#70400 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Apr 7, 2007 4:02 pm Subject: Re: Bhavana & the Body/Nina (Re: [dsg] a meditation tip) upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 4/7/07 9:34:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: > Dear Howard (and Nina), > > Thank you for your reply. I'm sorry for having exasperated you. > > Now, Howard, the below I've cut from the end and pasted here. It was > good to return to the central question for a moment. I appreciate the > way you ended your post with this reminder: > > Howard: "Does 'Eleven is larger than four' have bearing? The issue was > a clear and delimited one, Scott: What alleged paramattha dhamma is > bhavana? I say the correct answer is "none", and I have read nothing > to the contrary. Bhavana is pa~n~natti, but it is not unreal." > > Scott: Howard, here you suggest that bhaavaana is pa~n~natti, in order > to refute the statement that bhaavaana is paramattha-dhamma. I'd like > you to remind me, if you would, of where it was said that bhaavaana > was a paramattha dhamma, although if the exercise seems liable to > drive you to distraction, please feel free to desist. > > I believe this is what you said that Nina said, when you misunderstood > her - I consider - lo a few posts ago. When she returns after a bit > of a rest, she will likely patiently continue with her discussion. > You and Nina may, of course, be discussing at cross-purposes because > very clearly you and Nina differ as to the essential meaning of > bhaavaana, as far as I can tell of course. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, if Nina was NOT maintaining that bhavana is a paramattha dhamma, then all my posting on this topic has been pointless. When questioned, she never said that she wasn't maintaining that. It seemed to me she *was* maintaining it. Bur if not, well, that's just fine. ------------------------------------------- > > Just to make give own miniscule opinion on the matter, I don't think > bhaavaana, that is 'mental development', is or could be paramattha > dhamma. I don't think Nina ever said it was, mind you (I await the > quote) and for that matter, because I don't think she would > misunderstand this. When dhammas arise and fall away -and I would say > this could be wholesome or unwholesome dhammas - in succession, this > is, at its most basic, bhaavaana or 'mental development'. > > Why do I say this is so? Well, Howard, because the arising and > falling away of any given dhamma creates conditions for future arising > and falling away of that dhamma or related dhammas. In this way they > develop, you see? ---------------------------------------- Howard: I think that is quite good, Scott! I like that. In fact, I agree with it with a slight modification: 'Bhavana' as the term is usually used doesn't refer to any old development of conditions, but to development of conditions that lead onwards towards liberation, and, of course, the conditions involved in such development are very particular ones, as pointed out by the Buddha. ---------------------------------------- > > Here, Howard, we are dealing with 'process', with 'dynamisms', with > 'movement' if you take my meaning (and, of course, don't take these > words literally). > -------------------------------------- Howard: I *do* take your meaning, and I like it a lot. ----------------------------------- And, again of course, when one begins to discuss> > movement, or notions of things which do things, then we are dealing > squarely with pa~n~natti, again as to the best of my limited ability > to understand these sorts of things. Does this make more sense now? ---------------------------------- Howard: Yes, indeed. This rests fine and easy with me, Scott. ---------------------------------- > > Howard: "Yes, Scott. Every collection without exception is concept, > and not paramattha dhamma, regardless of what the elements of the > collection are." > > Scott: I'm truly thick, Howard, at least as far as the attempt to > find success in penetrating what you are suggesting here. Please bear > with me if at all possible. Nyanatiloka's statement, snipped: > > "Buddha has summed up all the physical and mental phenomena of > existence, and which appear to the ignorant man as his ego, or > personality, to wit: > > 1 the materiality group khandha ruupa-khandha, > 2 the feeling group vedanaa-khandha, > 3 the perception group sa~n~naa-khandha, > 4 the mental-construction group sankhara-khandha, > 5 the consciousness-group vi~n~naana-khandha" > > And your own position: > > Howard: "Every one of the foregoing, and every collection of every > sort is concept. No collection is a rupa or a member of any other > khandha. Anything that is neither nama nor rupa is pa~n~natti. That's > the story, and most especially the Abhidhamma story." > > Scott: I'd be pleased were you to be able to show how this is the > case, that is, that khandhas are concepts because they are > collections. Perhaps you can refer me to the appropriate Abhidhamma > text. I'd appreciate it. In the meantime, I hope you don't mind if I > provide a bit from the PTS PED definition of khandha, as you can see, > in the 'absolute' sense. Perhaps this might clarify things further: ----------------------------------------- Howard: I'm honestly sorry, Scott, but I can't do better on this. ------------------------------------- > > "...B. (absolute) in individual sense: constituent element, factor, > substantiality. More especially as khandhaa (pl.) the elements or > substrata of sensory existence, sensorial aggregates which condition > the appearance of life in any form. Their character according to > quality and value of life and body is evanescent, fraught with ills & > leading to rebirth...They are usually enumerated in the foll. > stereotyped set of 5: ruupaa (material qualities), vedanaa (feeling), > sa~n~naa (perception), sankhaaraa (coefficients of consciousness), > vi~n~na.naa (consciousness)..." > > Scott: Now here, Howard, in the above, and with the caveat that the > PTS PED is not necessarily the best source of definitions at all > times, when khandhaa is defined as 'elements or substrata of sensory > experience' we can clearly see that this does not refer in any way to > pa~n~natti, does it? ---------------------------------------- Howard: A khandha is collection. The members are elements, and it is they that are paramattha dhammas. The elements are not pa~n~natti. ---------------------------------------- > > Howard: "Scott, are you unaware of the difference between a single > phenomenon and a collection of phenomena? Rupas arise in groups, and > cittas arise with cetasikas. That is, these individual realities > co-occur. They are, each one of them, a paramattha dhamma. Any group > of them, however, is concept, and *not* a paramattha dhamma. A > group of rupas is called a "kalapa". A kalapa is neither a nama nor a > rupa. You will not find it in any list of dhammas. It is pa~n~natti. > (Please don'tignore this, but let it sink in.)" > > Scott: I appreciate, Howard, the reminder that there is a difference > between a single phenomenon and a collection of phenomena. This is > often an important distinction to keep in mind. I'll be certain not > to ignore this important distinction and will hope, as do you, that > it truly sinks in. > > Can you please elaborate on this point you are making that, when an > individual phenomenon, which is a paramattha dhamma, ceases to be a > paramattha dhamma when it is part of a collection of phenomena? > ------------------------------------- Howard: As I said before, Scott - it does NOT cease to be a paramattha dhamma ever, for so long as it exists. It will be part of a collection when we *view* it as such. However we view it doesn't change it one whit, however. It is what it is. A paramattha dhamma is a paramattha dhamma is a paramattha dhamma, to paraphrase Gertrude Stein. ---------------------------------- In> > particular I'd very much like to learn how, since it is impossible for > cetasika to arise without citta or for citta to arise without > cetasika, for example, in what way your thesis applies. Might you > kindly take the time to clarify this? ----------------------------------- Howard: I don't understand the question. Such interdependencies are part of what make dhammas anatta. I never denied interdependency, and I do not now. In fact, I insist on it. ---------------------------------- > > And with a ruupa-kalapa as well, now that you mention it again; it is > impossible that a single dhaatu should ever arise without the others. ------------------------------------ Howard: Interdependency of dhammas doesn't in the slightest contradict collections not being paramattha dhammas. A kalapa is not a rupa, it is not a nama, it is not nibbana. It is concept. If you say it is a rupa, what rupa? Which one? ------------------------------------- > Does pathavii-dhaatu, for example, cease to be paramattha-dhamma the > moment it arises with the other three? > ------------------------------------ Howard: I don't know why you persist with this. I cannot make myself clearer. You are apparently unable to grasp my words. ----------------------------------- To me this seems unusual since> > they all have to arise at once, every time and all the time, at least > as far as I've been given to understand this. > ---------------------------------- Howard: There are many pairs of co-arising dhammas. The dhammas are interdependent. Each of them is a paramattha dhamma. But the pair is not. When there is consciousness of a rupa, the consciousness is a paramattha dhamma, and so is the rupa. The consciousness-object pair is not. If it were, what would it be, rupa or nama? In fact, it is neither. It is conceptual. There is no paramattha dhamma observed through any door that is the pair. ---------------------------------- Please elaborate. For> > instance, you state: > > Howard: "Not at all. When these arise together, each one of them is > present and exists. But the GROUP does not, except conventionally. > That's the story, Scott. If you are uncomfortable with that, then it > is Abhidhamma that is making you uncomfortable. This distinction > between paramattha dhammas and pa~n~nati occurs in the Abhidhamma > explicitly, but only implicitly in the suttas. I think it is an > important and valid distinction, though." > > Scott: Here, Howard, I am not even treading water when it comes to > this particular way of viewing things you present above. Since they > do arise together, and since they are paramattha dhammas, can you > please exlain how the unalterable fact of their constant conascent > arising, they cease to be paramattha dhammas as a result? ---------------------------------------- Howard: GOD ALMIGHTY, Scott! They do NOT!!!! How many times do I have to say that??? Man, please pay less attention to your thoughts and more to what I'm actually saying to you! --------------------------------------- > > Howard: "...As far as "reality" is concerned, my view of this is > somewhat different from Khun Sujin's, mainly terminologically. > I speak of degrees of "reality"...I say it is *less* real than the > rupas underlying it." > > Scott: Ah, thanks Howard, I recall this. I'm very sorry to say I > think it is untenable, at least for me. > ------------------------------------ Howard: That's fine. I think I would first begin to worry were it otherwise. ;-) ------------------------------------ It does help me see how you> > are viewing the entire discussion though. I'd like to agree to > disagree with you here, unless you'd like to be shown more about this. ------------------------------------ Howard: No, I'd just as soon not be "shown more". ------------------------------------ > > Howard: "Scott! Do I have to repeat it 84,000 times?" > > Scott: Again, I apologise for discombobulating you. I shall leave > off at this point, for fear of further raising your ire. As usual, a > reply is always nice, but so might igoring me - feel free to do either. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > ====================== With metta, Howard #70401 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Apr 7, 2007 4:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts Need not be "Unreal"/Scott (Re: Bhavana & the Body/Nina) upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 4/7/07 9:50:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: > Howard: "Scott, I hope this is clear and that it gives you some > perspective on my understanding of the psychology of perception. I > think it is compatible with both sutta and Abhidhamma." > > Scott: It seems clearly stated but, I fear, I can't see how it is > anything other than dhamma-cised conventional theory of perception, > with a sprinkling of maybe some sort of cognitive neuroscience. I'm > sorry, Howard, that I can't see it otherwise, but thanks. If your > willing to show how this is compatible with the Sutta and Abhidhamma, > I'd be interesting in examining the fine points of it. > ------------------------------------ Howard: No, sorry, Scott - I quit. ==================== With metta, Howard #70402 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Apr 7, 2007 8:35 pm Subject: [dsg] Concepts Need not be "Unreal"/Scott (Re: Bhavana & the Body/Nina) scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Thanks... Howard: "No, sorry, Scott - I quit." Scott: No worries, Howard. Sorry I don't see it as you do. Sincerely, Scott. #70403 From: "sukinder" Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 4:29 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] A Meditation Tip sukinderpal Hi Dieter, All, Welcome to DSG. I would like to use this post of yours as basis for discussing some related points if you don't mind..? =========================== 'Thanks for the sutta quote from DN 2. I've often wondered about the simile of the ball of bath powder. Does anyone know what this is about exactly? D: interesting to note , that the simile appeared as well in DN 11, 12 ; MN 39,119 and A.N. V 28 showing its significance S: The 'ball and bath powder' simile may be about piti and this may refer literally to this conventional 'whole body', I don't know and am not interested about at this point. One thing I have noted here on DSG is that while discussions about the finer details of Jhana and whether this forms part of the Path to enlightenment goes on, none of its proponents seem interested in talking about the basic conditions that lead to Jhana and/or Vipassana. I hope you will not mind discussing this? I think that you will agree that Jhana is the outcome of the development of Samatha and this refers to the 'calm' of kusala. Therefore it is not as many seem to think, merely a matter of 'concentration' on some chosen object. It is first and foremost about understanding the danger of attachment in relation to sense objects experienced through the six doorways. How is this 'understanding' reflected and begin to develop if not now in daily life? Is there truly any seeing of attachment to kama objects so much so that a sense of urgency is aroused? Does morality come about easily as a consequence of such seeing? Does one therefore also see limitations in the household life? I don't ever see anyone talking about any of this but instead there is big talk about exalted states and theories about how samatha and vipassana must be developed together. When Nina recently wrote to Han saying that samatha must go together with the development of vipassana, what she meant was that the realities involved in the development of the former, if these are not known with insight as 'conditioned realities', then it is quite useless in light of the development of the Path. In other words, the Teachings is about the need to develop the understanding of conditioned realities, all namas and rupas, and this has no particular relation to the development of samatha. Buddha's Dhamma is about seeing the danger in "ignorance" unlike the development of samatha/Jhana which is focused on seeing the danger of "attachment". Therefore, while we continue to seek the development of samatha/jhana with the hope that this leads to/supports vipassana panna, we are in fact at those moments, increasing ignorance of the Four noble Truths and *not* following the Teachings! Actually, with such a view, one develops neither of these, not having sight of their differing goals, but something all together. So from where I stand, the following statement does not mean anything: >>>>>>>> Quote Dieter: Howard already pointed out the need of the actual experience to catch the meaning of the simile or allegory , which -I think you agree -avoids to be exact .