to accept and relinquish. The real trick is to retain loving, open-hearted joy, and clear seeing and degree of equanimity while cultivating but not yet fully achieving the necessary relinquishment. It is not easy. I find both contemplation of the Dhamma and meditative practice(s) a great help in this. May we each find our means to attain peace. With metta, Howard #67935 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 11:37 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing scottduncan2 Hi Howard, Thanks for the clarification: H: "This is my understanding of the arising, stasis, and declining aspects brought out in the commentaries. It is wave development, and it is a rather universal pattern found at all levels of experience." What I still am not clear on is the way in which you understand the beginning and ending points of the 'wave'. I'm likely not understanding you properly, though. I think you see the 'wave' as continuous, that is peaks and valleys but not staring and ending. Is this correct? Sincerely, Scott. #67936 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 7:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 2/4/07 2:38:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Thanks for the clarification: > > H: "This is my understanding of the arising, stasis, and declining > aspects brought out in the commentaries. It is wave development, and > it is a rather universal pattern found at all levels of experience." > > What I still am not clear on is the way in which you understand the > beginning and ending points of the 'wave'. I'm likely not > understanding you properly, though. I think you see the 'wave' as > continuous, that is peaks and valleys but not staring and ending. Is > this correct? > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > ====================== I am noncommital as to startings and endings. (My mathematics training makes this issue clear to me, but it is not easy to explain in short order.) I tend not to believe in startings and endings, but, as mysterious as it sounds, it in no way implies eternal existence in past or future. I think it best we drop this particular point. It isn't important to the Dhamma anyway, as I see it. With metta, Howard #67937 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 1:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing egberdina Hi Scott, On 04/02/07, Scott Duncan wrote: > I know you are smarter than to actually be as obtuse about these > matters as you wish to appear I didn't realise I was wishing to appear obtuse. - you know, these comments about my > children, or your pretending to know how I behave. There is no pretence in knowing a Scott Duncan post. While posts are the limit of my knowledge of you, that is certainly enough for me to know a Scott Duncan post, even if you wouldn't sign them. Where there is pretence, though, is in the claim that the phenomenon of duration is illusory. This very reading of this post, identifiable as a post of yours, demonstrates that the present has duration, and that this duration is not just a linguistic construct. I am sorry that I offend you by referring to yor private life. I promise to not do that again. I can observe the > appearance of continuity and identity as easily as you can. What I > believe you are missing is a capacity for faith, and I don't mean to > be insulting when I say this. What does insult me is insincerity, but I see no harm in your belief that I lack a capacity for faith. > > The Buddha teaches that this continuity is only apparent and that > identity is illusory. I was not going to find "evidence" of gradual change for you in the Suttas, because I am reluctant to fuel a mindset that rejects what is logically necessary, but will blindly accept anything from a particular source, because it is from that source. Sarah made it all a bit easier with her partial quote of SN 12.61. Feel free to read the whole sutta. And I recall Nina once quoting from the Latin Mass for the Dead. Vita mutatur, non tollitur - life is changed, not taken away (ended). Further, Nanavira Thera, who will no doubt not be your cup of tea, wrote a very useful paper entitled Fundamental Structure - showing invariance under transformation. He has a good grip on the philosophical implications of identity and change. Experience has allowed me to trust these > teachings. It isn't otherwise for me. Things are indeed not as they > seem. No one can give that to you. You return to this forum for > reasons only you can understand. I like to imagine that it is to find > something you have yet to find. I hope you can. I hope you can > accept this answer in the way it is given. > > Have you thought of what you need from me yet so we can discuss these > things together? > Sincerity. Don't write posts to me if I am to regard them as illusory :-) Kind Regards Herman #67938 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 1:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (11) egberdina Hi Phil, > > Herman, by the way, may I use you as an example of wrong view? > Please don't take that the wrong way, but it seems that some people > say that wrong view is failing to penetrate the vipallasas, almost > akin to saying that wrong view is a failure to be sotapanna. I would > like to refer to some of your posts to point to a more basic kind of > wrong view, not believing in rebirth, believing there are beings, > perhaps not believing that all the bad things that happen to us are > the result of our deeds, etc. (I don't know if you believe that, but > I wouldn't be surprised.) And not only having these views at times, > but holding to them, maintaining them in debate. I think this is the > kind of wrong view that is wrong view that the Buddha meant for > worldlings to consider. Since you don't identify yourself as a > Buddhist I trust you won't be insulted by that. And I apologize in > advance if you are. > Feel free to use me as as a paradigm of wrong view, Phil. And thanks for asking. Rest assured that I am not at all offended by that. And especially not from you. I'd much rather communicate with someone who knows and admits he is admiring cleavage when he is admiring cleavage, then with someone who glosses over the details of their very real daily life with appeals to illusion. And, no, I don't believe all the bad things that happen to a person are the results of their own deeds. This is a repugnant doctrine, which amounts to blaming the victim. But no doubt the doctrine has widespread appeal. Of interest to me is how any notion of compassion must be modified to incorporate the contributory negligence of the sufferer. What results tends to be more a supercilious haughtiness than compassion. Even the distinction wrong view -right view is often made with a distinct air of superiority. As are references to run-of-the-mill uninstructed ones and, not to mention the villagers, you know the ones with their curious sexual habits :-) Anyway, have a great, real day. Kind Regards Herman #67939 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 2:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: right effort, and some Thailand impressions. egberdina Hi James, > > Herman, you ask, "If an opportunity arose for it all to be over right > now, would you take it?" I assume that you believe you are asking if > people are willing to become enlightened and cease to be reborn, but > actually you are asking people if they are suicidal! LOL! What about our good friend Bahya, and the other dude, who, upon enlightenment, were gored to death by cows. Suicide by cow, perhaps :-) > > Robert, you answer Herman's question by stating that it will all be > over at paranibbana. That is annihilation belief and the Buddha > specifically taught against that. > I wonder about the usefulness of distinguishing between an end to becoming as being a kosher Buddhist doctrine, but an end to being as being wrong view? Especially seeing as neither an end to becoming or an end to being are even knowable. > Metta, > James > ps. Thanks Herman for your encouraging post. I do try to be an > island- just not a deserted one. ;-)) > Fair enough :-) Kind Regards Herman #67940 From: "joelaltman26" Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 2:42 pm Subject: Gratitude joelaltman26 dear friends in dhamma: this is a message of gratitude, of love, of thanksgiving... for the pure dhamma that flows endlessly, selflessly, peacefully. for Acharn Sujin and her patience and tireless committment to sharing "her" insightful and simple wisdom. for Nina and her part in connecting us with this dhamma, her years of dedication, her words, her "family" for Jonathan and his recordings, his love. i am new here in some ways, in other i am (simply) not. i do not know much. but i feel such deep love and gratitude for this possibility. this moment. and i want only to share this with you all, that we may grow in dhamma (and dhamma may grow in us). that each of our small lights may shine together, metta brothers and sisters... if any wish to continue this thread of gratitude, feel free to express yourselves, but please no personal responses here... let's keep this one pure. #67941 From: connie Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 3:17 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (15) nichiconn Friends, 15. Uttaraatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 15. The commentary on the verse of Therii Uttaraa TEXT: Kaayena sa.mvutaa aasinti uttaraaya theriyaa gaathaa. Tassaapi vatthu tissaatheriyaa vatthusadisa.m. Saapi hi sakyakulappasutaa bodhisattassa orodhabhuutaa mahaapajaapatigotamiyaa saddhi.m nikkhantaa obhaasagaathaaya arahatta.m patvaa pana- 15. "Kaayena sa.mvutaa aasi.m, vaacaaya uda cetasaa; samuula.m ta.nhamabbuyha, siitibhuutaamhi nibbutaa"ti.- Udaanavasena tameva gaatha.m abhaasi. PRUITT: I was restrained in body is the verse of Therii Uttaraa. Her story is also the same as the story of Therii Tissaa [verse 4]. For she too was a member of the Sakyan clan and a concubine in the Bodhisatta's harem. Having departed with Mahaa-Pajaapatii Gotamii, having attained Arahatship through a verse of radiance, she then spoke this verse as her solemn utterance: 15. I was restrained in body, speech, and mind. I have plucked out craving root and all and have become cool, quenched. MRS R-D: Well have I disciplined myself in act, In speech and eke in thought, rapt and intent. Craving with root of craving is o'ercome; Cool am I now; I know Nibbana's peace. (15) TEXT and PRUITT: Tattha kaayena sa.mvutaa aasinti kaayikena sa.mvarena sa.mvutaa ahosi.m. Vaacaayaati vaacasikena sa.mvarena sa.mvutaa aasinti yojanaa, padadvayenaapi siilasa.mvaramaaha. Udaati atha. Cetasaati samaadhicittena, etena vipassanaabhaavanamaaha. Samuula.m ta.nhamabbuyhaati saanusaya.m, saha vaa avijjaaya ta.nha.m uddharitvaa. Avijjaaya hi pa.ticchaaditaadiinave bhavattaye ta.nhaa uppajjati. 15. There, I was restrained in body means: I was restrained through the restraint connected with the body. Speech means: I was restrained through the restraint conected with speech. By linking thse two words [ie, body and speech] she said there was restraint through virtuous conduct. And (uda) means: and (atha). Mind means: she says [she was restrained] by the development of insight through this mental concentration. I have plucked out craving root and all means: having pulled out the latent tendencies together with craving or with ignorance. For craving arises in the three states of existence whose dangers are concealed by ignorance. Aparo nayo- kaayena sa.mvutaati sammaakammantena sabbaso micchaakammantassa pahaanaa maggasa.mvareneva kaayena sa.mvutaa aasi.m. Vaacaayaati sammaavaacaaya sabbaso micchaavaacaaya pahaanaa maggasa.mvareneva vaacaaya sa.mvutaa aasinti attho. Cetasaati samaadhinaa. Cetosiisena hettha sammaasamaadhi vutto, sammaasamaadhiggaha.neneva maggalakkha.nena ekalakkha.naa sammaadi.t.thi-aadayo maggadhammaa gahitaava hontiiti, maggasa.mvarena abhijjhaadikassa asa.mvarassa anavasesato pahaana.m dassita.m hoti. Tenevaaha "samuula.m ta.nhamabbuyhaa"ti. Siitibhuutaamhi nibbutaati sabbaso kilesapari.laahaabhaavena siitibhaavappattaa anupaadisesaaya nibbaanadhaatuyaa nibbutaa amhiiti. Uttaraatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa ni.t.thitaa. Another meaning of restrained in body is: "I was restrained in body through restraint of the path, through abandoning wrong conduct altogether by right conduct." Speech means: "I was restrained in speech through the restraint of the path, through abandoning wrong speech altogether by [practising] right speech." This is the meaning. Mind means: [restrained] through concentration. For here, concentration is said to be under the category of mind. This means by the inclusion of right concentration, which is a characteristic of the [eightfold] path, the constituents of the path such as right view, etc, which are individual characteristics [of the path], are also included. It is shown as utterly abandoning lack of restraint and covetiousness, etc, through the restraint of the path. Therefore she said, I have pluck out craving root and all. [I] have become cool (siitibhuutaamhi), quenched means: "I am quenched through the complete absence of the burning fever of the defilements, having attained the cool state (siiti-bhaava-ppattaa) in the element of quenching without [the result of past] attachment remaining." Here ends the commentary on Therii Uttaraa. === c. #67942 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 4:25 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing scottduncan2 Hi Herman, Good reply: H: "There is no pretence in knowing a Scott Duncan post. While posts are the limit of my knowledge of you, that is certainly enough for me to know a Scott Duncan post, even if you wouldn't sign them. Where there is pretence, though, is in the claim that the phenomenon of duration is illusory. This very reading of this post, identifiable as a post of yours, demonstrates that the present has duration, and that this duration is not just a linguistic construct." Yeah, with all of the so-called 'personality traits' annoyingly and endearingly on display it is, I guess, identifiable. Stylistic mannerisms and all that. Isn't this apparent wholeness, though, the contended issue? Isn't the identification of a Scott Duncan post, an artifact of avijjaa? I mean isn't it just a concatenation of words strung together, dimly reflecting some conceptual echo and sent into the ether like a grainy word-photograph? The only thing real about it, in the ultimate sense, is the colour seen and the feelings that arise. And this is all gone now too. The rest is all you, really. And, to make matters worse, I seem to remember writing it! H: "I am sorry that I offend you by referring to your private life. I promise to not do that again." No worries. H: "I was not going to find "evidence" of gradual change for you in the Suttas, because I am reluctant to fuel a mindset that rejects what is logically necessary, but will blindly accept anything from a particular source, because it is from that source. Sarah made it all a bit easier with her partial quote of SN 12.61. Feel free to read the whole sutta..." I will read it again, for the next time (I have a meatloaf to conceptualise). While I do: How is 'gradual change' a logical necessity? And for what? H: "Further, Nanavira Thera, who will no doubt not be your cup of tea..." No, you're correct about this. I don't like what I'm capable of proliferating when reflecting on the Dhamma unchecked. I certainly am not interested in what someone else (especially a really smart someone else) proliferates - especially when the project is one of radical redefinition. H: "Sincerity. Don't write posts to me if I am to regard them as illusory :-)" I'll do my best but I'm sure you will continue to regard them as real in spite of (or rather because of) 'me'!! Sincerely, Scott. #67943 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 8:02 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: right effort, and some Thailand impressions. buddhatrue Hi Herman (Robert K), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi James, > > > > > Herman, you ask, "If an opportunity arose for it all to be over right > > now, would you take it?" I assume that you believe you are asking if > > people are willing to become enlightened and cease to be reborn, but > > actually you are asking people if they are suicidal! LOL! > > What about our good friend Bahya, and the other dude, who, upon > enlightenment, were gored to death by cows. Suicide by cow, perhaps > :-) James: ;-)) I will assume you are joking. > > > > > Robert, you answer Herman's question by stating that it will all be > > over at paranibbana. That is annihilation belief and the Buddha > > specifically taught against that. > > > > I wonder about the usefulness of distinguishing between an end to > becoming as being a kosher Buddhist doctrine, but an end to being as > being wrong view? Especially seeing as neither an end to becoming or > an end to being are even knowable. This is a very complicated matter and I'm afraid I couldn't explain it to you in a way in which you would understand because you suffer from wrong view (no offense). However, I can quote where the Buddha taught specifically about this subject: "And when the devas, together with Indra, the Brahmas, & Pajapati, search for the monk whose mind is thus released, they cannot find that 'The consciousness of the one truly gone (tathagata) is dependent on this.' Why is that? The one truly gone is untraceable even in the here & now. "Speaking in this way, teaching in this way, I have been erroneously, vainly, falsely, unfactually misrepresented by some brahmans and contemplatives [who say], 'Gotama the contemplative is one who misleads. He declares the annihilation, destruction, extermination of the existing being.' But as I am not that, as I do not say that, so I have been erroneously, vainly, falsely, unfactually misrepresented by those venerable brahmans and contemplatives [who say], 'Gotama the contemplative is one who misleads. He declares the annihilation, destruction, extermination of the existing being.' 