( the finger pointing to the Moon is not the Moon) . However I try to express my understanding so far, hoping to motivate others too ;-) : S: Actually, as far as I can see, only two persons both holding Right View can ever be said to agree with/understand each other. The rest, will at best be in the position of 'agreeing to agree' or 'agreeing to disagree', even though they may not realize this. Much of the time however, there is complete confusion. When there is "wrong understanding", what is expressed is a perversion, and so even if the two parties involved might think that they agree, in reality they are being taken in by words/ideas/explanations which both are happy to rest upon. It is so easy to agree in delusion. The Moon which is pointed to, if this is not present moment realities, is a 'concept' and this is fertile ground for perversion of perception, consciousness and views! I don't think it wise to therefore 'believe in' such evaluation of experiences, let alone that 'ours' is the same as 'theirs'. This does not mean though, that we can't discuss with each other. But given the fact that we come from the position of "not knowing" and only beginning to take baby steps towards understanding, we should allow for increased precision first at the intellectual level. And more than the Suttas, the Abhidhamma allows for this to happen. With this I now go to this part of your post: >>>>>>>> Dieter: By the comments of Robert I recognized again that there is a lack of common understanding about Jhana between those favoring the Sutta /Vinaya Pitaka and those of the Abhidhamma Vitaka /Commentaries . S: This is a problem of those who *do not agree* with the Abhidhamma/Commentaries. The Abhidhamma perspective is in fact the Abhidhamma/Sutta/Vinaya/Commentaries. This understanding however, seems to leave little room for any "self" to "do" anything in order to speed up the process of development and therefore is a threat to "self view". The Sutta/Vinaya with its many 'stories' about 'people and situations' encourages an interpretation which "self" feels comfortable with, and so one without any hesitation dismisses the Abhidhamma and Commentaries. And so in making this distinction as you have made above, and choosing to be on the one side, namely, Sutta/Vinaya; one has unwittingly fallen prey to a particular aspect of Mara, doing harm to the Sasana. Sorry to be blunt here. I repeat my welcome to you Dieter and hope that you will not be put off by my opposing stance, and would like to say sincerely here, that this group would be less interesting to me were it without such opposing opinions. ;-) Metta, Sukinder #70404 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Apr 7, 2007 10:46 pm Subject: All converges on Feeling!!! bhikkhu5 Friends: Which are the 5 Abilities producing Feeling? The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus, there are these five mental abilities to feel (vedanÄ? ). What five? The ability to feel pleasure (sukha ). The ability to feel pain (dukkha ). The ability to feel gladness (somanassa ). The ability to feel sadness (domanassa ). The ability to feel equanimity ( upekkhÄ?). What, Bhikkhus, is the ability to feel pleasure? Whatever bodily pleasure there is, whatever bodily comfort, any pleasant agreeable feeling born of body-contact: This, Bhikkhus, is called the ability to feel pleasure. What, Bhikkhus, is the ability to feel pain? Whatever bodily pain there is, whatever bodily discomfort, painful disagreeable feeling born of body-contact: This, Bhikkhus, is called the ability to feel pain. What, Bhikkhus, is the ability to feel gladness? Whatever mental pleasure & joy there is, whatever mental comfort, pleasant agreeable feeling born of mental contact: This, Bhikkhus, is called the ability to feel gladness. What, Bhikkhus, is the ability to feel sadness? Whatever mental frustration there is, whatever mental discomfort, disagreeable feeling born of mental contact: This, Bhikkhus, is the ability to feel sadness. What, Bhikkhus, is the ability to feel equanimity? Whatever feeling there is, whether bodily or mental, that is neither comfortable nor uncomfortable, neither agreeable nor disagreeable: This, Bhikkhus, is called the ability to feel equanimity. These, Bhikkhus, are the five abilities to feel feelings. Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V:209] section 48: The Abilities. 36: Definitions ... Noteworthy Central Implications: If unaware & untrained bodily pleasure & mental gladness will incite Greed & Lust & derivatives such as desire, craving, urge & longing! If unaware & untrained bodily pain & mental sadness will induce Aversion & Hate & derivatives such as anger, irritation & opposition! If unaware & untrained mental equanimity will instigate Ignorance, Neglect, & derivatives such as doubt, uncertainty & confusion...!!! If aware & trained mental equanimity will activate bliss, knowing & seeing & will through peace refine & complete all other good states! This core causality made Buddha exclaim: All converges on Feeling!!! Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Ceylon * #70405 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 2:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: e-card from the English countryside nilovg Dear Ken H, thanks for explaining, I continued to be worried. I do not feel so good about their surfing. It is a different matter if one has done this all one's life, like you. But higher waves to be overcome are the waves of ignorance and wrong view. Nina. Op 7-apr-2007, om 23:50 heeft kenhowardau het volgende geschreven: > I think the Beach Boys invented the word surfari. It is a trip (like > a hunting safari) made by surfers in search of waves. Sarah, Jon and > nephew Tom (?) are on their way to Morocco where, apparently, there > are beautiful uncrowded beaches, and where they intend to do a lot of > surfing. #70406 From: han tun Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 3:24 am Subject: Daana Corner (35) hantun1 Daana Corner (35) Dear Dhamma Friends, The following is taken from “Generosity: The Inward Dimension” by Nina Van Gorkom Questions, comments and different views welcome:-) ------------------------------ Three of the unwholesome mental factors are "roots of evil." [6] These are the strong foundation of unwholesome types of consciousness: attachment or greed, aversion or anger, and ignorance. Each of these unwholesome factors has many shades and degrees. We may know that there is attachment when we are greedy for food or desire to acquire someone else's property. However, we may not realize that there is also attachment when we enjoy natural scenery or beautiful music. In society attachment of a subtle kind is considered good, provided we do not harm others. The unwholesome has a wider range than what we call in conventional language "immoral." It can include states that are weaker than the immoral. We cannot force ourselves not to like beautiful things; there are conditions for the arising of attachment. But we can learn to know the difference between the moments which are wholesome and the moments which are unwholesome. A degree of selfishness persists even in moments of subtle attachment. These are different from selfless moments of consciousness accompanied by generosity, when we do not think of our own enjoyment. There is attachment time and again, when we stand up, move around, reach for things, eat or go to sleep. We think of ourselves and want to acquire pleasant things for ourselves. We expect other people to be nice to us, and this is also a form of attachment. We may wonder whether attachment to relatives is wholesome. Attachment to relatives is not wholesome; it is different from pure loving-kindness, which is wholesome. When we cling to the pleasant feeling we derive from the company of relatives or dear friends, there is attachment. When we are genuinely concerned for someone else we do not think of ourselves, and then there is wholesome consciousness. We are so used to living with attachment that we may have never considered the difference between the moments of attachment and the moments of unselfish love. The different types of consciousness succeed one another so rapidly that so long as we have not developed understanding of them, we do not notice that they have changed. The unwholesome root of aversion also has many degrees. It can manifest as slight uneasiness or as coarse anger or hate. Aversion does not arise at the time as attachment. When there is attachment consciousness likes the object that is experienced and when there is aversion consciousness dislikes the object. Attachment arises with certain types of consciousness, not with all types, and so does aversion. Ignorance is an unwholesome root that arises with all types of unwholesome consciousness. It is the root of all evil. Ignorance does not know what is wholesome and what is unwholesome, it does not know anything about what is real. Whenever there is attachment or aversion, at the same time there is also ignorance. Note [6] - See Nyanaponika Thera, The Roots of Good and Evil (Wheel No. 251/253). To be continued. metta, Han #70407 From: han tun Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 3:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Daana Corner (35) hantun1 Dear Nina, There are many points in your essay that are worthy to note. To start with, I am glad you made a reference to: The Roots of Good and Evil: An Anthology by Nyanaponika Thera http://www.virtuescience.com/roots.html Next, you have mentioned about the many shades and degrees of attachment. You also raised a very good point. Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #70408 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 4:46 am Subject: parinibbana sutta / 4 great referenes A Meditation Tip rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Dieter Möller wrote: > > > Robert , please let me explain that my understanding of Theravada is first of all based on the Sutta/Vinaya Pitaka not excluding Abhidhamma and commentaries (e.g.Ven. Buddhadosa), as far as the latter are in accordance /within the framework of the suttas. > To check that - when in doubt - has been explicitly stated by the Buddha before his passing away. > In this way - I hope you agree- misunderstandings may be solved respectively finally be concluded ´to agree to disagree.. so it can't be helped .. ;-) ______________ Dear Dieter, I think you mean the 4 great references. http://www.abhidhamma.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=108 Sarah Abbott wrote From the Commentary to the Parinibbana Sutta: "But in the list [of four things] beginning with sutta, sutta means the three baskets [Suttanta, Vinaya, Abhidhamma] which the three Councils recited. `Accordance with sutta' means legitimate by being in accord [with what is explicitly legitimate]. `The word of a teacher' means the commentary. `One's own opinion' means one's own illumination through grasping an analogy or one's consequent understanding. Of these, sutta should not be rejected, for he who rejects that rejects the Buddha himself. If what is legitimate by being in accord agrees with the sutta, it should be accepted, but otherwise not. If the word of a teacher agrees with the sutta, it should be accepted, but otherwise not. One's own opinion is weakest of all, but if it agrees with the sutta, it should be accepted, but otherwise not. `The three Councils' are the one of five hundred monks, the one of seven hundred, the one of a thousand. Only a sutta transmitted through them is authoritative; any other is a contemptible sutta, not to be accepted. Even though words and syllables appear in the latter, they should be known `as ones which do not appear in the Sutta, are not found in the Vinaya.'" These are the only authorities worthy of a student of Dhamma. Robert #70409 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 2:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] parinibbana sutta / 4 great referenes A Meditation Tip upasaka_howard Hi, Robert (and Dieter) - > > ========================== Robert, I must be missing something, perhaps due to my not paying sufficient attention to previous posts. Are you referring here to SN 6.15, the Parinibbana Sutta? I don't see any reference in there to the matters of "sutta", "teacher", "in accordance with sutta", and "one's own opinion". Where are these referenced, and what is their relationship to the Parinibbana Sutta, please? With metta, Howard #70410 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 2:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] parinibbana sutta / 4 great referenes A Meditation Tip upasaka_howard Hi again, Robert (and Dieter) - In a message dated 4/8/07 9:04:56 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Upasaka writes: > Robert, I must be missing something, perhaps due to my not paying > sufficient attention to previous posts. Are you referring here to SN 6.15, the > Parinibbana Sutta? I don't see any reference in there to the matters of > "sutta", "teacher", "in accordance with sutta", and "one's own opinion". Where are > these referenced, and what is their relationship to the Parinibbana Sutta, > please? > > With metta, > Howard > ====================== Ah, I found my own answer: It is the MAHA-Parinibbana Sutta, DN 16, that is being referred to. A transaltion of a relevant portion is the following: And there the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Now, bhikkhus, I shall make known to you the four great references. 