13 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.022.than.html Metta, James #67944 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 7:36 pm Subject: Future Fruit of Kamma! bhikkhu5 Friends: Kamma (= action) and Fruit: Action & Reaction! The Blessed Buddha once said: Beings are owners of their actions (kamma = karma), inheritor of their actions, are created by their actions, linked to their actions, their actions produce their destiny. Whatever actions they do; good as evil, the resulting reaction & effect will be only theirs! There is one who kills living beings, steal what belongs to others, commits adultery with other's partners; speaks lies, uses divisive and aggressive speech, prattle empty gossip; is covetous, envious, jealous, wicked-minded of evil views. Such one is creeping in all actions both bodily, verbal, and mental. Hidden & secret are such one's actions, words, and thoughts, of ulterior & concealed ways. But I tell you: Whoever pursues hidden ways and objects will have to expect one of these two results: Either the torture of hell, or birth among the creeping animals. Thus it is with all rebirth of any being: They will be reborn according to their actions (kamma)... When reborn, they will experience the exact result of their actions. Therefore I declare: Beings are owners of their actions (kamma), inheritor of their actions, are created by their actions, linked to their actions, as a shadow that never leaves! Their actions produce and condition their future destiny. Whatever action they perform; good as evil, the resulting reaction & effects will be only theirs! Kamma causes & creates rebirth! A shadow that never leaves! Source: Numerical Discourses of the Buddha. Anguttara Nikaya AN 10:205 http://What-Buddha-Said.net/Canon/Sutta/AN/Index.Numerical.htm For details on the mechanics of Kamma = Action see: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Kamma_is_intention.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Buddha_on_Kamma.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Good_Action_dilutes_Evil_Kamma.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Kamma_leading_to_short_ &_long_life.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Effect_of_Action_(kamma)_is_Delayed.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Kamma_leading_to_Health_&_Sickness.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Kamma_leading_to_Low_or_High_Birth.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Kamma_leading_to_Wealth_or_Poverty.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Kamma_leading_to_Beauty_&_Ugliness.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Kamma_leading_to_Power_or_Disrespect.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Evil_Kamma_enhances_other_Evil_Kamma.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Kamma_leading_to_Stupidity_or_Intelligence.\ htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Good_Action_enhances_other_Good_Kamma.htm Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Ceylon * <....> #67945 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 10:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Smiles & Laughs (was: Meditation (again)) sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, Hope your computer woes will be over soon for all our sakes:-). You've had a tough computer run..... --- sarah abbott wrote: > Cittas indicate a meaning with the help of the rupas involved. So we > smile > or laugh or make gestures - just conditioned namas and rupas. We see the > various visible objects and sanna marks these (even obvious to animals). > But the bodily intimation rupa itself is not visible, however. A subtle > rupa and tricky topic. ... S: This was a bit garbled in (#67832). I hadn't meant to suggest that kayavinnati (bodily intimation) was alsways involved when we smile or laugh. We may often smile to convey a meaning, but often we smile or laugh as a response to something we've seen or heard without any intention to convey a meaning, I think. Btw, when we were in Thailand, I raised your question about whether we can refer to 'weak seeing' which we discussed. K.Sujin's response was that if we say 'seeing' is weak, for example, it's only thinking about the moment of seeing. There are many conditions involved (as I think I suggested before) - not just 'sluggish' eye-sense, but one may have a cold, be wearing glasses or sun-glasses, kamma and so on. The seeing is just as it is, depending on the complex conditions. There's an idea, thinking about it afterwards, but (she asked): "What about the moment of understanding it just as it is?". Metta, Sarah ======= #67946 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 10:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Energy: The Root Hero! sarahprocter... Dear Ven Samahita & all, Thank you for your quotes on viriya which are very relevant to our recent discussions on viriya and courage and 'Hero' in the 'Sisters' corner. --- Bhikkhu Samahita wrote: > Energy is The Chief Hero: Root of all Success! > > Your majesty, like a man might reinforce a house that was falling > down with an extra piece of wood, & being thus strengthened that > house would not collapse. Even so, your majesty, has energy (viriya) > the characteristic of reinforcing support & consolidating strength. > By energy are no advantageous states lost. The Questions of King > Milinda: > Milindapanha 36 http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebsut045.htm .... S: We also read this in the Atthasalini (Expositor, Moral consciousness in the Worlds of Sense, under 'viriya): "Its (viriya) characteristic is strengthening, and grasp, or support. As an old house stands when strengthened by new pillars, so the aspirant, when strengthened by energy, does not fall off, or deteriorate as to moral states. Thus should the characteristic of strengthening be understood. Hence it was said by Nagasena: [as you've quoted].... ....And as a small army going to battle might be repulsed; then they would tell the king; the kind would send as strong reinforcement; the king's army, being thus supported, would defeat the hostile enemy: - thus energy does not allow asociated states to recede, to retreat; it uplifts, supports them. Hence has it been said that energy has the characteristic of supporting (paggaha-lakkha.na.m viriyan ti)." ***** Metta, Sarah p.s Also in the Atth: 'Viira-bhaavo viriya.m' which PTS translates as 'Viriya is the state of an energetic man' - you give the Vism translation on this here: > Energy is the prime state of a chief hero, a champion, a conqueror! > Its characteristic is enthusiastic and forceful thrust of exertion. > Its function is the supporting foundation of associated states. > Its manifestation is a state of non-collapse of whatever is good. > The proximate cause of energy is what stirs up & activates effort. > Alternatively: Any source that stimulates and instigates energy. > It is said by the Blessed One that one who is stirred and aroused > by energy exerts and struggles properly. That leads to all success! > Rightly instigated it should be seen as the root of all attainments! > Visuddhimagga XVI 137 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=771100 <....> #67947 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 10:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing egberdina Hi Larry, On 04/02/07, LBIDD@... wrote: > Hi Herman, > > H: "if there is desire for an answer, that's the object of > consciousness." > > L: I think you are saying there is no contentless consciousness. No > "pure" consciousness. If so, my reply is that there is a difference of > opinion on that among the mahayana commentators. Some might liken it > (pure consciousness) to mindfulness. > > Be that as it may, I was using "object of consciousness" in a more > technical, analytical sense which evidently isn't your cup of tea. > That's fine, but you miss out on an interesting insight. The insight is > that there really isn't anything to be upset about. You can actually see > that directly in a way that 'hits home'. > Would you say that the insights obtained in one mode of consciousness (say analysing dhammas) apply to other modes (say talking to your mum on the phone)? Kind Regards Herman #67948 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 10:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] elements of experience sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- Herman Hofman wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > > I think it's good to question and question as you do, Herman, rather > than > > to blindly just accept whatever one has heard. However, if I may use > the > > reading analogy again, if the child continuously questions the value > of > > the entire exercise during the reading session, he may never get to > learn > > to read the passages. > > What you are saying is no doubt true. .... S: Good! So let's get on with the reading sessions!! .... > But if the exercise is nibbana, a child that refuses to feed the > papanca beast with all manner of views deserves full marks, no? .... S: I thought you were the one who wasn't interested in the subject of nibbana? If so, let's drop it because it's an unnecessary distraction to the task in hand. (I notice you're the one who keeps raising it:-)). Let's say the child continually asks you why he needs to learn to read and you keep telling him that he'll need to get on at school, learn the joys or reading like his older brothers, develop skills, get a job and so on. He says he's not interested in these goals- he just wants to climb trees and play with his cars. Ok - just get on with the reading and leave aside the idle, delaying tactic questions. The child who still refuses to work on his ABC deserves no marks in my book, though you might say he's a great philosopher and Joop might say he has great anarchistic accumulations:-)) Metta, Sarah ======== #67949 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 10:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 'We are here to learn the dhamma' sarahprocter... Good Afternoon Colette, I'm glad to see you're following many of the threads with others. Let me look for the Dhamma in your message to me: --- colette wrote: > Good Morning Sarah, > > Allow me to add a few thoughts here: > > > Sarah: I wouldn't quite put it that 'the event of the burning of > the curry > > becomes the object .....'on and on'. <...> > Enlightenment may not simply come by viewing the act of perfoming the > ceremonial of "burning the curry". The aroma may be the focus here, > no? ... S: I think that as soon as we look for a focus or ceremony, we're going off-track again. We're thinking of a ritual as a way to become enlightened, rather than just going about our daily business, being aware of dhammas which are arising without any special focus on them. .... <...> > Maybe there is no object, application of sunyata. ... S: There is always an object of citta (consciousness). Sunyata or anatta is the nature of all currently arising dhammas - no need to apply, otherwise we're back stuck with Self. It's a question of understanding rather than applying or focussing, wouldn't you agree? ... <...> I > refer to another piece I was reading last night the awakened me to > the fact that although "man" does not have a "soul" maybe the "soul" > has the "man", YES, now I remember, it was a definition > of "CONSCIOUSNESS ONLY". .... S: There's no soul to have man or man to have soul. These are illusions. Also, you'd have to say in a few simple words what you mean by 'consciousness only' as it makes no sense to me. Metta and best wishes, Sarah ======= #67950 From: "kanchaa" Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 10:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Are all the bad things that happen to us results of our deeds?(wasR... kanchuu2003 Yes, I beleive so.. Nitesh #67951 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 4, 2007 11:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: B.Bodhi article (was: Arahants and compassion) sarahprocter... Dear Joop, --- Joop wrote: > There is one topic, that even BB did not raise: > How did the Buddha in his former lifes as a bodhisatta prevent the > distruction of his fetters and get sotapanna … arahants? Because in > that case after a to quick arahantship he was not reborn any more and > could not be born as Gotama, the Buddha-to-be. (Jan Nattier is > calling this a skilful means). ... S: Nina already answered. Conditions - the nature of being a bodhisatta. No self to do or prevent anything. The greater the final attainement, the longer the incalculable time needed for englightenment to occur - only when all the samasambuddha perfections attained. The Great Disciples like Sariputta also needed an extremely long time for their enlightenment to be 'ripe' in their final lives on account of their great wisdom to be developed. Think of the preparations and ingredients needed for a great banquest as compared to the preparations needed for preparing a simple bowl of broth. ........ > More general: can aryans (streamenterer, once-returner, no-returner, > arahant) postpone Nibbana, so that they have more possibilities to > teach the Dhamma to other beings? .... S: No one can do anything. It depends on conditions when enlightenment will occur. A streamenterer won't have any wish or idea about postponing the path. Insight has been developed to such a degree that samsara is realised not to be appealing for any reason. Conditioned dhammas are fully known as being anatta and impermanent and unsatisfactory. .... > > You are right that only very few Buddhas are needed in the future. > But the discussion is not about quantity or time but about principles. > And the question then is: do you agree with BB's conclusion (I do): > " When we adopt this approach, we can truly venerate those > practitioners who work diligently to realize the final goal of the > Dhamma here and now, to reach nibbana, the extinction of suffering, > by following the noble eightfold path to its very end. .... S: OK ... >We can > venerate those who glorify the teaching by showing that it truly > leads to ultimate liberation, to the plunge into the unborn and > unconditioned state, the deathless element, which the Buddha so often > extolled, calling it the wonderful and marvelous, the peaceful > purity, the unsurpassed liberation. ... S: OK - I wouldn't refer to the 'plunge into the unborn and unconditioned state', but the experience of such leading to the end of samsara. ... >Again, by taking this approach, > we can also venerate those compassionate ones who vow to follow the > route of the bodhisattva, and who make this vow as an act of > supererogation, not because it is a necessary condition for their own > true deliverance. .... S: I think it could be called 'wishful thinking'. But each person has to know for him/herself what the cittas involved are. Veneration of modern-day woould-be bodhisattvas is not what comes to my mind. .... >We can revere and cherish their loving-kindness, > their great compassion, their lofty aspirations, and their self- > sacrificial service to the world. True Buddhism needs all three: > Buddhas, arahants, and bodhisattvas. It needs Buddhas to discover and > teach the path to liberation; it needs arahants to follow the path > and confirm that the Dharma does indeed lead to liberation, adorning > the teaching with examples of those who lead the purest holy life; it > needs bodhisattvas to bring forth the resolve to perfect those > qualities that will enable them at some point in the future, near or > distant, to become Buddhas themselves and once again turn the > unsurpassed Wheel of the Dharma." .... S: To me, this is all rather 'over the top', but I appreciate that B.Bodhi genuinely thinks this way and try and find a 'happy balance' between various Buddhist traditions. For my own way of thinking with confidence in the Pali teachings, I see no reason to part from the Theravada texts and line. ... > About the getting lenient in the last two decades I quote my 65474 > The passage that has been cited so often runs as follows: "Come, > Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing, > nor upon tradition, nor upon rumor, nor upon scripture, nor upon > surmise, nor upon axiom, nor upon specious reasoning, nor upon bias > toward a notion pondered over, nor upon another's seeming ability, > nor upon the consideration 'The monk is our teacher.' When you > yourselves know: 'These things are bad, blamable, censured by the > wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' > abandon them... When you yourselves know: 'These things are good, > blameless, praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things > lead to benefit and happiness,' enter on and abide in them." > In his 1988 essay BB's interpretation of the Kalama Sutta was: > "The Buddha begins by assuring the Kalamas that under such > circumstances it is proper for them to doubt, an assurance which > encourages free inquiry. .... S: I'm not sure this was quite correct. I think it would be more appropriate to say: 'it is natural for them to doubt, but doubt never leads to wisdom or confidence.' ... >He next speaks the passage quoted above, > advising the Kalamas to abandon those things they know for themselves > to be bad and to undertake those things they know for themselves to > be good. This advice can be dangerous if …" > In the 2006 essay BB says: "Once one gains confidence in the Buddha > by examining those aspects of his teaching that come into range of > one's immediate experience, one can then place trust in him as one > who speaks truthfully about things that lie beyond range of one's > immediate experience. And on the basis of this trust one can devote > oneself wholeheartedly to the practice of his teaching." .... S: I like this much more. This is the message I was trying to convey to Herman (?) recently. Doubting about dhammas arising and falling away now, dhammas to be known now - is an impediment. Developing confidence in the teachings leads to more wisdom. If this is what you call a growth in 'leniency', I'm all for it! .... > In 1988 BB says: don't think the Kalama Sutta gives you permission to > go outside the orthodoxy. > In 2006 BB stresses trust. .... S: I'm not sure from your example, but there are other examples of more recently not agreeing with ancient commentary notes on suttas which he'd previously agreed with as a result of what you'd call a less 'orthodox' view. The Luminous sutta would be one example, but I don't really have any interest in getting into 1988BB and 2006BB. Metta, Sarah ======== #67952 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 12:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meditation (was shoulder biceps surgery0 sarahprocter... Hi Connie, --- connie wrote: > hi sarah, > < ... > > sarah: So far in the accounts of our Therii (Sisters), all of whom have > become arahants, to date I see no evidence of those so far discussed > having attained prior mundane jhanas. Do you? > > For example, in Sisters (5) we read about Tissaa. In the R-D transl: > "Leaning on his words, she strove for insight and when she had reached > Arahantship, she declaimed her verse in exultation...." In the Pruitt > transl: "She zealously practised insight meditation [S: I assume this > refers to vipassana bhavana*], attained Arahatship, and spoke the > verse...." .... Connie to the rescue: > VRI / text: Saa pana obhaasagaathaaya vinaa pageva satthu santike > laddha.m ovaada.m nissaaya vipassana.m ussukkaapetvaa arahatta.m <...> > Pruitt: She, on the contrary, was without a verse of radiance, > depending > all the more on instruction obtained from the Teacher. She zealously > practised insight meditation, attained Arahatship, <....> ... S: No hint of jhana at all. Similarly with many/most the others as I read them.... Metta, Sarah ====== #67953 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 12:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: right effort, mundane and supramundane sarahprocter... Dear Nina & Robert, Rob, thx for raising this point for consideration again. --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Robert, > I read this in the Perfections: <...> >The kusala dhamma which has not yet arisen refers to samatha > and vipassanå and to the path, magga, the fruition, phala, and > nibbåna 5 . As to the words samatha and vipassanå in this context, > these refer to satipaììhåna. > ... S: Here I take it that satipatthana and vipassana (the mundane path) are being referred to as well as lokuttara cittas. It's also good to remember that in context, samatha and vipassana here refer to satipatthana only. This is what I wrote and quoted before (10th July 06): >S: ... I think it helps to consider these 4 right efforts as actually 4 functions of right effort. "...at the moment of the supramundane path this is one single kind of energy that gets four names by accomplishing four functions". (Dispeller, Classification of the Right Efforts, 1431). At lokuttara path moments, the 4 functions are fully developed, but even at moments of satipatthana, the 4 functions are beginning to be developed. By the way, the 'good states' ...., according to Dispeller (Sammohavinodani) above, refer to 'both tranquillity and insight and also the path' in the case of 'unarisen profitable/good states' (anuppannaa kusalaa dhammaa),and to tranquillity and insight only in the case of 'arisen profitable states' (uppannaa kusalaa dhammaa). Again, at 1443 in the Dispeller, it repeats that 'at the moment of the supramundane path it is one single energy that accomplishes both the function of causing the non-arising of those which are unarisen and might arise thus, and also the function of abandoning those which are arisen' with reference to the unwholesome states. I think we tend to think about situations of mental states rather than appreciating the functions of right effort at this very moment if it arises (which of course it has to do, if right understanding arises).< ..... > footnote[5]: > See the Commentary to the “Book of Analysis”, the “Dispeller of > Delusion” II, Ch 8, 292. > It is on page 4 and further, see also p. 14, 15. According to the > Abhidhamma and the Questionnaire, the four right efforts have to be > seen as supramundane only. According to the Suttanta: mixed mundane > and supramundane. .... S: Curious. Isn't this because in this Abhidhamma section only the sotapatti magga and other lokuttara dhammas are being analysed? As it says, only the surpramundane states are being expounded. I don't see any conflict. Metta, Sarah .... > Op 2-feb-2007, om 15:46 heeft rjkjp1 het volgende geschreven: > > > The fourth right effort, according to the Commentary, pertains to > > the > > > lokuttara citta and nibbaana. Who can make lokuttara citta arise at > > > will? > > > Nina. > > ______ > > Dear Nina > > do you have the details about what he commenatry says? #67954 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 12:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation sarahprocter... Hi Phil, (Pali fans*), We were discussing right path and wrong path in Anguttara Nikaya as you're currently studying these suttas: > >S: How does Phil '07 read the many Anguttara suttas which stress the > > importance of right view as leader and the danger of following the > wrong > > path?: [S: see end of message in p.s.] .... > Ph: I looked in my AN anthology, the one B.Bodhi did updating some > of N. Thera's translations. The one you've quoted is not in there. <...> >I looked in the table of contents, and unless I was > too hasty (please correct me if I was) the only definitions of wrong > view I found in suttas in my anthology were of the not-believing- > there-are-results-of-deeds variety, the variety that few if any of > us here are likely to hold. .... S: See 35: Three Sectarian Tenets, chapter of the 3s, p61 The 3rd wrong view which doesn't accept causes and conditions is interesting. Oh, this isn't us following this wrong view, wrong path, we might say. BB's footnote from the commentary: "AA: "having shown that these three views, as leading to inaction (in the moral sense) are empty, insubstantiated and not conducive to liberation, the Blessed One now begins to expound his own teaching, which is well substantiated and leads to liberation. As there is no end of what unintelligent people may say without proper understanding, the intelligent ones only are specified here." " ..... S: !! In this section, the Buddha teaches about the elements, ayatanas and so on. See the footnote BB gives quoting from the commentary under elements. Lots of Abhidhamma detail on the elements. Then " AA:"....Thus there are only these two things: name and form (naamaruupa). Beyond that, there is neither a substantial being (satta) nor a soul (jiiva). In this way one should understand in brief the meditation subject of the six elements that leads upt to arahatship."... " In other words, (as discussed in the thread on 'resolving of the compact (ghanavinibbhoga)' 'by resolution into the various elements, the characteristic of no-self appears'. On the otherhand, while we still take postures and bodies to be following us around all day, we keep following a wrong path by not understanding conditioned elements for what they are. ... >P: As for the deeper kind of right view, > there is a sutta in the Book of Ones that says that it is impossible > for a person of right view to believe that the impermanent is > permanent, that any formation brings happiness, that there the not- > self is self. This sounds like wisdom that sees through the > vipalassas to perfection. The note by B. Bodhi confirms this - this > person of right view is a sotapanna. .... S: Certainly the sotapanna has eradicated the vipallasas with wrong view (inc taking not self for self and permanent for impermanent). But when will this right view begin to develop in order to reach such a degree if not now? It has to be the right track from the start, otherwise it's more of the wrong track as I see it. No one is suggesting for a minute that one has to be a sotapanna to start on the path or begin to develop any understanding! Metta, Sarah p.s Btw, if you want to read more of the AN suttas about right path and wrong path, you can scroll through the suttas at these links: http://mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara-Nikaya/Anguttara6/10-dasak\ anipata/011-samanasannavaggo-e.htm http://mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara-Nikaya/Anguttara6/10-dasak\ anipata/012-paccorohanivaggo-e.htm .... Also, I've included the Pali for the first para I quoted below at the end for those interested*: AN, Bk of 10s, 104 'The Seed' (PTS transl): " 'Monks, for a man, a person, who has wrong view, wrong thinking, speech, action, living, effort, mindfulness, concentration, wrong knowledge and wrong release, whatsoever bodily action is carried to completion and fulfilment according to that view, whatsoever action of spech, of mind, whatsoever intention, aspiration, resolve, whatsoever activities of mind (directed thereto) there may be - all those states conduce to what is unpleasant, not delightful, not charming, not profitable, to what is painful. What is the cause of that? Monks, the view is bad. ... Micchaadi.t.thikassa bhikkhave purisa puggalassa micchaa sa.mkappassa micchaa vaacassa micchaa kammantassa micchaa aajiivassa micchaa vaayaamassa micchaa satissa micchaa samaadhissa micchaa ~naa.nissa micchaa vimuttissa ya~nceva kaayakamma.m yathaadi.t.thi samatta.m samaadinna.m, ya~nca vaciikamma.m yathaadi.t.thi samatta.m samaadinna.m ya~nca manokamma.m yathaadi.t.thi samatta.m samaadinna.m, yaa ca cetanaa yaa ca patthanaa, yo ca pa.nidhi, ye ca sa'nkhaaraa, sabbe te dhammaa, ani.t.thaaya akantaaya amanaapaaya ahitaaya dukkhaaya sa.mvattanti. Ta.m kissa hetu: di.t.thi hi bhikkhave paapikaa. =================== #67955 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 1:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Gratitude sarahprocter... Dear Joel(?), --- joelaltman26 wrote: > dear friends in dhamma: > > this is a message of gratitude, of love, of thanksgiving... > for the pure dhamma that flows endlessly, selflessly, peacefully. .... S: I'd just like to rejoice in your gratitude and to also express my appreciation to everyone who shares the Dhamma here as well. I hope we hear more from you, friend. From Antony's letter before: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/65952 A: Here is the verse from the Maha Mangala Sutta, translated by Dr R.L.Soni: Gaaravo ca nivaato ca santu.t.thii ca kata~n~nutaa / kaalena dhammasavana.m etam ma"ngalam-uttama.m / Gaaravo (reverence) ca (and) nivaato (humility) ca (and) santu.t.thii (contentment) ca kata~n~nutaa (and gratitude) kaalena (timely) dhammasavana.m (hearing Dhamma) etam ma"ngalam-uttama.m (this, the Highest Blessing). Right reverence and humility Contentment and a grateful bearing, Hearing Dhamma when it's timely: This, the Highest Blessing. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soni/wheel254.html "Two sorts of people are hard to find in the world: one who first does (something kind or helpful), and one who is grateful and recognizes (that kindness)." Metta, Sarah ========= #67956 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 1:26 am Subject: [dsg] Re: B.Bodhi article (was: Arahants and compassion) jwromeijn Hallo Sarah Thanks for you responses. The art now is to continue without repetition of arguments or statements (except one: compassion) Some of your remarks are to beautiful to discuss and to beautiful to be silent about. Like : "S: No one can do anything" And some days ago: "So the aim is to learn to really live alone, quietly and peacefully with present dhammas, no matter how we spend our day, no matter with whom we mix." I really respect this view of you, it makes me think on some of the "Ideas" of Blaise Pascal Special for you and for who studied philosophy some quotes of him below. It's not that I in stead of Arahant, Buddha or Bodhisatta now have Bhikkhu Bodhi, getting more and more lenient when getter older, as an ideal. It is good to discuss his texts because his style is clear. S: Veneration of modern-day woould-be bodhisattvas is not what comes to my mind. J: Sometimes you are rather direct and sometimes a little vague. Who does venerate? I think I don't. I follow my "spiritual intuition" that till now never betrayed me. And that intuition is telling me now: Joop, pay attention to compassion. I do and doing it I try to give 'compassion' the place it deserves in Theravada, trying to solve some doctrinair problems. And trying at the same moment to solve the autistic tendency accumulated in myself, a tendency I see for that reason in the arahant-ideal. S: … I think it would be more appropriate to say: 'it is natural for them to doubt, but doubt never leads to wisdom or confidence.' J: Without doubt I still have been a Christian believing what the pastors told me, and other fairy tales. "Doubt" is a phase in the process of 'letting go'. As quoted again this week "be an island" ! In a way you are right: an island doesn't doubt, an island just is (nobody). And this all my faith in the Buddha is only growing! BTW In #67951 (to Herman, but no idea where the thread is about) my eyes were caught by: S: " The child who still refuses to work on his ABC deserves no marks in my book, though you might say he's a great philosopher and Joop might say he has great anarchistic accumulations:-)) My english is not so good but the "he" must be some (virtuel?) child and not "Joop" But even then I doubt that you are right. The question is: can anarchistic reactions accumulate? I think not: the effect is not one big anarchistic tendency with a specified direction; contrary: the effect will be zero, the reactions will neutralize each other. End result: absolute emptiness. Is'nt that beautiful? Metta Joop "All the unhappiness of men comes from one thing: not knowing how to stay quiet in a room" "I do not know who put me in the world, nor what the world is, nor what I am myself. In am in a terrible ignorance about everything. I do not know what my body is, or my senses, or my soul, or even that part of me which thinks what I am saying, which reflects on itself and everything but knows itself no better than anything else. I see the terrifying spaces of the universe enclosing me, and find myself attached to one corner of this expanse without knowing why I have been placed here rather than there, or why the life alloted me should be assigned to this moment rather than to another in all the eternity that preceded and will follow me. I see only infinity on every side, enclosing me like an atom or a shadow that vanishes in an instant." Blaise Pascal #67957 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 1:30 am Subject: Re: Mind and Control christine_fo... Hello Phil, Sarah, Nina, all, Thanks for your comprehensive replies which were very helpful. I've lost a little of my grasp of Pali and Abhidhamma terms in the last year so, I may get back to you if there are any further questions. Phil, Please be at ease, no apology necessary - I've made my fair share of comments on dsg and elsewhere that I later thought would have been better left unsaid. And truthfully, yours didn't cause a ruffle. :-) metta Chris #67958 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 1:03 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Energy: The Root Hero! bhikkhu5 Thanx2U2 Sarah! Viriya does the Job! That is the hero… Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Ceylon * <....> #67959 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 1:45 am Subject: Listening and the three rounds. nilovg Hi Howard, ------------- Howard: Are you talking about the ordinary daily experiencing all folks have, or are you talking about intentionally attending to the nature of whatever arises "in the moment". If you mean the latter, that is what I call the practice of "ongoing mindfulness", a practice that becomes improved the more one engages in it especially with a mind that has been made calm and clear by sila and samadhi. ------------------------------------------- N: We read in the Cankisutta: ‘When associating he lends ear to listen to the Teaching and to bear it in his mind. When the Teaching is borne in the mind it is examined.’ Bearing in mind what one hears: firm remembrance of the Dhamma is a proximate cause for mindfulness of realities. What one hears is examined: and that is by studying with mindfulness of whatever appears. In the beginning it is mindfulness and understanding of the level of listening, but this is a condition for right mindfulness and direct understanding that can arise later on. You use the expression ‘ intentionally attending to the nature of whatever arises "in the moment" ’, but this does not do justice to the anattaness of mindfulness. Moreover, intention is not a factor of the eightfold Path. You speak of ‘ ongoing mindfulness’, but this expression could cause confusion, since it suggests that there should be mindfulness that continues on. The aim is: more understanding of realities, not: ongoing mindfulness. First there is understanding of the level of listening and then there are conditions for it to develop so as to become direct understanding. Ongoing mindfulness, this is not the way it works. We should know the difference between the moments without sati and the moment sati arises. We know that in a day we touch many things and hardness is experienced through the bodysense. No awareness. But there can be understanding that no table, no chair, no finger is experienced through touch. Only the ruupa that is hardness appears, no thinking about it, and mindfulness just for a very short moment. I heard this just now: N: When we listen to > > explanations about seeing, the experience of what is visible, should > there not be consideration of seeing right then, since our eyes are > open and there is seeing? ------------------------------------------- Howard: Actually, no. When we listen to explanations, we should be paying attention to those explanations. .... I think you are wrong in this, Nina. When listening, just listen (with keen attention). -------------------------------------------- N: There are many different cittas also when listening or driving the car. You have your attention on the road, but in between, can you not think of other things? When Khemaka preached to the monks he himself and the listeners became arahats. People who listened to the Buddha could develop understanding of seeing, visible object, hearing, sound etc. and thus they could attain enlightenment while listening. I think it is good to listen and also develop understanding of realities during such moments. When we speak to someone else, we think of what we have to say, but also there is hardness appearing when moving our mouth or jaws. Many relaities, and when there are the right conditions sati can arise. Also when yawning, it is all very natural. ----------- > > H: The Buddha taught many cultivational activities for overcoming > ignorance. What is being suggested by Khun Sujin other than listening > &thinking > over? > ------------ > N: To overcome ignorance understanding is to be cultivated, and this > is always, always at the present moment. > ----------------------------------------- Howard: How is it to be cultivated? Are you suggesting anything other than listening and considering? ---------------------------------------- N: It begins in this way. ----------- At the same time we have to > > keep in mind that the Buddha taught us so that we shall have less > clinging. Remember the sutta (an auspicious night) where we are > taught not to cling to past experiences, nor to the future which has > not come yet, but to attend to the present moment. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: That amounts to not getting lost in thought, but staying present. That is a fundamental element of meditating. .... Yes, practice is urgent. What do you practice? ------------------------------------------- N: I consider the three rounds of understanding the four noble Truths, and the first round is already difficult enough for me. Understanding of what is to be known, and always in connection with the present moment. From this morning, I was searching for things, getting things, this is the second noble Truth. When there is understanding of how to develop right understanding it can accumulate little by little. We should not overlook accumulation of right mindfulness and right understanding. One moment of mindfulness of what appears now seems very insignificant, and it falls away. But, it is accumulated so that it can arise again. Desire for ongoing mindfulness hinders, it is not to be expected. Thus, what you call the practice, pa.tipatti, can develop if the first round is realised, but, one should not abandon the first round when the second round begins: kicca ~naa.na. Pa.tipatti, practice, is a mental activity that arises because of the proper conditions. It is not’doing something special’, ‘going to a quiet room’ in order to meditate. Pa.tipatti means: reaching the specific characteristics, realizing the characteristics of nama or rupa that appears now. It is totally anattaa. It grows naturally out of the right listening, considering and investigating nama and rupa appearing now. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Are you recommending ongoing mindfulness here, Nina? Or are you using words without referring to anything any different than everyone always does? This is very important, it seems to me. --------------------------------------------- N: See above. Can you clarify what you mean by everyone and always? I feel that we should continue with this point. --------- H quotes N: But now, we have to continue testing the meaning of > the four noble Truths in our lives right now. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, indeed! We agree on this. ------- N: Not sure, it depends in what way we test the meaning of the four noble Truths. Nina. #67960 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 2:13 am Subject: Thinking about Dhamma ( was Re: An Interesting Meditation philofillet Hi Sarah > We were discussing right path and wrong path in Anguttara Nikaya as you're > currently studying these suttas: Ph: Thank you for holding off on your reply. Being a good and thoughtful friend, you probably sensed I was on the verge of getting caught up in too many discussions, leading to frustration again. >> > Ph: I looked in my AN anthology, the one B.Bodhi did updating some > > of N. Thera's translations. The one you've quoted is not in there. > <...> > >I looked in the table of contents, and unless I was > > too hasty (please correct me if I was) the only definitions of wrong > > view I found in suttas in my anthology were of the not-believing- > > there-are-results-of-deeds variety, the variety that few if any of > > us here are likely to hold. Ph: Of course I meant index here, not table of contents. And in the listening I am doing, when the Burmese Sayadaws mention wrong view, it is always this not-believing-in-kamma kind. This seems enough for me, for now. > .... > S: See 35: Three Sectarian Tenets, chapter of the 3s, p61 > The 3rd wrong view which doesn't accept causes and conditions is > interesting. Oh, this isn't us following this wrong view, wrong path, we > might say. > > BB's footnote from the commentary: > > "AA: "having shown that these three views, as leading to inaction (in the > moral sense) are empty, insubstantiated and not conducive to liberation, > the Blessed One now begins to expound his own teaching, which is well > substantiated and leads to liberation. As there is no end of what > unintelligent people may say without proper understanding, the intelligent > ones only are specified here." " > ..... > S: !! In this section, the Buddha teaches about the elements, ayatanas and > so on. Ph: This is too complicated for me right now. (i.e i am not unwilling to try to figure it out 'lest it ruin my comfort zone! :) > > See the footnote BB gives quoting from the commentary under elements. Lots > of Abhidhamma detail on the elements. Then > > " AA:"....Thus there are only these two things: name and form > (naamaruupa). Beyond that, there is neither a substantial being (satta) > nor a soul (jiiva). In this way one should understand in brief the > meditation subject of the six elements that leads upt to arahatship."... " > > In other words, (as discussed in the thread on 'resolving of the compact > (ghanavinibbhoga)' 'by resolution into the various elements, the > characteristic of no-self appears'. On the otherhand, while we still take > postures and bodies to be following us around all day, we keep following a > wrong path by not understanding conditioned elements for what they are. > ... > >P: As for the deeper kind of right view, > > there is a sutta in the Book of Ones that says that it is impossible > > for a person of right view to believe that the impermanent is > > permanent, that any formation brings happiness, that there the not- > > self is self. This sounds like wisdom that sees through the > > vipalassas to perfection. The note by B. Bodhi confirms this - this > > person of right view is a sotapanna. > .... > S: Certainly the sotapanna has eradicated the vipallasas with wrong view > (inc taking not self for self and permanent for impermanent). But when > will this right view begin to develop in order to reach such a degree if > not now? It has to be the right track from the start, otherwise it's more > of the wrong track as I see it. No one is suggesting for a minute that one > has to be a sotapanna to start on the path or begin to develop any > understanding! Ph: OK, but if one if tied up in knots about whether self is involved in this or that, one won't get anywhere, I feel. Especially if one if a morally degraded (relatively speaking) like myself. I like listening to the Burmese Sayadaws because there is a straightforward approach to avoiding evil and doing good without too many subtleties. Sometimes I feel I am listening to a sports training coach, when I listen to Sayadaw U Pandita's talks! I wouldn't be surprised if this leads to an eventual dissatisfcation and development into something subtler. But for now everything is quite straight forward. I think for people who are born with more wholesome tendencies (I forget what it's called in the commentaries, but for example strong on wisdom, weak on greed, weak on hatred, and all those permutations) there is room to stay open patiently to subtler approaches to Dhamma. I think Acharn Sujin's longtime students might be in there. Probably more wrong view, but so be it. I don't care. I have my hands full with more immediate concerns. Thanks again, Sarah. Metta, Phil #67961 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 2:25 am Subject: the perfections, Boodhisatta nilovg Dear Joop, your questions are interesting. I found a Wheel, no 305-307, by Ria Kloppenborg, a Dutch woman, "The Paccekabuddha'. She refers to many texts also to the Tipitaka. It is actually a study apart: the degrees of wisdom of the disciple, the Paccekabuddha and the Sammaasambuddha. There certainly is a rank here. ------- J: If I understand you well, then the answer to my question can better be given on the mythological than on the factual level. (By 'factual level' I mean: when exact had the Bodhisatta- the Buddha of the future - in his aeons during 'career' destructed the ten fetters?) ---------- N: He destructed defilements when he became the Sammaasambuddha, not before. ----------- J: You said: "When we develop the perfections we develop them as those of a disciple, not in the same way as a future Buddha." J: Why not? The ideal of a Buddha does attract me - in all modesty - more than the ideal of a disciple, I think that is the same as 'the ideal of the arahant'. Especially because the ideal of the Buddha, and before that stage the ideal of the Bodhisatta, is formulated more positive, more other- directed. That the Bodhisatta needed much more time than his disciples is no problem: time is a concept, is not a paramattha dhamma. --------- N: The amount of time indicates the extent of the development. We have to accept that there are differences in rank, differences also in capabilities. We cannot imagine what kappa or aeon means, but they show the differences in the extent to which pa~n~naa and all virtues are developed in the case of a Buddha, a Silent Buddha and a disciple. SeePuggallapa~n`natti, Human Types, one of the Abh. Book: by Nine: First is mentioned the Buddha, then the Silent Buddha, the person emancipated in both ways, the one emancipated by insight etc. M, sutta 142, offering to the Tathaagata, to a silent Buddha, to a disciple, etc. These offerings yield fruit accordingly. I take a quote from Kloppenborg, from the Co, to the Kindred Sayings: You asked about my sources: for the details of the perfections the Cariyapitaka and Co, but in the Tipitaka we find the differences in pa~n~naa (which is one of the perfections) in the case of the Buddha who is incomparable and the chief, his great disciples, and then his followers in general. ----------- J: The formula for the arahant … Now all these epithets are true for the Buddha as well, but the Buddha is not described in this way; for these terms emphasize the attainment of one's own liberation, and the Buddha is extolled, not primarily as the one who has attained his own liberation, but as the one who opens the doors of liberation for others. That is, even in the archaic suttas of the Nikayas, an "other- regarding" significance is already being subtly ascribed to the Buddha's status that is not ascribed to the arahant -------- N: Also arahats and the other ariyans have great mettaa and compassion due to their understanding that has been developed. They will also help others on the right Path but they do not have the same capacity as the Buddha. It is entirely due to conditions. One cannot become a Buddha by mere wishing. And does one relaize what one is wishing for? All the hardships one has to go through? I quote from the Perfections: < We read in the Commentary to the “Basket of Conduct” that the Bodhisatta needed to have a strong wish, a strong yearning, to become the Sammåsambuddha. We read in the “Miscellaneous Sayings”: “Strong desire (chandatå): wholesome desire, the wish for accomplishment. One possessed of the aforesaid qualities must have strong desire, yearning, and longing to practise the qualities issuing in Buddhahood. Only then does his aspiration succeed, not otherwise. The following similes illustrate the magnitude of the desire required. If he were to hear: ‘He alone can attain Buddhahood who can cross a whole world-system filled with water and reach the further shore by the bare strength of his arms’ -- he would not deem that difficult to do, but would be filled with desire for the task and would not shrink away. If he were to hear: ‘He alone can attain Buddhahood who can tread across a whole world-system filled with flameless, smokeless redhot coals, cross out, and reach the other side,’ he would not deem that difficult to do...” He does not become disheartened, he does not show the slightest dislike when he hears, “He alone can attain Buddhahood who can cross a whole world-system filled with water and reach the further shore by the bare strength of his arms”. He is filled with joy and has endeavour to attain Buddhahood.