37 Listen and pay heed to my words." And those bhikkhus answered, saying:"So be it, Lord."8-11. Then the Blessed One said: "In this fashion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu might speak: 'Face to face with the Blessed One, brethren, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a community with elders and a chief. Face to face with that community, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name live several bhikkhus who are elders, who are learned, who have accomplished their course, who are preservers of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with those elders, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a single bhikkhu who is an elder, who is learned, who has accomplished his course, who is a preserver of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with that elder, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation.' The four references or authoritative sources given here are (1) The Buddha, himself, declaring in one's presence what is Dhammavinaya, (2) A community of elder monks and a chief declaring such in one's presence, (3) A few dedicated and learned elder monks declaring such in one's presence, and (4) A single bhikkhu who is a learned and devoted elder declaring such in one's presence. To double check, I looked at this sutta in Maurice Walshe's translation of the DN. This gives a different picture: (1) Is a bhikkhu who SAYS he heard declared "This is the Dhammavinaya" from the Buddha's own lips, (2) a community of elders as above, (3) a group of elders as above, and (4) a single elder as above, and, in each case, it is said that what is claimed shoul be confirmed by comparing with recorded sutta and discipline In any case, this is different from giving the four references as "sutta", "teacher", "in accordance with sutta", and "one's own opinion", though. The four sources are given as a monk claiming direct hearing from the Buddha, a community of elders, a group of elders, and a single elder, and in each case, the claim from that source is to be compared against sutta and discipline, where sutta may indeed mean.generally the record of the teaching or it might literally refer to the Sutta Pitaka. One more question in this regard: As for "sutta" referring to the three baskets, did the Abhidhamma Pitaka, as opposed to proto-abhidammic materials that served as basis for it, already exist at the time the Buddha spoke the Mahaparinibbana Sutta? With metta, Howard #70411 From: Dieter Möller Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 6:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] parinibbana sutta / 4 great referenes A Meditation Tip moellerdieter Dear Robert, though I am quiet sure, you know the the wording of DN 16 , which refers explicitly to Sutta and Discipline /Vinaya... (similar SN XX 7, AN IV 180) once again the text: DN 16 the 4 Great References /transl. by Sister Vajira & Francis Story 8-11. Then the Blessed One said: "In this fashion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu might speak: 'Face to face with the Blessed One, brethren, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a community with elders and a chief. Face to face with that community, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name live several bhikkhus who are elders, who are learned, who have accomplished their course, who are preservers of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with those elders, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a single bhikkhu who is an elder, who is learned, who has accomplished his course, who is a preserver of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with that elder, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation.' "In such a case, bhikkhus, the declaration of such a bhikkhu is neither to be received with approval nor with scorn. Without approval and without scorn, but carefully studying the sentences word by word, one should trace them in the Discourses and verify them by the Discipline. If they are neither traceable in the Discourses nor verifiable by the Discipline, one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is not the Blessed One's utterance; this has been misunderstood by that bhikkhu -- or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' In that way, bhikkhus, you should reject it. But if the sentences concerned are traceable in the Discourses and verifiable by the Discipline, then one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is the Blessed One's utterance; this has been well understood by that bhikkhu -- or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' And in that way, bhikkhus, you may accept it on the first, second, third, or fourth reference. These, bhikkhus, are the four great references for you to preserve." worthwhile to read as well the comment by G.Shatz (extract from the link I recommended): ,Notice that on his deathbed he didn't say anything about comparing later teachings to the authority of the Abhidhamma Pitaka and the commentaries when trying to assess their conformity to the Dhamma. Why is this? Because the Abhidhamma Pitaka and the commentaries didn't yet exist at the time of the Buddha's Parinibbana (~483 BCE). In fact, the Abhidhamma Pitaka wasn't even added to the canon at the second council which transpired ~100 years after his death (~383 BCE), but was only added at the time of the third council (~250 BCE). This means that the earliest commentarial notion of jhana wasn't even included in the canonical oral transmission before this time - a full 230 years after the Buddha's death. It's hard to imagine just how long 230 years really is, but suffice to say it's a very long period of time, during which any number of novel innovations and even deviations from the Sutta Pitaka could occur in the commentarial tradition. And even in the Abhidhamma Pitaka and Patisambhidamagga there's no mention whatsoever of a prerequisite counterpart sign (patibhaga-nimitta), or jhana as a state of fixed absorption (appana-samadhi).' unquote with Metta Dieter #70412 From: Dieter Möller Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 7:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] parinibbana sutta / 4 great referenes A Meditation Tip moellerdieter Hi Howard, posting from Germany seems to take a bit of time ( sent 15.06 h ..received confirmation15.56).. otherwise I would have incl. your message in my answer ;-) with Metta Dieter #70413 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 7:20 am Subject: bhaavana and the body nilovg Hi Howard (and Scott), I followed your dialogue with Scott with interest. Let me take out one point at a time: concept and reality. You see one citta or one cetasika as a reality but citta and cetasikas which arise together you see as a concept. Or rupakhandha you see as a concept. I try to understand you. Perhaps this is because of your phenomenological view of realities. You call something a reality at the moment it is cognised or noted, thus, one object at a time, such as citta, or one cetasika. You may note generosity, a cetasika, but at the same time you cannot know the citta it accompanies, or the other cetasikas, and therefore, you see these as concepts. Is this the case? If that is so, so be it. As you know, I do not see it this way. Nina. #70414 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 7:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Daana Corner (35) nilovg Dear Han, thank you for your kind post to me. There is something I need to consider more. This morning when having breackfast enjoying taste and listening to quiet organ music, I remembered what Kh Sujin had said: I remarked to Lodewijk that I prefer this approach. It makes whatever we learn so much alive, so actual. The four noble Truths are not abstract, they are not theory. Nina. Op 8-apr-2007, om 12:33 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > There is attachment time and again, when we stand up, > move around, reach for things, eat or go to sleep. We > think of ourselves and want to acquire pleasant things > for ourselves. #70415 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 3:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] parinibbana sutta / 4 great referenes A Meditation Tip upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 4/8/07 10:10:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: > Hi Howard, > posting from Germany seems to take a bit of time ( sent 15.06 h ..received > confirmation15.56).. otherwise I would have incl. your message in my answer > ;-) > > with Metta Dieter > ==================== Just as well that it was independent of my post. :-) With metta, Howard #70416 From: han tun Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 7:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Daana Corner (35) hantun1 Dear Nina, Again, one more excellent point to note! The Four Noble Truths are not abstract, they are not theory, but they are to be applied to the present moment. Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #70417 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 4:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] bhaavana and the body upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 4/8/07 10:21:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard (and Scott), > I followed your dialogue with Scott with interest. Let me take out > one point at a time: concept and reality. > You see one citta or one cetasika as a reality but citta and > cetasikas which arise together you see as a concept. > ------------------------------------ Howard: No, Nina, I do not. A citta and cetasikas that arise all together are each a relity, and not a concept. The *group* is a concept. I keep on saying this, Nina - I keep on making the distinction. A group of "X" is not an X. A group of molecules is not a molecule. A sangha of monks is not a monk. A collection of paramattha dhammas is not a paramattha dhamma. ---------------------------------- Or rupakhandha > > you see as a concept. ------------------------------- Howard: Certainly. Just as the collection of rupas we call a human body is a concept. -------------------------------- I try to understand you. Perhaps this is > > because of your phenomenological view of realities. > -------------------------------- Howard: No, that has no bearing on it. -------------------------------- You call > > something a reality at the moment it is cognised or noted, thus, one > object at a time, such as citta, or one cetasika. You may note > generosity, a cetasika, but at the same time you cannot know the > citta it accompanies, or the other cetasikas, and therefore, you see > these as concepts. Is this the case? If that is so, so be it. ------------------------------- Howard: No, Nina, that's not it. What is being discussed are collections, like Nagasena's chariot. They are concept. That's all I'm saying, nothing more. -------------------------------- > As you know, I do not see it this way. > Nina. > > ===================== With metta, Howard #70418 From: Dieter Möller Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 10:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Meditation Tip moellerdieter Hi Sukinder ( Han and friends) , thanks for your wellcome! I remember your name ( in relation to Buddhology? ) but believe we never communicated directly.. you wrote : 'I would like to use this post of yours as basis for discussing some related points if you don't mind..?' D: it is my pleasure ;-) S: The 'ball and bath powder' simile may be about piti and this may refer literally to this conventional 'whole body', I don't know and am not interested about at this point. One thing I have noted here on DSG is that while discussions about the finer details of Jhana and whether this forms part of the Path to enlightenment goes on, none of its proponents seem interested in talking about the basic conditions that lead to Jhana and/or Vipassana. I hope you will not mind discussing this? D: yes, it may be useful discussing this .. about the other see later S: I think that you will agree that Jhana is the outcome of the development of Samatha and this refers to the 'calm' of kusala. D: yes without samatha no jhana... I think we agree :samatha = tranquility , a peaceful mind rather free from the 5 hindrances, or (- using the simile in which the Buddha compared the mind with a monkey , jumping from branch to branch day and night without rest) letting the monkey take a break STherefore it is not as many seem to think, merely a matter of 'concentration' on some chosen object. It is first and foremost about understanding the danger of attachment in relation to sense objects experienced through the six doorways. D: I see samatha as a precondition for concentration , where we fix the monkey (mind) on one spot and keep it there, i.e. focus on an object , like breathing When we sit down for meditation we must let go our wordly attachments or better in detail: nivarana , the 5 hindrances ). Do you think that is not wellknown by many? S: How is this 'understanding' reflected and begin to develop if not now in daily life? Is there truly any seeing of attachment to kama objects so much so that a sense of urgency is aroused? Does morality come about easily as a consequence of such seeing? Does one therefore also see limitations in the household life D: ok but now you seem to suggest a far more general topic S: I don't ever see anyone talking about any of this but instead there is big talk about exalted states and theories about how samatha and vipassana must be developed together. When Nina recently wrote to Han saying that samatha must go together with the development of vipassana, what she meant was that the realities involved in the development of the former, if these are not known with insight as 'conditioned realities', then it is quite useless in light of the development of the Path. In other words, the Teachings is about the need to develop the understanding of conditioned realities, all namas and rupas, and this has no particular relation to the development of samatha. D: as I am participating in DSG only recently , I don't know .. but I remember the discussion in lists about samatha and vipassana is going on since years. Assumed Han is forgiving me to copy from one of his messages to me I especially favored ( another list 2 years ago .. Hi Han , I hope you are well and hope permission subsequently granted ? ;-) ) quote: First of all, it is necessary to understand what one means by "dry insight". There are two types of meditation, namely samatha meditation and vipassana meditation. During Lord Buddha's time meditators used to practice samatha meditation first and then switched on to vipassana meditation. But now-a-days, most people find that to practice samatha meditation to attain jhana is much more difficult than to practice vipassana meditation directly to attain insight wisdom. Therefore the Sayadaws in Burma recommend the practitioners to start straight away with the vipassana meditation without wasting time to attain jhanas first. The underlying factor for samatha is samadhi and the underlying factor for vipassana is panna or wisdom. However, for a meditator who practices vipassana meditation directly, although he does not try to attain jhana first, he does not ignore the samadhi altogether. Mahasi Sayadaw said that the momentary samadhi or khanika samadhi attained by vipassana meditator is sufficient to attain insight wisdom. Therefore, it is important to note that dry insight might be equated with "non-jhanic" tradition, but it will be wrong to equate it with "non-samadhi". Thus, what I am doing is to try to get into vipassana directly, but at the same time I try to develop samadhi at least to the level of khanika samadhi. In other words I do not try to attain jhana first, but I do not ignore the development of samadhi completely. I might call it "sub-jhanic" level of samadhi which I am trying to achieve, simultaneously with insight wisdom. unquote S: Buddha's Dhamma is about seeing the danger in "ignorance" unlike the development of samatha/Jhana which is focused on seeing the danger of "attachment". Therefore, while we continue to seek the development of samatha/jhana with the hope that this leads to/supports vipassana panna, we are in fact at those