> Nina. #67962 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 2:26 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (11) philofillet Hi Nina I would like to write quite a lot about it. It is fascinating the way the 4 reflections (I will get sick, grow old, die, and so with all those who love) which are on their own a bit overwhelming and would lead to panic, depression, a sense of doom, or perhaps all kinds of strategies to feel better if they weren't followed by that 5th reflection, the reflection that one is the owner of one's kamma, which is where the hope and the wholesome samvega come in. And then there is the reflection that not only I but all other people are subject to the same. This almost invariably conditions metta (or what I happily take to be metta) as I head out into the world and see people. And then there is the wonderful little verse that is added on to the end of it, that if I, who am subject to old age, sickness, death etc were to be disgusted by other people who are subject to the same thing, it would be unwise. I have done something that I think is quite clever and added a reflection on the "burning" sutta to it to make for a wonderfully stirring morning contemplation! Not only are we all subject to sickness, old age, death and loss of loved ones, but we are all burning with the fires of greed, ignorance and hatred as well. It would be unwise to have aversion toward people who are burning with the same fires that I am. This reminds me that hatred, greed and ignorance are not about that person doing something anger-making to this person (me) but are a universal phenomenon. This takes the gas out of all the stories and conditions a lot of metta. The Burmese Sayadaws say we should reflect on this sutta three times daily. I do every morning, after my meditation, and before bedtime, and find it very wonderfully helpful. I would like to write about it in a more cohernet, thoughtful way someday. I guess I should link to it, though I prefer the BB/NT translations. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.057.than.html Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Phil, > It is an impressive sutta. I like to hear it often. Can you give your > reflections on it? > Nina. > Op 4-feb-2007, om 11:36 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > > > think of the daily recollections on old age, sickness and death, > > and loss of loved ones the Buddha says all people, of all stripes, > > should "often" do. I do it every morning. Reflect on it to various > > depths. #67963 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 2:29 am Subject: Re: Mind and Control philofillet Hi Chris > Phil, Please be at ease, no apology necessary - I've made my fair share > of comments on dsg and elsewhere that I later thought would have been > better left unsaid. And truthfully, yours didn't cause a ruffle. :-) Thanks, I didn't really think it did. Confidence in Dhamma really makes us pretty immune to people implying that we're not "getting it," doesn't it? Metta, Phil #67964 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 2:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Are all the bad things that happen to us results of our deeds?(wasR... philofillet Hi Nitesh and Howard, and all Thanks for your yes, Nitesh, and your no, Howard. Is the question I asked included in the imponderables? I know that the Buddha told us not to think too hard about figuring out kamma because it would drive us crazy. I don't want to figure out which result comes from which kamma, or anything like that. Just wanted to know if there was an explicit, official "right view/wrong view" teaching on this point. Personally, I find reflecting that any hardship I have is the result of kamma strangely comforting, and conditions abstention from making matters worse. Also with pleasant objects, which are also "village raiding bandits." Dry the kamma out here and now, kind of thing. Metta, Phil #67965 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 2:39 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (11) philofillet Hi Herman > Feel free to use me as as a paradigm of wrong view, Phil. And thanks > for asking. Rest assured that I am not at all offended by that. Thanks! If I get back into this topic, I might pull up some of your most not-toeing-the-lineish posts and say here, friends, is wrong view from a Buddhist perspective. Which doesn't mean wrong view from a philosophical perspective, obviously. I also hope that you see the light, of course! :) Metta, Phil #67966 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 2:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (11), a Sutta. nilovg Hi Phil, thank you for writing about it. I have another version, I got via Rob K's web: Abhidhamma Vipassana, links, and then: Tipitaka transl, Metta net: 7. Should be constantly reflected upon 006.07. Bhikkhus, these five things should be constantly reflected upon by a woman, man, a householder or one gone forth. What five? I have not gone beyond decay should be constantly reflected by a woman, man, a householder or one gone forth. I have not gone beyond ailing should be constantly reflected by a woman, man, a householder or one gone forth. I have not gone beyond death should be constantly reflected by a woman, man, a householder or one gone forth. All my near and dear ones change and disappear should be constantly reflected by a woman, man, a householder or one gone forth. I'm the owner of actions, the heritage of actions, action is my origin, action is my relation and refuge. Whatever action I do, good or evil, will be my inheritance, should be constantly reflected by a woman, man, a householder or one gone forth. Bhikkhus, for what reason should I have not gone beyond decay be constantly reflected by a woman, man, a householder or one gone forth? Bhikkhus, to sentient beings there is the youth, intoxicated by which they misbehave by body, words and mind. To one constantly reflecting, I have not gone beyond decay, the intoxication of youth when young, completely fades or dwindles. Bhikkhus, on account of this I have not gone beyond decay should be constantly reflected by a woman, man, a householder or one gone forth. Bhikkhus, for what reason should I have not gone beyond ailing be constantly reflected by a woman, man, a householder or one gone forth? Bhikkhus, to sentient beings there is the intoxication of health, intoxicated by which they misbehave by body, words and mind. To one constantly reflecting, I have not gone beyond ailing, the intoxication of health, completely fades or dwindles. Bhikkhus, on account of this I have not gone beyond ailing should be constantly reflected by a woman, man, a householder or one gone forth. Bhikkhus, for what reason should I have not gone beyond death be constantly reflected by a woman, man, a householder or one gone forth? Bhikkhus, to sentient beings there is the intoxication of life, intoxicated by which they misbehave by body, words and mind. To one constantly reflecting, I have not gone beyond death, the intoxication of life, fades completely or dwindles. Bhikkhus, on account of this I have not gone beyond death should be constantly reflected by a woman, man, a householder or one gone forth. Bhikkhus, for what reason should all my near and dear ones change and disappear be constantly reflected by a woman, man, a householder or one gone forth? Bhikkhus, to sentient beings there's interest and greed for near and dear ones, delighted by which they misbehave by body, words and mind. To one constantly reflecting, all my near and dear ones change and disappear that interest and greed, completely fades or dwindles. Bhikkhus, on account of this, all my near and dear ones change and disappear should be constantly reflected by a woman, man, a householder or one gone forth. Bhikkhus, for what reason should, I'm the owner of my actions, the heritage of my actions, action is my origin, action is my relation and refuge. Whatever action I do, good or evil, will be my inheritance, be constantly reflected by a woman, man, a householder or one gone forth? Bhikkhus, to sentient beings there is misbehaviour by body, words and mind. To one constantly reflecting, I'm the owner of my actions, the heritage of my actions, action is my origin, action is my relation and refuge. Whatever action I do, good or evil, will be my inheritance, the misbehaviour by body, words and mind completely fades or dwindles. Bhikkhus, on account of this, I'm the owner of my actions, the heritage of my actions, action is my origin, action is my relation and refuge. Whatever action I do, good or evil, will be my inheritance,should be constantly reflected by a woman, man, a householder or one gone forth. Bhikkhus, the noble disciple reflects, it is not only I, that have not gone beyond decay, yet all sentient beings that have come, gone, disappeared and are born have not gone beyond decay. To one constantly reflecting this, the path appears. Then he develops that path and makes much of it and all his bonds get dispelled and the latent tendencies get destroyed. Bhikkhus, the noble disciple reflects, it is not only I, that have not gone beyond ailing, yet all sentient beings that have come, gone, disappeared and are born, have not gone beyond ailing. To one constantly reflecting this, the path appears. Then he develops that path and makes much of it and all his bonds get dispelled and the latent tendencies get destroyed. Bhikkhus, the noble disciple reflects, it is not only I, that have not gone beyond death, yet all sentient beings that have come, gone, disappeared and are born have not gone beyond death. To one constantly reflecting this, the path appears. Then he develops that path and makes much of it and all his bonds get dispelled and the latent tendencies get destroyed. Bhikkhus, the noble disciple reflects, it is not only my near and dear ones that change and disappear, yet the near and dear ones of all sentient beings that have come, gone, disappeared and are born change and disappear. To one constantly reflecting this the path appears. Then he develops that path and makes much of it and all his bonds get dispelled and the latent tendencies get destroyed. Bhikkhus, the noble disciple reflects, it is not only I that have the ownership of actions, their heritage, origin, relationship and refuge, yet all sentient beings that have come, gone, disappeared and are born have the ownership of actions, their heritage, origin, relationship and refuge. To one constantly reflecting this the path appears. Then he develops that path and makes much of it and all his bonds get dispelled and the latent tendencies get destroyed. Ailing, decay and death, these unavoidable things the ordinary folk loathe. It is not suitable for me, who abide without passion to loathe these. I'm enlightened about these intoxicants of health, youthfulness and life And see appeasement in giving up these. Now I cannot enjoy sensual pleasures I will go non-stop, until the end of the holy life is reached. ------ Nina. Op 5-feb-2007, om 11:26 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > It is fascinating the > way the 4 reflections (I will get sick, grow old, die, and so with > all those who love) #67967 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 4:25 am Subject: Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (15) scottduncan2 Dear connie, Sarah, Sisters-enthusiasts, I notice here: "...Cetasaati samaadhinaa. Cetosiisena hettha sammaasamaadhi vutto, sammaasamaadhiggaha.neneva maggalakkha.nena ekalakkha.naa sammaadi.t.thi-aadayo maggadhammaa gahitaava hontiiti, maggasa.mvarena abhijjhaadikassa asa.mvarassa anavasesato pahaana.m dassita.m hoti..." "...Mind means: [restrained] through concentration. For here, concentration is said to be under the category of mind. This means by the inclusion of right concentration, which is a characteristic of the [eightfold] path, the constituents of the path such as right view, etc, which are individual characteristics [of the path], are also included..." As pointed out repeatedly; right concentration as path constituent and said to be an 'individual characteristic' of said path. Sincerely, Scott. #67968 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 9:01 am Subject: Re: the perfections, Boodhisatta jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Joop, > your questions are interesting. I found a Wheel, no 305-307, by Ria > Kloppenborg, a Dutch woman, "The Paccekabuddha'. She refers to many > texts also to the Tipitaka. It is actually a study apart: the degrees > of wisdom of the disciple, the Paccekabuddha and the > Sammaasambuddha. There certainly is a rank here. ... Dear Nina Thanks for your information. One misunderstand: I don't wish to be a Buddha. I only see the Buddha more as an ideal than a arahant. That preference is, as you say, "entirely due to conditions". Metta Joop BTW I read the PhD (proefscherift) of Ria Kloppenborg about the Paccekabuddha; i think the Wheel is based on it. Do you know she translated Therigatha & Theragatha in dutch? #67969 From: connie Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 10:18 am Subject: Are all the bad things that happen to us results of our deeds? nichiconn Dear Nitesh, Phil, Howard, All: "The Official Answer": see AN 3.61, Tittha Sutta / Sectarians, which reads in part: "Having approached the priests & contemplatives who hold that... 'Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past,' I said to them: 'Is it true that you hold that... "Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past?"' Thus asked by me, they admitted, 'Yes.' Then I said to them, 'Then in that case, a person is a killer of living beings because of what was done in the past. A person is a thief... unchaste... a liar... a divisive speaker... a harsh speaker... an idle chatterer... greedy... malicious... a holder of wrong views because of what was done in the past.' When one falls back on what was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. This was my first righteous refutation of those priests & contemplative who hold to such teachings, such views." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.061.than.html peace, connie #67970 From: "m. nease" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 11:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Are all the bad things that happen to us results of our deeds? m_nease Hi Connie, Nicely cited in my opinion. Just off the top of my head, thieving, unchastity, lying, divisive and harsh speech, idle and harsh speech, greed, malice and wrong viewing are all kamma, not vipaakka, cause rather than effect. Kamma is (a) cause, vipaakka effect I think. Good to know the difference and not to confuse them. Also, if I remember correctly, what occurs in a mind-door process is not vipaakka (corrections welcome). In what door do association with the unbeloved, separation from the loved, not getting what is wanted occur? Aren't these pa.n.natti? If so, can the be vipaakka? mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "connie" To: "dsg" Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 10:18 AM Subject: [dsg] Are all the bad things that happen to us results of our deeds? > "Having approached the priests & contemplatives who hold that... 'Whatever > a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past,' I > said to them: 'Is it true that you hold that... "Whatever a person > experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past?"' Thus asked by > me, they admitted, 'Yes.' Then I said to them, 'Then in that case, a > person is a killer of living beings because of what was done in the past. > A person is a thief... unchaste... a liar... a divisive speaker... a harsh > speaker... an idle chatterer... greedy... malicious... a holder of wrong > views because of what was done in the past.' When one falls back on what > was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no > effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' > When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be > done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to > oneself as a contemplative. This was my first righteous refutation of > those priests & contemplative who hold to such teachings, such views." #67971 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 11:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the perfections, Boodhisatta nilovg Dear Joop, thank you for your post. I do not know of Therigatha & Theragatha in dutch. Nina. Op 5-feb-2007, om 18:01 heeft Joop het volgende geschreven: > Do you know she > translated Therigatha & Theragatha in dutch? #67972 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 11:12 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily Life, Ch 23, no 6 nilovg Dear friends, The sotåpanna has not eradicated all defilements. One may wonder whether he can still talk in an unpleasant way to others. Of the ten kinds of akusala kamma-patha (unwholesome courses of action) there are four akusala kamma-patha through speech which are: lying, slandering, rude speech and idle, useless talk. The sotåpanna has eradicated lying. He can still say unpleasant things to others or use harsh speech, but not to the extent that it would lead to rebirth in a woeful plane. The sotåpanna cannot be reborn in a woeful plane anymore. Useless talk is speech which has not as objective dåna, síla or bhåvanå. This is not eradicated by the sotåpanna, it can only be eradicated by the arahat. The question may arise whether it is necessary to classify defilements in such a detailed way. The purpose of the study of the Abhidhamma is right understanding of realities. If one does not study at all one will not be able to judge what is the right Path and what the wrong Path. We do not live in the Buddha's time; since we cannot hear the teachings directly from him, we are dependent on the teachings as they come to us through the scriptures. Therefore, it is beneficial to study the scriptures and also the Abhidhamma. It depends on one's personal inclination to what extent one will study the details about realities. Learning about the different ways of classifying defilements helps us to see their different aspects. For instance, di.t.thi is classified under the group of defilements known as the latent tendencies or proclivities (anusayas) and it is also classified as one of the åsavas, ``cankers'' or ``influxes'', which is another group of defilements. Furthermore, defilements are classified as ways of clinging (upådånas); as we have seen, three classes of di.t.thi are classified under this group of defilements. Defilements are also classified as ``bonds'' (ganthas), as ``hindrances'' (nívaraùas), and in several other ways. Each way of classifying shows us a different aspect of defilements and thus we understand better how deeply accumulated defilements are and how difficult it is to eradicate them. Only magga-cittas (lokuttara kusala cittas) can eradicate them. Not all defilements can be eradicated by the magga-citta of the first stage of enlightenment. As we have seen, there are four stages of enlightenment (the stages of the sotåpanna, the sakadågåmí, the anågåmí and the arahat), and for each of these stages there is a magga-citta which experiences nibbåna and eradicates defilements. Defilements are progressively eradicated by the magga-citta at each of the four stages of enlightenment. Thus, there are four types of magga-citta. There are four types of phala- citta (lokuttara vipåkacitta or ``fruition-consciousness'') which are the results of the four magga-cittas. Only the magga-citta eradicates defilements; the phala-citta, which also experiences nibbåna, is vipåka, result of the magga-citta. ******** Nina. #67973 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 11:17 am Subject: Letters on Vipassana, 6, no 7. nilovg Dear friends, Now, at this moment, hardness appears and it falls away immediately. However, it is succeeded so rapidly by the next rúpa which is hardness that it seems that hardness stays. Each reality is succeeded by a next one which is similar but not the same. Each reality appears only once in the cycle of birth and death and then it disappears, it never comes back. When we meet people who are dear to us we should not forget that seeing only sees visible object and that seeing and visible object only last for a moment and are then gone for ever. "Everything goes, goes, goes", Khun Sujin reminded us. It comes and then goes for ever. It is useful to reflect about impermanence, but it is not the same as the direct experience of the arising and falling away of nåma and of rúpa. When the first stage of "principal insight" has arisen, vipassanå has become a "power" (bala) [1] . When there is mindfulness of hardness now, knowledge of this characteristic is still coarse; realities have not been precisely understood yet. There is no realization of the characteristic of each nåma and rúpa which appears one at a time, no realization of their arising and falling away. When insight has become a “power” it is unshakable. However, at the first stage of principal insight paññå is not keen enough yet so that there can be detachment from realities. At the second stage of "principal insight", "Knowledge of Dissolution" (bhanga ñå.na), paññå turns more towards the falling away of realities and sees that they cannot be any refuge. Even when insight has become already a “power” its development should continue on so that there can be more and more "turning away" from nåma and rúpa. We read in the "Path of Discrimination" (Paìisambhidåmagga, Treatise on Knowledge, Ch XXXIV, par. 455): Insight power: in what sense is insight a power? Through contemplation of impermanence it is unshakable by perception of permanence, thus insight is a power. Through contemplation of dukkha it is unshakable by perception of pleasure... Through contemplation of anattå it is unshakable by perception of self...Through contemplation of dispassion it is unshakable by delight... Through contemplation of fading away it is unshakable by greed... Through contemplation of cessation it is unshakable by arising... Through contemplation of relinquishment it is unshakable by grasping, thus insight is a power. It is unshakable, immovable and cannot be shifted by ignorance and by the defilements and khandhas that accompany ignorance, thus insight is a power. This is insight as a power. ---------- footnote [1]: Specific cetasikas have been classified as “spiritual powers” which should be developed, namely: confidence, energy, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom (insight). When these have been developed so that they are unshakable by their opposites, they have become powers. ********* Nina. #67974 From: connie Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 11:23 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (16) nichiconn Dear Sisters-enthusiasts, Full text from VRI and Pruitt plus Mrs R-D's translation of the verse: 16. Vu.d.dhapabbajitasumanaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 16. The commentary on the verse of Therii Sumanaa, who went forth when old Sukha.m tva.m vu.d.dhike sehiiti sumanaaya vu.d.dhapabbajitaaya gaathaa. Ayampi purimabuddhesu kataadhikaaraa tattha tattha bhave kusala.m upacinitvaa imasmi.m buddhuppaade saavatthiya.m mahaakosalara~n~no bhaginii hutvaa nibbatti. Lie down happily, old lady is the verse of Sumanaa, who went forth when old. She, too, having acquired the necessary [moral] qualifications under former Buddhas and having accumulated good deeds in various lives, was born during this Buddha era in Saavatthi as the sister of King Mahaakosala. Saa satthaaraa ra~n~no pasenadissa kosalassa "cattaaro kho me, mahaaraaja, daharaati na u~n~naatabbaa"ti-aadinaa (sa.m. ni. 1.112) desita.m dhamma.m sutvaa laddhappasaadaa sara.nesu ca siilesu ca pati.t.thaaya pabbajitukaamaapi "ayyika.m pa.tijaggissaamii"ti cirakaala.m viitinaametvaa aparabhaage ayyikaaya kaala"nkataaya ra~n~naa saddhi.m mahagghaani atthara.napaavura.naani gaahaapetvaa vihaara.m gantvaa sa"nghassa daapetvaa satthu santike dhamma.m sutvaa anaagaamiphale pati.t.thitaa pabbajja.m yaaci. Satthaa tassaa ~naa.naparipaaka.m disvaa- Ima.m gaatha.m abhaasi. Having heard the Teacher teach the discourse on the Doctrine beginning "There are four young creatures, O king, that are not to be despised, etc" to King Pasenadi Kosala, she obtained faith and stood firm in virtuous conduct and the refuges. But, although she wanted to go forth, she waited a long time, saying, "I will look after my grandmother." Afterwards, her grandmother died. Together with the king, she went to the lodgings [of the bhikkhus] and had valuable rugs and clothing taken. They ordered that they be given to the Order. She heard the Doctrine in the Teacher's presence, and being established in the fruition state of a Non-Returner, asked to go forth. The Teacher, seeing her mature knowledge, spoke this verse: 16. "Sukha.m tva.m vu.d.dhike sehi, katvaa co.lena paarutaa; upasanto hi te raago, siitibhuutaasi nibbutaa"ti.- 16. Lie down happily, old lady, clad in the garment that you have made, for your desire is stilled. You have become cool, quenched. {{ Mrs. R-D ( http://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/davids/psalms/psalms.html ): Happily rest, thou venerable dame! Rest thee, wrapt in the robe thyself hast made. Stilled are the passions that have raged within. Cool art thou now, knowing Nibbana's peace. (16) }} Saa gaathaapariyosaane saha pa.tisambhidaahi arahatta.m patvaa udaanavasena tameva gaatha.m abhaasi. Idameva cassaa a~n~naabyaakara.na.m ahosi, saa taavadeva pabbaji. At the end of the verse she attained Arahatship together with the [four] discriminations, and as her solemn utterance, she spoke this verse. This was her declaration of perfect knowledge. She went forth immediately. Gaathaaya pana vu.d.dhiketi vu.d.dhe, vayovu.d.dheti attho. Aya.m pana siilaadigu.nehipi vu.d.dhaa, theriyaa vuttagaathaaya catutthapaade siitibhuutaasi nibbutaati yojetabba.m. Sesa.m vuttanayameva. Vu.d.dhapabbajitasumanaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa ni.t.thitaa. 16. Now, in the verse, old lady (vu.d.dhike) means: old woman (vu.d.dhe), old in age (vayo-vu.d.dhe), but also old (vu.d.dhaa) in the [good] qualities of virtous conduct, etc. In the fourth paada of the verse spoken by the therii, the meaning is to be furnished for you have become cool, quenched (siiti-bhuutaasi nibbutaa ti) [see comments with verse 15 for siiti-bhuutaamhi nibbutaa ti]. The meaning of the rest has been explained. {see v.1} Here ends the verse of Therii Sumanaa, who went forth when old. ::::::::::::::::: peace, connie #67975 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 11:25 am Subject: re:are all bad things that happen vipaaka? nilovg Hi Mike, May I butt in? --------- M: Also, if I remember correctly, what occurs in a mind-door process is not vipaakka (corrections welcome). ---------- N: the mind-door adverting-consciousness is followed by javanacittas which are either kusala or akusala. Then there may be two tadaaramma.nacittas, which are vipaaka. -------- M: In what door do association with the unbeloved, separation from the loved, not getting what is wanted occur? Aren't these pa.n.natti? If so, can they be vipaaka? -------- N: They are pa~n~nattis describing situations. In such a situation there moments of akusala vipaaka and moments of akusala cittas usually. It is similar to the worldly conditions of gain and loss, etc. Nina. #67976 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 11:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (11) nilovg Hi Howard, I appreciate your reflections on: 'this should be often contemplated' very much. Thank you very much for this post. Nina. Op 4-feb-2007, om 20:36 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I reflect on this very, very often. I don't do it as planned activity. > It is just something I do - a lot. In fact, especially after one > has lived to > a certain age, #67977 From: "m. nease" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 11:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] re:are all bad things that happen vipaaka? m_nease Hi Nina, > Hi Mike, May I butt in? Anytime, of course-- > M: Also, if I remember correctly, what occurs in a mind-door process > is not > vipaakka (corrections welcome). > ---------- > N: the mind-door adverting-consciousness is followed by javanacittas > which are either kusala or akusala. Then there may be two > tadaaramma.nacittas, which are vipaaka. > M: In what door do association with the > unbeloved, separation from the loved, not getting what is wanted occur? > Aren't these pa.n.natti? If so, can they be vipaaka? > -------- > N: They are pa~n~nattis describing situations. In such a situation > there moments of akusala vipaaka and moments of akusala cittas usually. > It is similar to the worldly conditions of gain and loss, etc. Thanks for the corrections. I was out of my depth, as usual. mike #67978 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 12:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Are all the bad things that happen to us results of our deeds?(wasR... egberdina Hi Phil, On 05/02/07, Phil wrote: > > Is the question I asked included in the imponderables? I know that > the Buddha told us not to think too hard about figuring out kamma > because it would drive us crazy. I don't want to figure out which > result comes from which kamma, or anything like that. Just wanted to > know if there was an explicit, official "right view/wrong view" > teaching on this point. > You can be absolutely sure that the most precisely and truthfully worded formulation is wrong view if clung to. Kind Regards Herman #67979 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 12:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] elements of experience egberdina Hi Sarah, > .... > S: Good! So let's get on with the reading sessions!! > .... Let's do it! > > But if the exercise is nibbana, a child that refuses to feed the > > papanca beast with all manner of views deserves full marks, no? > .... > S: I thought you were the one who wasn't interested in the subject of > nibbana? I am sorry, but that is not right. If so, let's drop it because it's an unnecessary distraction to > the task in hand. You're giving the game away here, Sarah, you are not interested in Nibbana. Nibbana is pivotal to Buddhism. I am flabbergasted that you describe it as an unnecessary distraction. >(I notice you're the one who keeps raising it:-)). Yes, because without it, Buddhism is nothing. > > Let's say the child continually asks you why he needs to learn to read and > you keep telling him that he'll need to get on at school, learn the joys > or reading like his older brothers, develop skills, get a job and so on. > He says he's not interested in these goals- he just wants to climb trees > and play with his cars. Ok - just get on with the reading and leave aside > the idle, delaying tactic questions. Ah, miss, you are simply telling the child that it is very important to keep the tradition rolling along, and that just because. Your pedagogy is aimed at ensuring history is repeated. That some of the alumni of the school have achieved great rebirths is a sign of success to you, to the child in question any rebirth is a sign of not having understood the curriculum. > > The child who still refuses to work on his ABC deserves no marks in my > book, though you might say he's a great philosopher and Joop might say he > has great anarchistic accumulations:-)) The child that tells their teacher that she is seeking safety in a tradition whose sole guaranteed outcome is self-preservation is quite courageous, and certainly very insightful. And likely to get expelled :-) Kind Regards Herman #67980 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 1:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (11) egberdina Hi Phil, On 05/02/07, Phil wrote: > > Hi Herman > > > Feel free to use me as as a paradigm of wrong view, Phil. And thanks > > for asking. Rest assured that I am not at all offended by that. > > Thanks! If I get back into this topic, I might pull up some of your > most not-toeing-the-lineish posts and say here, friends, is wrong view > from a Buddhist perspective. Which doesn't mean wrong view from a > philosophical perspective, obviously. > > I also hope that you see the light, of course! :) > One day Mick Jagger, in his early days, was told by a policeman to go and get a haircut. To which Mick replied "And what, look like you?" :-) Kind Regards Herman #67981 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 1:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing egberdina Hi Scott, On 05/02/07, Scott Duncan wrote: > Hi Herman, > > Yeah, with all of the so-called 'personality traits' annoyingly and > endearingly on display it is, I guess, identifiable. Stylistic > mannerisms and all that. > > Isn't this apparent wholeness, though, the contended issue? Isn't the > identification of a Scott Duncan post, an artifact of avijjaa? > I mean > isn't it just a concatenation of words strung together, dimly > reflecting some conceptual echo and sent into the ether like a grainy > word-photograph? The only thing real about it, in the ultimate sense, > is the colour seen and the feelings that arise. And this is all gone > now too. The rest is all you, really. And, to make matters worse, I > seem to remember writing it! People don't seem to realise, that when they claim that something is an illusion, they first acknowledge the reality of the something, and then deny it. I am very happy for you to spend your days perceiving then denying, perceiving then denying. It seems a bit OCD to me. > > I will read it again, for the next time (I have a meatloaf to > conceptualise). While I do: How is 'gradual change' a logical > necessity? And for what? > Observe what happens in constructing your meatloaf, and the steps that lead from ingredients to consumed product. I used logic in the way it might be used for a logic board, an electronic circuit. It is simply the pathway of change. Of course, you are free to deny your meatloaf, but in doing so you will have acknowledged it's thereness. > H: "Further, Nanavira Thera, who will no doubt not be your cup of > tea..." > > No, you're correct about this. I don't like what I'm capable of > proliferating when reflecting on the Dhamma unchecked. I certainly am > not interested in what someone else (especially a really smart someone > else) proliferates - especially when the project is one of radical > redefinition. Like KenH, you do not acknowledge at all the central role you have played in selecting which Buddhism is the one for you. And in preferring selected authors, you do not acknowledge that it is your approval of their proliferations either. You cannot avoid that your project of pursuit of the one true Dhamma is your own creation. (but you can certainly deny it it). > > H: "Sincerity. Don't write posts to me if I am to regard them as > illusory :-)" > > I'll do my best but I'm sure you will continue to regard them as real > in spite of (or rather because of) 'me'!! > A denial of what has appeared is predicated on a prior appearance. Your posts will cease to be real when you stop sending them. Kind Regards Herman #67982 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 1:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] re Letters on Vipassana 6,5 egberdina Hi Nina, On 05/02/07, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Herman. > --------- > H Rúpas arise and fall away and succeed one another. > > Please tell me why you believe this to be the case. If you have no > other reason than that it says so in a book, there is no need to reply > ---------- > N: If there was not the arising and falling away of the rupas of the > body, you would not notice that the body changes and grows old. It > seems that rupas last but they fall away instantly, and so long as > there are conditions for them to be replaced, new rupas arise. > Rupas of the body originate from kamma, citta, nutrition and > temperature from birth to death. If it is only namas that know rupas, and namas fall away quicker than anything else, how can namas know that rupas fall away? Kind Regards Herman #67983 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 1:56 pm Subject: Theratherigatha (Was: Re: the perfections, Boodhisatta jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Joop, > thank you for your post. > I do not know of Therigatha & Theragatha in dutch. > Nina. Verzen van monniken en nonnen Uitspraken van bevrijde mannen en vrouwen in het vroege boeddhisme Uitgeverij Asoka Vertaling Ria Kloppenborg #67984 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 2:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: B.Bodhi article (was: Arahants and compassion) egberdina Hi Sarah, > S: I like this much more. This is the message I was trying to convey to > Herman (?) recently. Doubting about dhammas arising and falling away now, > dhammas to be known now - is an impediment. Developing confidence in the > teachings leads to more wisdom. > Developing confidence in a tradition leads to more confidence in that tradition. If the tradition has some goal, like ending rebirth or ending suffering, then you can move away from confidence and test whether your confidence is warranted. Until such time, confidence is just confidence, and certainly not wisdom. > S: I'm not sure from your example, but there are other examples of more > recently not agreeing with ancient commentary notes on suttas which he'd > previously agreed with as a result of what you'd call a less 'orthodox' > view. The Luminous sutta would be one example, but I don't really have any > interest in getting into 1988BB and 2006BB. No, of course not, because you just want to have confidence, right? Kind Regards Herman #67985 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 2:46 pm Subject: Conditions egberdina Hi All, It is often said here at dsg that all phenomena are conditioned/caused. Of course this would mean that views of any kind are caused, including the view that all phenomena are caused. My question is, is a view, which is itself the coming together of many conditions/causes, a new condition in it's own right, or no more than the sum of it's constituent conditions? To put it another way, can the coming together of conditions produce a condition which is different in nature to it's component conditions. As an example of what I'm getting at, if you put either hydrogen or oxygen on a fire, the fire will increase. But if you combine hydrogen and oxygen to make water, and put it on a fire, the fire will go out. Hydrogen and oxygen in combination are different in quality to hydrogen and oxygen on their own. In relation to views, much effort is expended to avoid/deny certain views, like atta views. Of course, the view would be that that avoidance/denial is also caused. But does an atta view become a new condition, capable of creating a chain of causality that it's component causes cannot bring about? If not, what is it that recognises and tries to avoid / deny views if not already an atta view? If anatta is the only reality, how can atta view be causal of anything? Kind Regards Herman #67986 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 3:09 pm Subject: Re: Are all the bad things that happen to us results of our deeds? philofillet Hi Connie Thanks for this. Clarifies a lot - mostly in a stick-to-the-present- moment way. Metta, Phil > When one falls back on what > was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no > effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' > When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be > done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to > oneself as a contemplative. #67987 From: "Ramesh Patil" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 7:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma in Daily lIfe, Ch 23, no 5. rameshat27 Nina, A very good explanation given by you!! The explanation of latent tendency,Latent tendencies in every citta, right understanding diììhi and finally eradication of latent tendencies of di.t.thi explained in a very good and fantastic manner. Its all fantastic!! I am from india!! Please Give ur introduction also!! Thanks & Regards Ramesh Patil M.E.Comp 9324806892 #67988 From: "colette" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 8:59 am Subject: Re: Toodles! ksheri3 Good Morning connie, Only a few seconds til later but lets go... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > > dear colette, > > colette: Theravadan I'm to pressume, no, not ASS-sume, deals with nothing > less than "COMPLETE REALISM". > So, what is REALISM? ------------------------------------------------- -> > connie: shrug. who is asking? colette: now you bring into the picture several variables, one of which happens to be the potential that you see, stereotype, label, consciously recognize me as being more than simply myself. Wow, that'll take some time to work out YOUR meaning, YOUR VIEW. let's throw that other cloak back into > the Lost and Found (#63789); we've still got the eggshell one. colette: yea, but I'm working on that eggshell and I believe I'll be crackin' that nut soon. > > Not sure what you mean by domination. Off the cuff, I'd say the > tilakkhana and four perversions might rule. colette: "tilakkhana" and the "four perversions" damn, some more research. What the heck are they? but you say "...might rule." Well, in that case, whatever those two things happen to be I've got a hierarchy, and I've got a position which I can observe and apply different techniques, theories, etc., to. I'll get back to ya after a little meditation on that one. That would be the status quo, > too, i believe. colette: oooh, so it's a resemblence, a mirror image of the status quo. Now I've got even more info, and a better picture. > > An avowed lable lover myself, i can't say enough about The Pitaka > Disclosure. :) colette: profiling is so much easier for the simpleton on the run. It also makes magik that much more fun! Notice I tend toward an Aleister Crowley spelling of the word magic or magick or in MY case "magik". Or The Guide or any of the other wonderful books Nina's > writings / TA Sujin's talks quote and discuss. colette: yea, nina's got some stuff out there that I don't have much time to get to but what I do get from her Vipassana site is well received. Thanx Nina. I'm sure if I had the time I could gain from her material but alas.... See ya later girlfriend. toodles, colette Some play "Keep Away" and > lose. But I mentioned those two books because there's a lot of precision > in the proper way of speaking, and I fall far short of the mark. Why care > what I have to say, my warped thoughts? Better we look at the texts > themselves, <....> #67989 From: "colette" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 9:45 am Subject: [dsg] Re: 'We are here to learn the dhamma' -- Miss Interpretation says Hi. ksheri3 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Good Afternoon Colette, > > I'm glad to see you're following many of the threads with others. colette: isn't that what Basket Weaving 101 was about? A single thread is not very applicable as a garment, although the emperor seems to enjoy New Clothes and so a single thread may be in Chic on the catwalks, the runways, of todays political dress code. ;-) > > Enlightenment may not simply come by viewing the act of perfoming the > > ceremonial of "burning the curry". The aroma may be the focus here, We're thinking of a ritual as a way to become > enlightened, colette: and so you seperate "enlightenment" from any and all life? Aren't you trying to put a genie back in a bottle, if enlightnement is something that only the rich can have or something that is only applicable in certain situations? ------------------------------------ rather than just going about our daily business, being aware > of dhammas which are arising without any special focus on them. > .... > <...> > > Maybe there is no object, application of sunyata. > ... > S: There is always an object of citta (consciousness). Sunyata or anatta > is the nature of all currently arising dhammas - no need to apply, > otherwise we're back stuck with Self. colette: Zoiks, you've taken me back thousands of years here. Aren't we INTENTIONALLY realizing that WE ARE EVERYTHING, that our essence is EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE ESSENCE OF THAT WHICH WE DO? > There is always an object of citta (consciousness). colette: and that object is THE SELF THE SELF OF THE INDIVIDUAL? If we look, and cosciously recognize that the things we do ARE EMPTY then we can better view, consciously recognize, the EMPTINESS of our daily lives as THE MEANS TO UNDERSTAND SVABHAVA. It's a question of understanding > rather than applying or focussing, wouldn't you agree? > ... > <...