moments, increasing ignorance of the Four noble Truths and *not* following the Teachings! Actually, with such a view, one develops neither of these, not having sight of their differing goals, but something all together. D: now , I think it should be clear that Jhana or right concentration is part of the 3 fold Noble Path training (sila , samadhi , panna).. a step by step development with individual approaches (of perfection) to all links of the path. You will know the different types of students mentioned in the suttas K: S: Actually, as far as I can see, only two persons both holding Right View can ever be said to agree with/understand each other. The rest, will at best be in the position of 'agreeing to agree' or 'agreeing to disagree', even though they may not realize this. Much of the time however, there is complete confusion. When there is "wrong understanding", what is expressed is a perversion, and so even if the two parties involved might think that they agree, in reality they are being taken in by words/ideas/explanations which both are happy to rest upon. D: there is a long way from a first understanding to perfect understanding (samma ditthi) and common understanding rather rare .. happy to rest upon .. isn't it ? ;-) S: It is so easy to agree in delusion. The Moon which is pointed to, if this is not present moment realities, is a 'concept' and this is fertile ground for perversion of perception, consciousness and views! I don't think it wise to therefore 'believe in' such evaluation of experiences, let alone that 'ours' is the same as 'theirs' D: I think you misunderstood what I intended to say . The Buddha used similes/allegories for the benefit of understanding ...so the finger pointing to the moon was meant to be an analogy to bathman, water , ball of bathpowder in respect to piti and approach to the body . (In case Jon is reading this message too: I recognized that bath powder is mentioned in the vinaya ....at that time it was probably the custom that well to do people used the service of a bathman who soaped them with a ball of bath powder prepared for each service) S: This does not mean though, that we can't discuss with each other. But given the fact that we come from the position of "not knowing" and only beginning to take baby steps towards understanding, we should allow for increased precision first at the intellectual level. And more than the Suttas, the Abhidhamma allows for this to happen. D: yes , one should apply 'baby steps ' towards understanding .. remembering many failures from the past . As I see it the suttas provide an angle to translate into one's own experience , the Abhidhamma gives us the possibility to order it by categorization. ( perhaps like Aristotle in respect to Socrates ;-) ) There is a danger of an ivory tower , when the intellect uses terms /categories without connection to personal experience S: This is a problem of those who *do not agree* with the Abhidhamma/Commentaries. The Abhidhamma perspective is in fact the Abhidhamma/Sutta/Vinaya/Commentaries. This understanding however, seems to leave little room for any "self" to "do" anything in order to speed up the process of development and therefore is a threat to "self view". The Sutta/Vinaya with its many 'stories' about 'people and situations' encourages an interpretation which "self" feels comfortable with, and so one without any hesitation dismisses the Abhidhamma and Commentaries. And so in making this distinction as you have made above, and choosing to be on the one side, namely, Sutta/Vinaya; one has unwittingly fallen prey to a particular aspect of Mara, doing harm to the Sasana. Sorry to be blunt here D: I would have not joined DSG if dismissing Abhidhamma /commentaries right away. In fact I respect the A. being the third basket of the Canon, however in case of doubt would rely on the Sutta (Vinaya) Nikaya . i.e. Mahapadesa, the Great References) and still believe it may be a treasure to support one's progress in wisdom. Unfortunately my impression is sometimes that there is too less listening from the A. side in order to reach a consens. S: Sorry to be blunt here. I repeat my welcome to you Dieter and hope that you will not be put off by my opposing stance, and would like to say sincerely here, that this group would be less interesting to me were it without such opposing opinions. ;-) D: we need to be blunt from time to time , otherwise our point of view remains unclear and I totally agree that a group discussion lives by opposing opinions. Thank you for your kind mail and hoping for more exchange .. with Metta Dieter #70419 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 11:52 am Subject: Rupas Ch 7, 1. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 7 Rúpas originating from different factors The study of rúpas that are produced by kamma, citta, temperature or nutrition is beneficial for the understanding of our daily life. When we study the conditions for our experiences and bodily functions, we shall better understand that our life is only nåma and rúpa. This again reminds us to be aware so that realities can be known as they are. In this human plane of existence experiences through the senses arise time and again, such as seeing and hearing, and these could not occur without the body. The sense-cognitions have as their physical places of origin their appropriate sense-bases (vatthus) and these are produced by kamma throughout our life. All other cittas have as their physical base the heart-base (hadaya-vatthu) and this kind of rúpa is produced by kamma from the first moment of life. In the planes of existence where there are nåma and rúpa, citta needs a physical base, it could not arise without the body. The rúpa that is life-faculty (jívitindriya) is also produced by kamma from the first moment of life. Moreover, it is due to kamma whether we are born as a female or as a male. The rúpas that are the femininity-faculty (itthindriyaÿ) and the masculinity-faculty (purisindriyaÿ) have a great influence on our daily life. They condition our outward appearance, our behaviour, the way we walk, stand, sit or lie down, our voice, our occupation, our place and status in society. All these kinds of rúpa arise in groups, that always include the eight inseparable rúpas and also life- faculty. Some kinds of rúpa are produced solely by kamma, some are produced solely by citta, such as bodily intimation (kaya-viññatti) and speech- intimation (vací-viññatti). Some kinds of rúpa can be produced by kamma, citta, temperature or nutrition. The eight inseparable rúpas of solidity, cohesion, temperature, motion, colour, odour, flavour and nutrition can be produced by either one of the four factors. If kamma produces them, they always arise together with life-faculty, and in addition they can arise with other rúpas produced by kamma. Citta produces groups of the eight inseparable rúpas from the moment the bhavanga-citta (life-continuum) that succeeds the rebirth- consciousness arises. ****** Nina. #70420 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 11:52 am Subject: Perfections N, 3. nilovg Dear friends, When we find out that the Buddha's teachings really help us to know ourselves better we gain more confidence in them. Each time we visit the holy places we can recollect his birth, his enlightenment, his first sermon and his parinibbana with more confidence, reverence and gratefulness. VIJJA CARANASAMPANNO-ENDOWED WITH KNOWLEDGE AND VIRTUE, These are qualities of the Buddha we praise when we pay homage to him. What is the meaning of these words? We read in the “Visuddhimagga” (VII,32) : Herein, the Blessed One’s possession of clear vision consists in the fulfilment of Omniscience (Ps. 1, 131), while his possession of conduct (virtue) consists in the fulfilment of the Great Compassion (Ps. 1, 126). He knows through omniscience what is good and harmful for all beings, and through compassion he warns them of harm and exhorts them to do good. Out of compassion the Buddha developed during his lives as a Bodhisatta the ten perfections, paramis, so that he eventually could become the Sammasambuddha, an omniscient Buddha who has discovered the truth all by himself and who is able to teach the truth to others as well. We read in the Introduction to the jatakas, the Buddha's birth stories, that the Bodhisatta, aeons ago, when he was born as the brahman Sumedha, came to realize that it is sorrowful to be subject to birth, old age and death. He wanted to look for the way leading to freedom from birth and he became an ascetic. He acquired proficiency in the jhanas and supernatural powers. Once he saw people clearing a path for the Buddha Dipankara and he helped full of joy. The Buddha approached before Sumedha's work was finished and he, with great devotion, lay down on the mud, wishing that the Buddha would tread on him. He aspired to become a Buddha in the future and the Buddha Dipankara declared that his aspiration would reach fulfilment. Sumedha then considered the ten perfections he would have to develop during innumerable lives as a Bodhisatta in order to attain Buddhahood. The ten perfections are the following: liberality (dåna) morality (síla) renunciation (nekkhamma) wisdom (paññå) energy (viriya) patience (khanti) truthfulness (sacca) determination (aditthåna) lovingkindness (mettå) equanimity (upekkhå) The Bodhisatta was unshakable in his resolution to develop the paramis in order to attain Buddhahood for the welfare and happiness of other beings. He always had in mind to alleviate the sufferings of beings and he was prepared to give his life for them. He was mindful of his ultimate goal, the attainment of Buddhahood, also when he encountered great difficulties and obstacles. He practised the perfections with constancy and vigour, out of compassion for us, so that we too can attain enlightenment. ******* Nina. #70421 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 2:46 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Leading to stream entry kenhowardau Hi Scott, ---------------------- <. . .> S: > along with maintaining the centrality of the momentaneity of consciousness, one needs to consider the 'dynamics' of the way one moment succeeds a previous moment, and so on. I was only pointing out the possibility that a balance might be required which includes a balance of 'content' and 'process'. ----------------------- Yes, I like that. I think the understanding of momentariness can be equated with the first noble truth. All conditioned (momentary) dhammas are, after all, dukkha. Then your term 'dynamics' could be equated with the second NT (the cause of dukkha). Without that balance there could be no cessation of dukkha and no way leading to it. However, I don't accept that my hardline interpretation of the Dhamma lacks that kind of balance. The only balance that it might lack would be with conventional reality, and I make no apologies for that. :-) ----------------------------------- <. . .> KH: > > 'Faultless and faulty actions' seems to me to be very dangerous terminology. At any moment in which there is there right understanding of reality there is no concept of actions - of walking or of telling the difference between birds and animals etc." S: > Kamma, for example. What is it? I think it is 'action'. I think this can either be 'faultless' or 'faulty', 'advantageous' or 'disadvantageous' (Nyanatiloka), 'kusala' or 'akusala'. I think you are referring to 'concept', if I'm reading you accurately, and saying there is 'no person who does anything' or 'no one acting' or something like that. ------------------------------------- Not exactly. I have no disagreement about kusala and akusala kamma. There is no one who does or acts, but that is not what I meant. I thought U Narada's explanation gave the impression there could be kusala and akusala concepts, which, of course, there can't. (There are only dhammas.) -------------------------------- S: > I think the excerpt might be suggesting that, although wrong view conditions thoughts of concepts when 'action' occurs - as you say, it is, among other things, jhaana-paccaya which assists in the dynamics of existence such that actions occur and become condition to bring about result. Is this a way to bridge things? -------------------------------- The only bridge building that I am familiar with is a kind that I disagree with. It is an attempt to put anatta aside in order that insight can be "deliberately practised" (as if it were just another conventional reality). While you, Robert and Andrew agree with me on that,you (and, quite possibly, others) see a need for another type of bridge building. I still can't see what it is. ------------------------------------ S: > I like the way Azita put it in her recent reply to James: "...not sure about this 'no effort', because there is effort/energy with almost every citta or moment of consciousness. I somehow think the emphasis is placed differently. There is effort but it dosen't belong to anyone! It is our perversion of perception that makes us believe 'we'can do something. Listening to KS has never stopped me doing things that I think are wholesome, with some effort involved:-) however its good to be reminded that effort arises, and falls away, and that there is no 'me' in the effort." This is good, I think, because it accepts the dynamics as well as the static moment. ------------------------------------- Yes, I agree with all of that. And that means that I (like you) accept the dynamics as well as the moment. Some people could read Azita's message and still have the wrong idea of two realities. But there is only one. Effort is a cetasika that arises, performs its functions and falls away in the space of just one citta. Kamma does the same. There is no other reality. We understand that, but, not being ariyans, we have only intellectual understanding. For the time being, we continue in our conventional ways. But at least we have an intellectual understanding that there really only dhammas. ------------------ <. . .> S: > The bigger picture, I think, thanks to a factoring in of conditional relations, is that the conditioning dhammas, conditioned dhammas and the forces inherent in their connections allow for the coherence and dynamics of the moment-to-moment process to be elaborated. This allows for the reality of the moment, with all its complexity to be preserved, while demonstrating how these moments relate the moments in succession. Take kamma. An act, and I'm standing for correction, does not have its result immediately, necessarily, yet is condition for the arising of its result at some point future to it. What say you? ---------------------- Yes, I think that is well said, and I agree with all of it. Ken H #70422 From: han tun Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 3:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Meditation Tip hantun1 Dear Dieter and Sukinder, Dieter wrote: “as I am participating in DSG only recently, I don't know, but I remember the discussion in lists about samatha and vipassana is going on since years. Assumed Han is forgiving me to copy from one of his messages to me I especially favored (another list 2 years ago.) Hi Han, I hope you are well and hope permission subsequently granted?;-)) Han: I am honoured by your quoting my old post. I am also grateful to you for that, because I have a very poor retentive memory and it gives me a chance to refresh my memory on what I had written two years ago. I am well, Dieter, still alive and kicking. Thank you very much. I am following with keen interest your discussions with Sukinder. Sukinder is the one who had kindly introduced me to Khun Sujin’s teachings, and my warmest regards to Sukinder. With metta, Han #70423 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 4:12 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Leading to stream entry scottduncan2 Dear Ken H., Thanks for the reply: "...However, I don't accept that my hardline interpretation of the Dhamma lacks that kind of balance. The only balance that it might lack would be with conventional reality, and I make no apologies for that. :-)" Scott: I think I've got it, Ken. I'll try to keep arguing about something else below. K: "...Not exactly. I have no disagreement about kusala and akusala kamma. There is no one who does or acts, but that is not what I meant. I thought U Narada's explanation gave the impression there could be kusala and akusala concepts, which, of course, there can't. (There are only dhammas.)" Scott: I'm going to put the quote back in just to refer to it, if you don't mind: "It is due to jhaana condition that a faultless or a faulty action in thought, word or deed can be completely performed from the beginning right through to the end. Without jhaana condition it would not be possible (i) to clearly distinguish birds from animals, (ii) to clearly distinguish what and whose form it is, (iii) to take one straight step forward correctly, for, if at the beginning the foot was pointed eastwards, it would point southwards in the middle and westwards at the end of the step. Or else, while taking the step forward, the mind would take another object and forget about the step altogether, (iv) to pronounce one word correctly. This shows how swiftly the mind is distracted and changed..." Scott: I don't quite agree that what you suggest about kusala and akusala concepts. As I read above, I first note reference to 'birds' and 'animals', as well as 'what and whose form it is'. If I'm not mistaken, these refer to concepts. I'm not able to see any reference to kusala or akusala concepts. I see 'faultless and faulty action in thought, word or deed' and figure this may be the phrase in question. I see this as being qualified by 'completely performed from the beginning right through to the end'. Without misunderstanding that there is someone who starts and finishes something, here's how I think this does not refer to 'kusala or akusala concepts: Say, for example, I decide to go moose hunting (perish the thought). I'd say that the moment of consciousness which first arises and conditions action is akusala. I'd say that it would be jhaana-paccaya, among other conditions, that would be the force that kept this 'goal' in mind, or, in other words, that allowed for the perpetuation, from moment to moment of the intention to kill a moose. This would persist, from moment to moment, while a firearm was secured, a license purchased (law-abiding, eh), a location scouted, a means of transport arranged, a date set, a trip prepared and taken, a search for moose, a sighting and, finally, a killing of a moose. The final act of killing - in fact all of the thoughts, words and deeds related to this final act - would be, from beginning to end, conditioned in part by jhaana-paccaya as I think is described in the quote. This would be many, many, many akusala moments from start to finish, interspersed, no doubt, with many others. (I can see a role for sa~n~na here as well, but don't know right now what more to say about that.) Nowhere, can I see, is there a need to think of a person doing the moose hunting. I think there would be lots of mind-made ruupas creating millions of gestures, postures and the like, all cemented by jhaana-paccaya, one after the other after the other. That a moose would be killed, in the end, would attest to the akusala-nature of the complex series of mind-moment which would naturally lead from first akusala-citta to dead moose. The death of the moose, also concept, can also be described from an ultimate point of view, I think. K: "The only bridge building that I am familiar with is a kind that I disagree with. It is an attempt to put anatta aside in order that insight can be "deliberately practised" (as if it were just another conventional reality). While you, Robert and Andrew agree with me on that,you (and, quite possibly, others) see a need for another type of bridge building. I still can't see what it is." Scott: I don't agree with bridge-building, as, say, between Science and Dhamma, or Psychology and Dhamma, or My Ideas and Dhamma. Eclecticism is for taste in music or clothes or something, not Dhamma. I'm guessing we agree here. I think the 'bridge' I was referring to is, obviously, only conceptual and would allow for a grasp of anatta and that there is no one who practises while remaining cognizant that what appear to be actions performed by someone are nonetheless incredibly complex dhammas in succession. The moose got killed. The gift gets given. What do you think? Sincerely, Scott. #70424 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 6:44 pm Subject: Re: e-card from the English countryside buddhatrue Hi Sarah, Very nice e-card. I like the atmosphere you create with your descriptions. I also appreciate what you are doing with the children that you are encountering- teaching them the dhamma at their own level (which is something we all need...as we often tend to bite off more than we can chew ;-)). > p.s James, after this trip I should be re-viatalized for more debates - That's good. > perhaps we could swap sides and you could argue the KS line appreciating > the importance of understanding realities now and I could challenge you on > it:-) ;-)) Like Howard, I don't like "assignments" too much, but I still usually do them. ;-)) However, this one would be dangerous. The last thing I would want to do is give you more fuel for wrong view. After all, this isn't a game. :-) Metta, James #70425 From: "gazita2002" Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 7:39 pm Subject: Re: Letters on Vipassana 11, no 2. gazita2002 Hello James, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Azita, > > Oh, good, I'm glad I got you debating! ;-)) :-)) > Azita: you know, I've listened to KS quite a lot, and I've > never heard her say that we must abandon Buddhas teachings right at > the onset. > > James: That was my summary of how I view her teaching. She stresses > that no effort must be made toward enlightenment. azita: No, I think you have it wrong. Her stresses come from the position of if its 'self' that making all this effort and trying to 'see' dhammas then that is wrong path and that the 'no effort' position comes from understanding even if that understanding is very weak, that the arising and falling of dhammas NOW are not within 'our' control. The 1st noble truth: all is dukkha. What is this all, it is now, the dhammas that are arising and falling away now, are dukkha, because we perversely think we can control them, 'we' cant. It goes along with detachment, not attachment to a self who cna do something. > James: Am I supposed to be impressed by this? She sounds like a > librarian. What does a librarian know about the Buddha's teaching? ;- azita: sounds a bit elitist! whats tje difference bet a librarian, a teacher, a monk if they all have right view about the Buddha's teachings? > Azita: It is our perversion of perception that makes us > believe 'we'can do something. > > James: Well, if you don't believe you can do anything then don't do > anything. How is that working for you so far? Have you found > improved inner peace and wisdom from doing nothing different? (This > is really important because it will determine if there is value to be > found in doing nothing special toward enlightenment.) azita: remarked to a friend recently, that I have observed less and less reasons for being mean and unkind to others, more reasons to give, maybe more patience and that I have not actively tried to be/do these things- they appear to be the result of listening, contemplating and living in accordance with understanding, when is arises. Unfortunately, James, I am runing out of time, I have to go to work. so will continue later to answer your following questions. patience, courage and good cheer, azita #70426 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 8:48 pm Subject: Optimal Observance VIII: Not using high, comfy & luxurious beds! bhikkhu5 Friends: What are the 8 Precepts which brings Divinity? The Blessed Buddha once said: The habitual praxis of the observance day endowed with eight features brings high reward and blessing, & is of sublime dignity and greatness! And which are these eight features? In this, any Noble Disciple considers within himself: Throughout their life the Arahats avoid high and luxurious beds, using only a low couch, be it a mattress on or close to the floor or simply a layer of straw... May I also this very day & night avoid high, comfy, & luxurious beds! By that I will follow the track & traits of the perfected Arahats! I shall then have observed the Uposatha observance day perfectly! With this eighth praxis is the observance day enriched. Observed in this very way, the observance day endowed with eight features brings high - even divine - reward & blessing & is of sublime dignity and immense greatness... Source (edited extract): Numerical Discourses of the Buddha. Anguttara Nikaya AN 8:44 http://what-buddha-said.net/Canon/Sutta/AN/Index.Numerical.htm More on this Optimal Buddhist Uposatha Day Observance: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Fullmoon_Observance_Day.htm http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/atthasila.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/uposatha.html Optimal Observance VIII: Avoidance of high and luxurious beds! When humble as doormat, modest, living simple, the bliss is dense! Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Ceylon * #70427 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 9:27 pm Subject: Re: bhaavana and the body buddhatrue Hi Nina, Howard, and Scott (and All), This conversation over concepts vs. realities reminds me of another famous conversation: Abbott: Goofè Dean. Well, let's see, we have on the bags, Who's on first, What's on second, I Don't Know is on third... Costello: That's what I want to find out. Abbott: I say Who's on first, What's on second, I Don't Know's on third. Costello: Are you the manager? Abbott: Yes. Costello: You gonna be the coach too? Abbott: Yes. Costello: And you don't know the fellows' names? Abbott: Well I should. Costello: Well then who's on first? Abbott: Yes. Costello: I mean the fellow's name. Abbott: Who. Costello: The guy on first. Abbott: Who. Costello: The first baseman. Abbott: Who. Costello: The guy playing... Abbott: Who is on first! Costello: I'm asking YOU who's on first. Abbott: That's the man's name. Costello: That's who's name? Abbott: Yes. Costello: Well go ahead and tell me. Abbott: That's it. Costello: That's who? Abbott: Yes. http://www.baseball-almanac.com/humor4.shtml ;-)) There is never going to be an agreement or understanding because Nina and Scott see dhammas as self-existent realities while Howard sees dhammas as elements of experience. To Nina and Scott a group of dhammas are still dhammas because they are self-existent realities, to Howard a group of dhammas (including the Khandas) are concept because they are no longer elements of direct experience (since only one thing at a time can be directly experienced). There will never be a resolution to this discussion. (This is the reason why I never join in with the concept vs. reality debate.) Let's see how that other famous discussion ends: Costello: Naturally. Abbott: That's different. Costello: That's what I said. Abbott: You're not saying it... Costello: I throw the ball to Naturally. Abbott: You throw it to Who. Costello: Naturally. Abbott: That's it. Costello: That's what I said! Abbott: You ask me. Costello: I throw the ball to who? Abbott: Naturally. Costello: Now you ask me. Abbott: You throw the ball to Who? Costello: Naturally. Abbott: That's it. Costello: Same as you! Same as YOU! I throw the ball to who. Whoever it is drops the ball and the guy runs to second. Who picks up the ball and throws it to What. What throws it to I Don't Know. I Don't Know throws it back to Tomorrow, Triple play. Another guy gets up and hits a long fly ball to Because. Why? I don't know! He's on third and I don't give a darn! Abbott: What? Costello: I said I don't give a darn! Abbott: Oh, that's our shortstop. LOL! Metta, James #70428 From: "Dan D." Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 10:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Meditation Tip onco111 Dear Robert, I think you are right. The word in DN 2 is "kaayo", which is "group, heap, collection, aggregate, body", and the rupas of the "body" cannot be what is referred to here. Dan > In the sutta you quote the translation is a little misleading. > The "body' refered to is actually the body of cetasikas, not rupa, if > I remember correctly. In first jhaana it is, of course, impossible to > perceive any physical data at all. #70429 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 11:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Meditation Tip rjkjp1 Good to see you here Dan. Perhaps pali experts like Venerable Dhammanando, Suan Lu ZAW or Nina will give us a definitive answer. Robert #70430 From: "colette" Date: Sun Apr 8, 2007 10:54 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Leading to stream entry ksheri3 Happy Easer Scott, Group, Just a quick thought since your subject line caught my eye and as I read I felt I needed to connect. let me qualify my actions at the moment since I'm experiencing a very, highly, CLEAR LIGHT, as I perform meditations in Mahamudra/Dzogchen/Kalachackra. so lets get this done. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Scott: I don't quite agree that what you suggest about kusala and > akusala concepts. As I read above, I first note reference to 'birds' > and 'animals', as well as 'what and whose form it is'. If I'm not > mistaken, these refer to concepts. I'm not able to see any reference > to kusala or akusala concepts. colette: makes sense so far! a space is needed to seperate the thoughts and slow the speed of the message. here's how I think > this does not refer to 'kusala or akusala concepts: > > Say, for example, I decide to go moose hunting (perish the thought). > I'd say that the moment of consciousness which first arises and > conditions action is akusala. I'd say that it would be > jhaana-paccaya, among other conditions, that would be the force that > kept this 'goal' in mind, or, in other words, that allowed for the > perpetuation, from moment to moment of the intention to kill a moose. colette: STOP THIS CRAZY THING! as said by George Jetson. lol "perpetuation", Heavens to Mergatroid as said by Snagglepuss. Perpetuation is synonimous with continuation, no? Citta "falls" as soon as it "rises" and the same with Dhamma. "...the intention to kill..." SHAZAM as said by Gomer Pyle As Three Dog Night once said: "Wash away my troubles. Wash away my fears. I'm on the road to Shamballa." That statement concerning "intention to kill" is way out there. shouldn't we be examining the factors leading to the consciousness of killing as in terms of CAUSE & CONDITIONS? Maybe the urge to go hunting is a right of passage for males in certain cultures and therefore they've totally associated the actual ACT, ACTION, of killing, hunting, with a pleasurable experience such as eating or being a member of a group, or... the intent may not be as simple as killing. There may be an entire host of illusionary qualities to the act of killing which you fail to recognize consciously in samsara. It is a possibility isn't it? but I'll move on. > This would persist, from moment to moment, while a firearm was > secured, a license purchased (law-abiding, eh), a location scouted, a > means of transport arranged, a date set, a trip prepared and taken, a > search for moose, a sighting and, finally, a killing of a moose. colette: OUCH, are you a forensic psychologist in your professional daily life? The same person I'm speaking of here introduced me to the 3 Keliphotic Nagas, maybe I've mispelled the word, but they are 3 Qliphothic evils a human should never approach -- the jews happen to be extremely careful about guarding their traditional Kabballistic traditions and they haven't allowed me to fully understand them as of yet despite my requests a few years ago. But lets move on! "this would persist..." in Western psychology and psychiatry you speak of a fixation which easily turns into an obsession. Again you fail to analyze the situation fully. What could possibly be in the mind that maintains the fixation concerning the killing since that is the act that you focus on, not all that "premeditation" that goes comes with the killing since you speak of what is called in military terms "support activities". > > The final act of killing colette: I've gotta apply classic buddhist phenominology here: once the thought of killing is raised to consciousness the act has already been performed, the conditioning has already accured, the response has already been generated as kusala but lets move on. - in fact all of the thoughts, words and > deeds related to this final act - would be, from beginning to end, > conditioned in part by jhaana-paccaya as I think is described in the > quote. This would be many, many, many akusala moments from start to > finish, interspersed, no doubt, with many others. (I can see a role > for sa~n~na here as well, but don't know right now what more to say > about that.) colette: jhaana-paccaya, in a few days I'm gonna meditate on that concept! Thanx. I do appreciate and like how you recovered here at the end. A very tight basket weave. Sorry I don't have time to continue reading but maybe I'll get to it tomorrow at the library. toodles, colette #70431 From: connie Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 1:08 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (50) nichiconn Dear Friends, We meet up with Pa.taacaaraa again with the sisters starting off Chakkanipaato / The Section of Groups of Six [Verses]: vri: Pa~ncasatamattaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa Pruitt: The commentary on the verses of the five hundred theriis who were mothers CAF RD: Pa.taacaaraa's Five Hundred. *252 *252 Pa~ncasataa Pa.taacaaraa. Dr. Neumann, who disregards the Commentary throughout as a mere exegesis and of less than no historical value, renders pa~ncasataa by 'of fivefold subtlety' - die fu:nfmal Feine - sataa being taken as 'one who has sati' (memory, mindfulness, discernment), Sanskrit sm.itaa. I believe the expression pa~ncasataa occurs nowhere else; nor is there anything in the gaathaa's to justify the soubriquet. Nor am I concerned to euhemerize the, to us, mythical absurdity of 500 bereaved mothers all finding their way to one woman, illustrious teacher and herself bereaved mother though she might be. Five hundred, and one or two more such 'round numbers,' are, in Pali, tantamount simply to our 'dozens of them,' 'an hundredfold,' and the like. But, besides this, the phenomena of huge cities and swarming population are not, in countries of ancient civilization, matters of yesterday's growth, as in our case. Chakkanipaate yassa magga.m na jaanaasiiti-aadikaa pa~ncasatamattaana.m theriina.m gaathaa. Imaapi purimabuddhesu kataadhikaaraa tattha tattha bhave viva.t.tuupanissaya.m kusala.m upacinantiyo anukkamena upacitavimokkhasambhaaraa hutvaa imasmi.m buddhuppaade tattha tattha kulagehe nibbattitvaa In the section of groups of six verses, the verses beginning [You cry, "My son,"] for the one whose way you do not know, etc, belong to the five hundred theriis who were mothers. They too did meritorious deed[s] under previous Buddhas and accumulated good [actions] in various lives as their basis for release. In due course they accumulated the requisites for liberation. In this Buddha era, they were born in the homes of various [good] families. vayappattaa maataapituuhi patikula.m aaniitaa tattha tattha putte labhitvaa gharaavaasa.m vasantiyo samaanajaatikassa taadisassa kammassa katattaa sabbaava mataputtaa hutvaa, puttasokena abhibhuutaa pa.taacaaraaya theriyaa santika.m upasa"nkamitvaa vanditvaa nisinnaa attano sokakaara.na.m aarocesu.m. Therii taasa.m soka.m vinodentii- 127. "Yassa magga.m na jaanaasi, aagatassa gatassa vaa; ta.m kuto caagata.m satta.m, mama puttoti rodasi. 128. "Magga~nca khossa jaanaasi, aagatassa gatassa vaa; na na.m samanusocesi, eva.mdhammaa hi paa.nino. 129. "Ayaacito tataagacchi, naanu~n~naato ito gato; kutoci nuuna aagantvaa, vasitvaa katipaahaka.m; itopi a~n~nena gato, tatopa~n~nena gacchati. 130. "Peto manussaruupena, sa.msaranto gamissati; yathaagato tathaa gato, kaa tattha paridevanaa"ti.- Imaahi catuuhi gaathaahi dhamma.m desesi. When they came of age, they were taken by their parents to husbands' households here and there, and they had children. They led the household life, and because they had done deeds that were similar, they had the same sort of lives. All of them had dead children; and overcome by grief for their children, they went into the presence of Pa.taacaaraa, paid homage, sat down and explained the cause of their grief. The therii dispelled their grief. And she taught the Doctrine with these four verses: 127. You cry "My son," for the one whose way you do not know - neither his coming nor going - for that being who comes from [who knows] where. 128. But you do not grieve for him whose way you know - whether coming or going. For such is the nature of living creatures. 129. Unasked, he came from there. Unpermitted, he went from here - surely having come from somewhere or other, having lived a few days. He went from here by one [road]. He will go from there by another. 130. Passed away, he will go journeying on in human form. As he came, so he went. What lamentation is there in that? RD: THESE too, having fared under former Buddhas as the foregoing Sisters, were, in this Buddha-era, reborn in some clansman's house in divers places, were married, and bore children, living domestic lives. And having wrought karma such as would bring to pass such a result, they suffered bereavement in the death of a child. Then they found their way, overwhelmed with grief, to Pa.taacaaraa, and saluting her, and seated by, her, told her the manner of their sorrow. The Sister, restraining their sorrow, spake thus: The way by which men come we cannot know; Nor can we see the path by which they go. Why mournest then for him who came to thee, Lamenting through thy tears: 'My son! my son!' (127) Seeing thou knowest not the way he came, Nor yet the manner of his leaving thee? Weep not, for such is here the life of man. (128) Unask'd he came, unbidden went he hence. Lo! ask thyself again whence came thy son To bide on earth this little breathing space? (129) By one way come and by another gone, As man to die, and pass to other births - So hither and so hence - why would ye weep? *253 (130) *253 The sharp contrast between this chant of consolation and that which any other religious anthology affords is sufficiently interesting. But if the burden of the chant, in its varied iteration, be imagined, not tripped off on the tongue of a cheerful critic or a disapproving other-believer, but uttered in grave, tender accents, coming from a heart that felt intensely because it had so ached, and from a mind that understood and was therefore serene . . . Even so might Bouguereau's 'Vierge Consolatrice' speak, her great wise eyes looking forth over the anguished bereaved sister flung on her lap, while the dead child lies below at her feet. ==== to be continued, connie #70432 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 1:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Leading to stream entry kenhowardau Hi Scott, I think we have gone astray technically. After a quick look at Nina's "Conditions," and also at "The Buddhist Dictionary," I don't think jhana condition is quite what we thought it was. I don't think it is relevant to the "series of cittas" that you are telking about. It seems to be purely a way in which presently arisen dhammas act on other presently arisen dhammas. I'll quote a little from Nina's book: Vitakka, applied thinking, "touches" the object which is experienced, it leads citta to the object <. . .> vicara, sustained thinking, <. . .> has the characteristic of continued pressure. <. . .> Piti <. . .> takes an interest in the object (end quote) So you get the idea. I think we can read U Narada's comments this way too. Citta (and its cetasikas) can concentrate on an object that is a concept just as well as it can concentrate on an object that is a dhamma. Everything Narada is describing (knowing the difference between a bird and an animal: walking properly etc) happens in one citta. Of course, the same (or similar) thing happens again and again over the course of time - giving the illusion of a single course of action or of a persisting intention. This doesn't change the gist of what you have written. Be it by jhana condition or by some other condition(s) the fact remains that citta has arisen, and there seems to be a connection between the present intention (to kill a moose) and various past intentions. But what is the significance of this in the context of our conversation? How does it make conventional appearances of reality useful in the course of Dhamma study? ---------------- <. . .> S: > Scott: I don't agree with bridge-building, as, say, between Science and Dhamma, or Psychology and Dhamma, or My Ideas and Dhamma. Eclecticism is for taste in music or clothes or something, not Dhamma. I'm guessing we agree here. I think the 'bridge' I was referring to is, obviously, only conceptual and would allow for a grasp of anatta and that there is no one who practises while remaining cognizant that what appear to be actions performed by someone are nonetheless incredibly complex dhammas in succession. The moose got killed. The gift gets given. What do you think --------------- Sorry if I am being thick. or stubborn, or whatever it is, but I still say we can't have it both ways. Ultimately, there was no moose and no gift. The entire world is the few dhammas that have arisen now at one of the six doorways. Stories of moose-hunting and gift-giving might help to describe the dhammas that are akusala-kamma-patha and dana, respectively, but that is all. What do you think? When it comes to insight development, can you see any value in concepts other than as descriptions of dhammas? Ken H #70433 From: "Alan Weller" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 12:26 am Subject: Falling in Love? alanzolag Hi all, Are you in Love or falling in love? A new article on my site www.zolag.co.uk might interest you. Its called Attachment to Another Person and was written by Sarah Abbott 28 years ago! It can be found at the bottom of the download page. #70434 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 2:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Falling in Love? nilovg Hi Alan, thank you. I especially like: As always she points to this moment, the only moment that understanding can be developed. It is good she shows the difficulty of seeing how deeply rooted clinging to self is. Nina. Op 9-apr-2007, om 10:22 heeft Alan Weller het volgende geschreven: > Are you in Love or falling in love? A new article on my > site www.zolag.co.uk might interest you. #70435 From: "Beverly Westheimer" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 4:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Fwd: ADL in audio nsdragonman 2 more uploaded this morning USA EST tom On 05 Apr 2007 12:10:31 -0700, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > Tom just announced that 2 chapters of Abhihamma in Daily Life are on > audio on his website, read by Beverly. > Nina. > > > > Onderwerp: ADL in audio > > > > Preface and Chapters 1-2 are now on-line > > http://westheimers.net/dsg/ > > #70436 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 4:33 am Subject: Re: Falling in Love? buddhatrue Hi Alan (and Sarah), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alan Weller" wrote: > > Hi all, Are you in Love or falling in love? A new article on my > site www.zolag.co.uk might interest you. Its called Attachment to > Another Person and was written by Sarah Abbott 28 years ago! It can > be found at the bottom of the download page. > Very nice article. I was surprised that I agreed with everything presented in it! ;-)) I think it is very important for everyone to read to better understand one's attachements to others. I also like how it states that we are all at different levels of understanding when it comes to attachment to another person, and that a new or higher understanding can't be forced. I was curious, however, about the fact that this was written 28 years ago. In the article, KS gives advice to Sarah not to get married, and Jon is quoted in the article, but as we know Sarah got married to Jon anyway. Perhaps Sarah, in retrospect, would like to comment on this? (if it's not too personal). Metta, James #70437 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 5:09 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Leading to stream entry scottduncan2 Dear colette, Thanks for your reply. Happy Easter to you. Me: "Say, for example, I decide to go moose hunting (perish the thought). I'd say that the moment of consciousness which first arises and conditions action is akusala. I'd say that it would be jhaana-paccaya, among other conditions, that would be the force that kept this 'goal' in mind, or, in other words, that allowed for the perpetuation, from moment to moment of the intention to kill a moose." colette: "STOP THIS CRAZY THING! as said by George Jetson. lol" Okay. I did hunt birds and animals as a young man, I'm very sorry to say. I agree that this should all be stopped. Out, damned spot. C: "Perpetuation is synonimous with continuation, no? Citta "falls" as soon as it "rises" and the same with Dhamma." Scott: Yeah, I think that its fair to say this, at least your first statement. Dhamma, as in the sense of the teachings, well, it seems this just keeps getting more and more variably and thoroughly misunderstood over time, but this may be a whole other discussion... c: "That statement concerning "intention to kill" is way out there. shouldn't we be examining the factors leading to the consciousness of killing as in terms of CAUSE & CONDITIONS? Maybe the urge to go hunting is a right of passage for males in certain cultures and therefore they've totally associated the actual ACT, ACTION, of killing, hunting, with a pleasurable experience such as eating or being a member of a group, or... the intent may not be as simple as killing. There may be an entire host of illusionary qualities to the