> I > > refer to another piece I was reading last night the awakened me to > > the fact that although "man" does not have a "soul" maybe the "soul" > > has the "man", YES, now I remember, it was a definition > > of "CONSCIOUSNESS ONLY". > .... > S: There's no soul to have man or man to have soul. These are illusions. > Also, you'd have to say in a few simple words what you mean by > 'consciousness only' as it makes no sense to me. colette: way too much to deal with right now. As quickly as possible we can go to Fa-hsiang or Yogacara as being definitions of Consciousness Only or we can go to Vijnanavada (Consciousness Affirming/Doctrine of Consciousness). We'll have to see how I CHOOSE TO APPLY IT TO THE SENSE, FEELING, I GET FROM YOU AND YOUR SPEACH before I can translate that for ya. toodles, colette #67990 From: "colette" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 9:31 am Subject: Re: Toodles!, track 2. ksheri3 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > > dear colette, > > colette: Theravadan I'm to pressume, no, not ASS-sume, deals with nothing > less than "COMPLETE REALISM". > So, what is REALISM? > > connie: shrug. who is asking? let's throw that other cloak back into > the Lost and Found (#63789); we've still got the eggshell one. > > Not sure what you mean by domination. Off the cuff, I'd say the > tilakkhana and four perversions might rule. That would be the status quo, > too, i believe. > > An avowed lable lover myself, i can't say enough about The Pitaka > Disclosure. :) Or The Guide or any of the other wonderful books Nina's > writings / TA Sujin's talks quote and discuss. Some play "Keep Away" and > lose. But I mentioned those two books because there's a lot of precision > in the proper way of speaking, and I fall far short of the mark. colette: I have found that when SPEAKING there are two different potentials: a) speaking to the RELATIVE or the IMMEDIATE position we are in at the time of speach. We speak amongst ourselves and in terms that we understand. For myself, since I practice traditions of magik, I also must contend with another form of "speaking". b) speaking to the ABSOLUTE or the infinitive position. I speak in terms of LEAVING A MARK, MAKING A STATEMENT, IMPLYING MY CONSCIOUSNESS, at that time, UPON THE LOGOS/COSMOS. Okay, there is another way to look at this, a very simple way: WHAT THE HELL IS PROPER? Ya see, now we get into an entirely "man-made" consciousness when we are forced to conform our speach to a certain STANDARD. Lets look at the great majestic Religious Right aka The Republican Party, the Terrorist Party, here in the USA and find that it is a Republican ideal, see IDEALISM, to force all students in the USA from coast to coast, from poverty to gluttony, to conform, manifest, the EXACT SAME TEST SCORES as a means of placing the robot into a hierarchy. We can also look at the process of manufacturing and find that STANDARDIZATION is a STANDARD that must be upheld, see Quality Assurance or Quality Control divisions within corporations. So What (see Joe Walsh) if YOUR speach does not conform to the man- made stratification, hierarchy, of these so-called "sacred texts". Who, might I add, is the judge? Are we to place value in a corrupt system, a system that promotes the torture of sentient humans or are we to move forward, move to a better position? May I also add here that that action: speaking in a way that will aggitate, agrivate, anger, an apposing force, or a body that is to be used for magikal purposes, is a rather convenient technique. As a matter of fact, in a Rosicrucian forum I'm on I showed a certain individual that it is "he" that held the cravings for death, and torture, etc., which is what we in Buddhist traditions must RECOGNIZE and REMOVE from OUR INDIVIDUAL SELF, CONSCIOUSNESS. Why care > what I have to say, my warped thoughts? Better we look at the texts > themselves, or as near as we can get; for me, text(s) = pali (tradition). > But do we read in terms of what is real now? Oh, wait, that's what you > said ;) colette: EXACTLY. We can read these words and attempt to transcribe them but do we have the EXACT SAME CONSCIOUSNESS, THE EXACT SAME SITUATIONS (CONDITIONS), etc. that they had when they wrote these things. I tend toward applying them DIRECTLY to the situation at hand, since, IF they are eternal and are self-existant, THEN they surely must be applicable now. As I state to any organized religion, even back to my row with the Archdiose of L.A. in 1981-2, If this is an eternal thing and I'm staking my life on it, then this schtick better be directly applicable now, if not then find another sucker. > > As for assuming, the Pitaka Disclosure has plenty to say, << [and] < How > many ideas must be given attention by one who desires to verify the fruit > of Stream-Entry? > the Blessed One said < The Five Categories for > assumption > >> colette: these are wonderful examples, thank you. I'll be looking into it. > > This next quote is a bit long, but beautiful: > > 79. 7. Herein, what is the type of Thread Dealing with Corruption, Dealing > with Penetration, and Dealing with the Adept? <.....> #67991 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 3:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing lbidd2 Hi Herman, H: "Would you say that the insights obtained in one mode of consciousness (say analysing dhammas) apply to other modes (say talking to your mum on the phone)?" L: They might but I think you would have to consider your mum as a dhamma and analyze her. Larry #67992 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 5:17 pm Subject: The Mystery of Consciousness christine_fo... The Mystery of Consciousness ~ Time Magazine (Health and Science) ~ Fri. Jan 19 2007. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...1580394,00.html Don't you think that this is a wonderful 7 page article? :-) The Buddha taught that there was no self, no eternal continuing consciousness, and that all that is reborn is the kammic accumulations and latent tendencies impressed on the succession of conscious moments. This research seems to be getting much closer to the Buddha's teachings from two and a half millenia ago, don't you think? As Ven. Dr. W. Rahula says (paraphrased slightly by me :-)) Of the Aggregates, Consciousness is a reaction or response, it does not recognize an object. It is only a sort of awareness - awareness of the presence of an object. It is not a 'self' or 'soul' which continues as a permanent substance through life and which has persisted from the earliest time to the present day. So often we hear on lists how 'consciousness' continues on ... always with the Wrong View in an unspoken sense of 'it's me'. The five aggregates together, which we popularly call a 'being', are dukkha itself (sa.mkhaara-dukkha). There is no other 'being' or 'I', standing behind these five aggregates, who experiences dukkha. There is no unmoving mover behind the movement. It is only movement. It is not correct to say that life is moving, but life is movement itself. Life and movement are not two different things. In other words, there is no thinker behing the thought. Thought itself is the thinker. If you remove the thought, there is no thinker to be found. As Buddhaghosa says: 'Mere suffering exists, but no suffering is found; The deeds are, but no doer is found.' metta cooran #67993 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 5:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing egberdina Hi Larry, Thanks for your thoughts. On 06/02/07, LBIDD@... wrote: > Hi Herman, > > H: "Would you say that the insights obtained in one mode of > consciousness (say analysing dhammas) apply to other modes (say talking > to your mum on the phone)?" > > L: They might but I think you would have to consider your mum as a > dhamma and analyze her. > It seems to me that in analysing a phenomenon, you are destroying the phenomenon in the process. Neither mum analysed into dhammas, or dhammas synthesised and reconstituted into mum, are mum. Whatever is experienced is a consequence of what method is used to experience it. The reality of what is seen through a microscope, does not come into play when looking with eyes unaided, or with a telescope. IMO Kind Regards Herman #67994 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 5:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Mystery of Consciousness egberdina Hi Christine, On 06/02/07, Christine Forsyth wrote: > The Mystery of Consciousness ~ Time Magazine (Health and Science) ~ > Fri. Jan 19 2007. > http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...1580394,00.html > The link is a dud, I'm afraid. How's things oterwise? Everything is groovy here :-) Kind Regards Herman #67995 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 6:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Mystery of Consciousness egberdina Hi Christine, Me again. > > The Buddha taught that there was no self, no eternal continuing > consciousness, and that all that is reborn is the kammic > accumulations and latent tendencies impressed on the succession of > conscious moments. This research seems to be getting much closer to > the Buddha's teachings from two and a half millenia ago, don't you > think? > > As Ven. Dr. W. Rahula says (paraphrased slightly by me :-)) > Of the Aggregates, Consciousness is a reaction or response, it does > not recognize an object. It is only a sort of awareness - awareness > of the presence of an object. It is not a 'self' or 'soul' which > continues as a permanent substance through life and which has > persisted from the earliest time to the present day. So often we hear > on lists how 'consciousness' continues on ... always with the Wrong > View in an unspoken sense of 'it's me'. Of course this applies to the Buddha and Buddhagosa as well. In no sense was there a "them". > > As Buddhaghosa says: > 'Mere suffering exists, but no suffering is found; > The deeds are, but no doer is found.' > You probably meant that no sufferer is found? Kind Regards Herman #67996 From: connie Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 6:42 pm Subject: are all bad things that happen vipaaka? nichiconn mike, angels, 1 - t'was Wonder Woman to the Rescue, i'twere!! score 4 dude! two of mine ;( where's that darn chart!? meantal anatomy 101, was it? SPD, methinks. more SoundPoliticDhammastudy. coming up. i remain, in servile obedience, dragonmeistrix gloometta deville, ex. (gag me-) ps. you'd mentioned something about dhA being counter-intuitive? i ran across a bit on the shadowy beast of burden, is it Dhp 1 and 2? - in 'pi.taka-disclosure'/ a bit? ho! but talk about out of one's depth & all :( a Question on cause and effect, "Ain't life grand?": The Pi.taka Disclosure: 169. 27. Herein, what is Ripening? < Full sixty thousand years gone by > (Jaa iii 47) < In ripening in such a form > ( ), [and] < Bhikkhus, there are [the hells] with the six bases for contact; bhikkhus, whatever are [the hells] with the six bases providing contact are all > (cf S iv 126). This is Ripening. Answer: see "the second half". Now that ain't funny, is it?... not 'at all, 'It ain't. "I am a man of constant sorrow... "etc. pss. I was going to send a jpg of me & The SacredCow, but she (influenced by my mother, no doubt - just kidding, of course a mother loves her child!) isn't sure she wants the guilt by association in recognition of ...well, you know me &: "suffer not a fool!" uh, is that [unilaterally-?}] a bad thing? obviously still in the depths of my own, c. ======= > It is similar to the worldly conditions of gain and loss, etc. Thanks for the corrections. I was out of my depth, as usual. #67997 From: connie Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 6:43 pm Subject: B.Bodhi article (was: Arahants and compassion) nichiconn H-Man! --- Developing confidence in a tradition leads to more confidence in that tradition. If the tradition has some goal, like ending rebirth or ending suffering, then you can move away from confidence and test whether your confidence is warranted. Until such time, confidence is just confidence, and certainly not wisdom. connie: -- faith. phil's disgusted by the display of faith exemplified by the soka gakkai... on another personal note, he might be familiar with one of the founder's (revolutionary) views on education. as Mr (sorry for the slaughter here) "mak-a-gucchi"... they've got some effective stuff going as far as making & keeping 'shakabukus' goes... 'cell structure' for one. ; but apart from the street display, if i may, there are also more formal, if you will, meditations or practices. One might object that the 'kasina' thingy in question for the more ritualistic(?), 'sitting' chanting/rehearsing/o-ming(?) isn't listed in the Vis & that's fine, too. the book of books in question / more bias! / is the LOTUS SUTRA... note the spelling. Run like hell. My personal opinion, the death of Mac was not in the best interests of the society. Worse, Toda's renunciation of "Shakyamuni" in favour of "a modern day Buddha"... reformed something. In any case, since the 60's, the SGIinternational, USA has become more 'respectable' and 'stream-lined'... but still contends with it's other brethren in Nichiren. james mentions faith. i read about faith in The Pi.taka Disclosure, here's a quote I was going to send mike: << 74. 2. Herein, what is the type of Thread Dealing with Morality? < Ideas are heralded by mind, Mind heads them and they are mind-made. If someone with a placid mind Is wont to speak or act, then bliss Sure follows after him, as does His shadow keep him company > (Dh.2), [and] the Thread in the Sa.myutta [in which] the Blessed One [taught] to Mahaanaama the Sakyan in the Sakyans' city of Kapilavatthu with guiding-detail (?) [how] that [cognizance of his at the time of his death] at the last moment would be fortified by faith and virtue and fortified by learning, generosity, and understanding (S.v,371). >> peace, connie #67998 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 7:03 pm Subject: Re: The Mystery of Consciousness rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > The Mystery of Consciousness ~ Time Magazine (Health and Science) ~ > Fri. Jan 19 2007. > http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...1580394,00.html > > Don't you think that this is a wonderful 7 page article? :-) > > ____ Dear Christine From my perspective it is crude materialism, extrem wrong view. Pinker writes: "" neuroscientists agree on many features of both of them, and the feature they find least controversial is the one that many people outside the field find the most shocking. Francis Crick called it "the astonishing hypothesis"--the idea that our thoughts, sensations, joys and aches consist entirely of physiological activity in the tissues of the brain. Consciousness does not reside in an ethereal soul that uses the brain like a PDA; consciousness is the activity of the brain."" What he believes is that all consciouness, feelings, thoughts are purely material. Robert #67999 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Feb 5, 2007 7:04 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Some Idle Thoughts on Nothing scottduncan2 Hi Herman, Thanks for the reply: H: "People don't seem to realise, that when they claim that something is an illusion, they first acknowledge the reality of the something, and then deny it..." True, Herman. This is actually a stripped-down version of the basic psychodynamics of simple, mundane psychological defense, isn't it? A conscious denial has to reflect an initial perception, some sort of conflict with it, and an unconscious 'warding-off' of that perception, turning it into a denial. At least this it the case when discussing psychodynamics. I'm not sure what point you wish to make here, though, nor how it applies to the Dhamma. H: "Observe what happens in constructing your meatloaf, and the steps that lead from ingredients to consumed product. I used logic in the way it might be used for a logic board, an electronic circuit. It is simply the pathway of change. Of course, you are free to deny your meatloaf, but in doing so you will have acknowledged it's thereness." Yes, of course, Herman, there are steps to making a meatloaf. I don't even need a recipe book (although I was not too pleased with it last night - a bit dry). I'm still not really clear on why this particular aspect of things is so very important to you. Why the insistence on the acknowledgement of the 'reality' of that which is not 'real'? What is the draw here for you? Why insist that the meatloaf be acknowledged as meatloaf? Consider the following, (Note 162, SN63,(3)): "Spk: When nutriment as edible food is fully understood: It is fully understood by these three kinds of full understanding: (i) the full understanding of the known (~naatapari~n~naa); (ii) the full understanding by scrutinisation (tiira.napari~n~naa); and (iii) the full understanding as abandonment (pahaanapari~n~naa). Therein, (i) a bhikkhu understands: 'This nutriment edible food is 'form with nutritive essence as the eighth' together with its base. This impinges on the tongue-sensitivity, and the four elements - these things are the form aggregate. The contact pentad (contact, feeling, perception, volition, consciousness) arisen in one who discerns this - these are the four mental aggregates. All these five aggregates are, in brief, name-and-form.' Next he searches out the conditions for these phenomena and sees dependent origination in direct and reverse order. By thus seeing name-and-form with its conditions as it actually is, the nutriment of edible food is fully understood by the full understanding of the known. (ii) Next he ascribes the three characteristics to that same name-and-form and explores it by way of the seven contemplations (of impermanence, suffering, nonself, revulsion, dispassion, cessation, and relinquishment...Thus it is fully understood by the full understanding of scrutinisation. (iii) It is fully understood by the full understanding of abandonment when it is fully understood by the path of nonreturning, which cuts off desire and lust for that same name-and-form." I realise that this is commentarial material but I think it pretty clearly adheres to the suttas as far as I can tell. Is this not what meatloaf is, according to the Buddha? Sincerely, Scott P.S. I read SN61(1) a number of times and am ready to discuss when you are.