act of killing which you fail to recognize consciously in samsara. It is a possibility isn't it?" Scott: I think I just wanted to be with my dad, when it comes to my own experience. But, yeah, I think the 'rite of passage' thing makes sense. I guess its still killing though, eh? I think that there are certainly rationalisations and thinking about killing which are held unconsciously. We could discuss what conditions and causes akusala citta. It would be a chance to study the stuff. We could start a whole new thread... colette: "OUCH, are you a forensic psychologist in your professional daily life?..." Scott: No, to the great relief of all forensics everywhere. I did work in a prison for three years during grad school though - does that count? colette: "I've gotta apply classic buddhist phenominology here: once the thought of killing is raised to consciousness the act has already been performed, the conditioning has already accured, the response has already been generated as kusala but lets move on." Scott: Can you say more about how the thought and the act are the same? From which tradition is this perspective taken? You say that the thought is the deed. I'd think that, although kamma is thought, word and deed, there might be degrees of it. Like thought is less than word is less than deed kind of thing. I'm not sure, though. What do you think? colette: "jhaana-paccaya, in a few days I'm gonna meditate on that concept! Thanx. I do appreciate and like how you recovered here at the end. A very tight basket weave." Scott: You're welcome, colette. Thanks for your kind words about this attempt to form a thought about something. It did kind of come together there at the end didn't it, now that you mention it. Jhaana-paccaya? Only my hairdresser knows for sure. c: "Sorry I don't have time to continue reading but maybe I'll get to it tomorrow at the library." Thanks again, colette. See you tomorrow hopefully. Sincerely, Scott. PS. Do you listen to any new music these days? Just curious. I recognise many of the oldies you are so fond of quoting. I've been listening to a re-mix (Hoffman) of 'Who's Next', speaking of 'oldies'. #70438 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 1:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavana and the body upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 4/9/07 12:31:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > ;-)) There is never going to be an agreement or understanding because > Nina and Scott see dhammas as self-existent realities while Howard sees > dhammas as elements of experience. To Nina and Scott a group of > dhammas are still dhammas because they are self-existent realities, to > Howard a group of dhammas (including the Khandas) are concept because > they are no longer elements of direct experience (since only one thing > at a time can be directly experienced). There will never be a > resolution to this discussion. (This is the reason why I never join in > with the concept vs. reality debate.) > ======================== James, thanks for entering in. What you say of my take on dhammas is true, James, but that really isn't the basis for what I'm saying with regard to collections and concept either - sorry, my friend. Nina also thought that this was what it is about, But not so. Yes, I do see dhammas as elements of experience. But I see trees - and bhavana - as elements of experience as well. Dhammas, such as hardness, sights, sounds, tastes, and smells are experiences arising without the benefit of sankharic fabrication (though certainly conditioned by kamma/cetana). However, our experiences of trees, cars, people, and bhavana are all mental constructs resulting from fabrication working upon dhammas in complex ways. They are experienced through the mind door, having been mind-constructed. Though mind constructs, they also are elements of experience, and thus that isn't the difference. Being sankharic constructs, they are pa~n~natti. That is the point. Even if every rupa were a thing-in-itself, existing not(only) as an element of experience, but independently of consciousness, it would remain true that *collections* of rupas such as trees, cars, and human bodies would not exist other than as elements of experience and in dependence on consciousness. This is the critical point. The same would be true of any and all collections of namas such as bhavana. It is true of any and all collections, including each aggregate and the heap of five aggregates. A tree is not a rupa, but a collection, and only a mind object. The same for cars. The same for human bodies. The same for the rupakkhandha. NOT the same, however, for the rupas that are members of that khandha. They are all paramattha dhammas. Every *collection* of dhammas is a sankharic construct, and not something presented to consciousness without sankharic fabrication. A tree, for example, is neither a nama nor a rupa. It is mentally constructed based upon an unimaginably huge and complex body of rupas [It is irrelevant here what the status of the rupas is - mere elements of experience or self-existent entities] operated upon by an unimaginably huge and complex body of mental operations involving carvings out involving multiple sense doors (mostly eye door) and combining of factors. There IS NO TREE observable without this sankharic construction and mental projection, making the tree sankhata in that sense, making it pa~n~natta. The many hardnesses that constitute a small portion of the dhammas on the basis of which "the tree" is imputed, each one of them, arise as elements of direct (sankharically unmediated) experience. All those hardnesses are paramattha dhammas. It is the fact that the hardnesses and all the other phenomena from which the tree experience is created are paramattha dhammas, and intricately interrelated, that gives "the tree" its status as not complete fiction. But "the tree" itself, though its basis is paramatthic, is concept-only, precisely because it is a collection, a mental construct. This is the same for all collections. The "collecting", as it were, is done by the mind. The dhammas that are the elementary members of a collection are paramattha dhammas, and not mental constructs. Every collection of them *is* a mental construct, making it pa~n~natti. With metta, Howard #70439 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 6:14 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Leading to stream entry scottduncan2 Dear Ken H., I like the reply: K: "I think we have gone astray technically. After a quick look at Nina's "Conditions," and also at "The Buddhist Dictionary," I don't think jhana condition is quite what we thought it was. I don't think it is relevant to the "series of cittas" that you are talking about. It seems to be purely a way in which presently arisen dhammas act on other presently arisen dhammas...Citta (and its cetasikas) can concentrate on an object that is a concept just as well as it can concentrate on an object that is a dhamma. Everything Narada is describing (knowing the difference between a bird and an animal: walking properly etc) happens in one citta. Of course, the same (or similar) thing happens again and again over the course of time - giving the illusion of a single course of action or of a persisting intention....But what is the significance of this in the context of our conversation? How does it make conventional appearances of reality useful in the course of Dhamma study?" Scott: I think its the other way 'round, actually. The significance is in how Dhamma study (you know, the right kind, like the way we do it)is useful in that we don't have to misunderstand conventional appearances of reality while we keep on seeing it that way... K: "...Sorry if I am being thick. or stubborn, or whatever it is, but I still say we can't have it both ways. Ultimately, there was no moose and no gift. The entire world is the few dhammas that have arisen now at one of the six doorways. Stories of moose-hunting and gift-giving might help to describe the dhammas that are akusala-kamma-patha and dana, respectively, but that is all." Scott: Okay, there is no moose in the ultimate sense. It occurs to me, though, that being killed, for the non-existent moose, might be vipaaka - I mean within that 'stream'. The next moment would be patisandhi-citta and new existence - for 'the moose'. I mean, just twisting it a bit, within this 'other succession of thought-moments and ruupa', which to me might be colour (or smell if I get close enough or hardness if my moose call worked right) there will be an end to that current existence in the animal realm. I don't think this would have any bearing (the 'meaning' of death for 'a moose') on 'me'. If I killed the hapless thing, since it is the act of killing that would accumulate as akusala-kamma, this act would have real consequences kammically. Isn't this the way the argument always goes: What about the 'other being'? I think all I mean to say is that, although it is clear that one moment is the world, as it were, there is, nonetheless, a reality to the killing of the moose and hence a reality to the act of killing - you can't have one without the other. This is so, I think, since (i) there is this series of thought moments including cuti-citta and patisandhi-citta for 'the moose' which are proof of death and are real, and (ii) the act of killing must be real as well since the events in (i) transpired. In this way it is killing - a being died because jiivitindriya ceased due to 'actions outside of it'. I don't think it is correct to argue that there are 'beings' which are the 'recipients of my actions' because this is missing the point. I do think that one can't throw out the baby with the bathwater either by invoking the ka.nikaa clause too stringently. And this being said, I don't for a minute think that it is other than this moment but when it comes to discussing conceptually one then speaks of the next moment or the last moment without needing to lose sight of this moment, if you know what I mean. Past and future are relevant, and I think in an ultimate sense, although God knows what I've just unleashed in saying this... K: "What do you think? When it comes to insight development, can you see any value in concepts other than as descriptions of dhammas?" Yes. Concepts as objects of thinking. And thinking as object of satipa.t.thaana. Descriptions of dhammas understood conceptually with right view and then serving as condition for understanding of, say, the difference between naama and ruupa in reality later - so value as basis for further insight. What say you? Sincerely, Scott. #70440 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 7:00 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 145. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 145. Intro: In the previous sections (136-144) the Visuddhimagga explained in different ways that a being in one kind of destiny was reborn in the same kind of destiny or a different kind of destiny. The object experienced by the last javanacittas can be experienced through one of the six doorways. We have read about someone in an happy destiny who was reborn in an unhappy destiny, someone born in an unhappy destiny who was reborn in a happy destiny, someone born in a happy destiny who was reborn in a happy destiny. In this section the Visuddhimagga deals with someone in an unhappy destiny who is reborn in an unhappy destiny. Only one type of citta, santiira.na-citta which is akusala vipaaka, accompanied by upekkhaa, can perform the function of pa.tisandhi in woeful planes, but there are many varieties and intensities of this type of rebirth-consciousness. The unhappy planes are: the hell planes, the animal world, the plane of the ghosts (petas), and the plane of the demons. ---------- Text Vis.145: [From unhappy to unhappy destiny.] In the case of one in an unhappy destiny who is an evil-doer, that kamma, or its sign, or the sign of the destiny, comes into focus in the mind door, or in the five doors, as the object that is the cause for the unprofitable rebirth. -------- N: As we have seen before, the sign of destiny may be a vision of flames or fire. It is compared to a dreamlike vision. --------- Text Vis.:Then his rebirth-linking consciousness arises in due succession at the end of the death consciousness and located in the unhappy destiny and with one of those objects as its object. This is how rebirth-linking occurs with a 'past' or 'present' object next to death in an unhappy destiny with a 'past' object. ------------ Conclusion: There are four classes of unhappy planes but there are many varieties and intensities of unhappy rebirth in those planes. We can see the varieties of rebirth in the animal plane when we look at the endless varieties of fishes and insects. Each kamma brings its appropriate result. When there is birth in a hell plane the unpleasant objects experienced there are of greater intensity than in the other unhappy planes. In the case of an unhappy rebirth, the pa.tisandhicitta is as it were driven there by the force of defilements. As we have read in section 136: When one is in an unhappy plane it is difficult to be reborn in a happy plane since there are not many opportunities for kusala kamma in an unhappy plane. But it is still possible that kusala kamma of the past produces a happy rebirth for someone in an unhappy plane as we have seen (section 139). This section reminds us that it is difficult to be reborn in the human plane where the wisdom can be developed leading to the end of rebirth. ********** Nina. #70441 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 7:01 am Subject: Rupas Ch 7, no 2 nilovg Dear friends, The following three kinds of rúpa are sometimes produced by citta, sometimes by temperature, sometimes by nutrition. They are: buoyancy or lightness (lahutå) plasticity (mudutå) wieldiness (kamma~n~natå) Because of lightness, our body is not heavy or sluggish. Because of plasticity it is pliable, it has elasticity and is not stiff. Because of wieldiness it has adaptability. For the movement of the body and the performance of its functions, these three qualities are essential. They arise in the bodies of living beings, not in dead matter. These three rúpas are rúpas without a distinct nature, asabhåva rúpas; they are qualities of rúpa, namely, changeability of rúpa (vikåra rúpas, vikåra meaning change) . The “Atthasåliní” (II, Book II, Part I, Ch III, 326) gives the following definitions of these three kinds of rúpa : ... buoyancy of matter has non-sluggishness as its characteristic, removing the heaviness of material objects as its function, quickness of change as its manifestation, buoyant matter as its proximate cause. Next “plasticity of matter” has non-rigidity as characteristic, removing the rigidity of material objects as function, absence of opposition in all acts due to its own plasticity as manifestation, plastic matter as proximate cause. “Wieldiness of matter” has workableness suitable or favorable to bodily actions as characteristic, removal of non-workableness as function, non-weakness as manifestation, workable matter as proximate cause. The “Atthasåliní” also states that these three qualities “do not abandon each other”. When one of them arises, the others have to arise as well. They never arise without the eight inseparable rúpas. Although the qualities of lightness, plasticity and wieldiness arise together, they are different from each other. The “Atthasåliní” (in the same section) explains their differences. Buoyancy is non- sluggishness and it is like the quick movement of one free from ailment. Plasticity is plasticity of objects like well-pounded leather, and it is distinguished by tractability. Wieldiness is wieldiness of objects like well-polished gold and it is distinguished by suitableness for all bodily actions. When one is sick there is disturbance of the elements of the body, and then the body is sluggish, stiff and without adaptability. ****** Nina. #70442 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 7:01 am Subject: Perfections N, 4. nilovg Dear friends, The Bodhisatta made his resolution to become a Buddha in the presence of the Buddha Dípa.nkara and he gave expression to his resolution again in the presence of twentythree Buddhas who came after the Buddha Dípa.nkara. The Bodhisatta had listened to the teachings of all these Buddhas and since the teaching of vipassanã, insight, is exclusively the teaching of a Buddha, the Bodhisatta must have developed satipatthåna together with the ten paramis, otherwise he could not have attained Buddhahood. During this pilgrimage we discussed the Buddha’s perfections in relation to our lives. We have accumulated many kinds of defilements during countless lives and thus there are conditions for the arising of unwholesomeness, akusala, time and again. Because of our defilements we do not have enough strength to walk the Path the Buddha taught and therefore we need to accumulate all kinds of wholesome qualities which can support us while we develop right understanding of realities. We are not destined to become a Sammasambuddha, but if we develop the perfections along with satipatthana there are conditions to attain enlightenment, one day, during one life, we do not know when. When we develop the perfections we should not expect any gain for ourselves, our goal should be the eradication of defilements. If this is not our goal dana, sila and the other wholesome qualities are not perfections leading to enlightenment. The Buddha became the world’s helper out of compassion. Could we also help the world through the development of the paramis and the attainment of enlightenment? The disciples of the Buddha who had developed the paramis during countless lives and who attained enlightenment could also help other beings but they could not equal the Buddha who was foremost in wisdom and virtue and who had an immeasurable compassion for all beings. However, all those who have attained enlightenment can inspire others with confidence in the Buddha’s teachings since they have proved that the eightfold Path can be developed and that it leads to the eradication of defilements. Those who have attained enlightenment can be the "good friend in Dhamma" to others. They can be of much help to others, not only through words, but above all through the application of the Dhamma in life. We read in the "Middle Length Sayings" (III, no.110, Lesser Discourse at the Time of a Full Moon) about the good qualities of the noble person (sappurisa): And how, monks, is a good man possessed of good states of mind? As to this, monks, a good man has confidence (saddhá), he has shame (hiri) and fear of blame (ottappa), he has heard much, he is of stirred up energy, he has mindfulness aroused, he has wisdom- it is thus, monks, that a good man is possessed of good states of mind. The ariyan, the person who has attained enlightenment, has an unshakable confidence in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha, and in wholesomeness. Even the sotapanna, the person who has attained the first stage of enlightenment and who has not yet eradicated all defilements, never neglects the five precepts. The ariyan who has developed direct knowledge of realities can explain the Dhamma to others more clearly than the non-ariyan and he can truly help others to develop the eightfold Path leading to enlightenment. It is encouraging to know that if we develop the perfections along with satipatthana we do not only help ourselves but we can also help others. Thus, to a certain extent we can also become "helpers of the world". ******** Nina. #70443 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 8:52 am Subject: [dsg] Re: bhaavana and the body buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, James - > > In a message dated 4/9/07 12:31:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > buddhatrue@... writes: > > > ;-)) There is never going to be an agreement or understanding because > > Nina and Scott see dhammas as self-existent realities while Howard sees > > dhammas as elements of experience. To Nina and Scott a group of > > dhammas are still dhammas because they are self-existent realities, to > > Howard a group of dhammas (including the Khandas) are concept because > > they are no longer elements of direct experience (since only one thing > > at a time can be directly experienced). There will never be a > > resolution to this discussion. (This is the reason why I never join in > > with the concept vs. reality debate.) > > > ======================== > James, thanks for entering in. What you say of my take on dhammas is > true, James, but that really isn't the basis for what I'm saying with regard to > collections and concept either - sorry, my friend. Nina also thought that > this was what it is about, But not so. Hmmm...so this is not so simple as I first assumed after all...hmmmm....well, give me some more time to figure out this quandary. ;-)) Don't worry. I never give up, my friend. :-) You are just speaking leagues above my thinking right now....:-) Metta, James #70444 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Apr 6, 2007 12:31 am Subject: Summary of the Five Mental Abilities! bhikkhu5 Friends: Which are the 5 Abilities Leading to Awakening? The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus, there are these five mental abilities (indriya). What five? The ability of Faith (saddhÄ? ) The ability of Energy (viriya ) The ability of Awareness (sati ) The ability of Concentration (samÄ?dhi ) The ability of Understanding (pañña ) These are explained in detail here: The Five Mental Abilities (indriya) in general: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Analysis_of_the_Abilities.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Fruits_of_the_Abilities.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Final_Abilities.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Finding_the_Abilities.htm 1: Faith ( saddhÄ?): The Initiating Key! http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/The_Buddha_on_Faith.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Going_Forth_Faith.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Outstanding_Faith.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Unwavering_Faith.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Analysis_of_Faith.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Power_of_Faith.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Highest_Faith.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Leaping_Faith.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Fruitful_Faith.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Mutual_Faith.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Dual_Faith.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Fine_Faith.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Rich_Faith.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Lay_Faith.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Faith_Summary.htm 2: Energy ( viriya): The Motor & Fuel! http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/The_Definition_of_Energy.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/The_Arising_of_Energy.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/The_Ability_of_Energy.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/The_Origin_of_Energy.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Enthusiastic_is_Energy.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Power_of_Energy.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Ballanced_Energy.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Ballanced_Energy.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Energetic_Effort.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/The_Chief_Hero.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Avoiding_Effort.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Feeding_Energy.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Energy_Viriya.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Dual_Energy.htm 3: Awareness ( sati): The Light to See with! http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Four_Foundations_of_Awareness.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Clear_and_Aware_Comprehension.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Careful_and_Rational_Attention.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/The_Awareness_Ability.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/What_is_Right_Awareness.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Awareness_Analysis.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Feeding_Awareness.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/One_and_only_Way.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Noble_Awareness.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Clear_Comprehension.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Awareness_Sati.htm http://what-buddha-said.net/drops/Causes_of_sati.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Sati_Studies.htm 4: Concentration ( samÄ?dhi): The Focus to Drill & Catch with! http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Requisites_for_JhÄ?na_Absorption.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/The_Concentration_Ability.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/What_is_Right_Concentration.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Concentration_Samadhi.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Feeding_Concentration.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Samma-Samadhi.htm 5: Understanding ( pañña): The Resultant Aloof State! http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/The_Understanding_Ability.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Outstanding_Understanding.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Revealing_Understanding.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Understanding_is_the_Chief.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Supreme_Understanding.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Right_Understanding.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/n_r/pannaa.htm Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Ceylon * #70445 From: Date: Sat Apr 7, 2007 1:33 am Subject: The Good, The Beautiful, and The True sihalene60 The Good, The Beautiful, and The True by Bhikkhu Bodhi (Part Two - conclusion.) The Beautiful According to the Buddha, Goodness or ethical purity is the basis, the indispensable basis, for real happiness. But in itself it is not sufficient. To discover a deeper and more substantial happiness than is possible merely through moral goodness, we must take a step forward. This brings us to the next constituent of happiness, which I call the Beautiful. I do not use this word to refer to physical beauty, to a beautiful face and a lovely figure, but to inner beauty, the beauty of the mind. In the Buddha's teaching, the true mark of beauty is beauty of the mind. That is why the Abhidhamma uses the expressions sobhana cittas and sobhana cetasikas, beautiful states of mind, beautiful mental factors, to characterize the qualities we must arouse in treading the path to happiness and peace. To develop the beautiful states of mind, the beautiful consciousness, we begin with certain qualities that are fundamental to ethics. These qualities naturally inhere in the moral state of consciousness, and thus the moral consciousness is the launching pad in our quest for the Beautiful. True beauty cannot be reached by means of morally unwholesome states of mind. However, to travel further along the path to the Beautiful, we must deliberately propel the ethically purifying states of consciousness towards new pinnacles not accessible by the mere observance of moral precepts. In the process, these qualities of mind expand, becoming powerful, lofty, and sublime. They enter upon a whole new landscape, which in terms of Buddhist cosmology belongs, not to the realm of sensual experience (kaamadhaatu) in which we normally dwell, but to the realm of pure form (ruupadhaatu) accessible through the mastery of the jhaanas or meditative absorptions. The Buddha has taught many ways to develop the beautiful consciousness. These include meditation on certain coloured disks called kasinas, mindfulness of breathing, contemplation of the Three Jewels - the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha - and so forth. One group of meditation subjects often mentioned in the texts is the development of four lofty attitudes called the "divine abodes" (brahma-vihaara): loving kindness, compassion, altruistic joy, and equanimity. These are to be developed boundlessly, towards all sentient beings without distinction. They are considered the natural qualities of the divine beings known as the brahmas, and thus to develop them in meditation is to make one's mind the abode of inward divinity. ... ... Source: Bodhi Leaves No: 154 Copyright � Kandy; Buddhist Publication Society, (2001) #70446 From: "Egbert" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 4:16 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Leading to stream entry egberdina KenH, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Scott, > > I think we have gone astray technically. I have heard you repeat ad nauseum "There are only dhammas." Going astray technically is dhammas also, no? What's your problem? Herman #70447 From: "Egbert" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 4:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Falling in Love? egberdina Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Alan, > thank you. I especially like: times in the > discussions, we often don't know when it is the kusala citta with > mettå and > when it is attachment. `At this moment is it attachment or mettå? Who is the "we" that doesn't know? And what is Khun Sujin? How is Khun Sujin relevant to the point being made? Herman #70448 From: "Egbert" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 4:20 am Subject: Re: Letters on Vipassana 11, no 2. egberdina Azita, > azita: No, I think you have it wrong. Her stresses come from the > position of if its 'self' that making all this effort and trying > to 'see' dhammas then that is wrong path and that the 'no effort' > position comes from understanding even if that understanding is > very weak, that the arising and falling of dhammas NOW are not > within 'our' control. Is it important to you to make sense? When you talk about "her stresses" what do you mean? Who, or what, is her? Herman #70449 From: "colette" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 7:48 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Leading to stream entry ksheri3 Good Morning Scot, Again we've gotta put on the breaks, as in Stop this crazy thing, so that we don't go chasing after hallucinations. ------------- > Okay. I did hunt birds and animals as a young man, colette: I have no concern for an act you may have or may not have performed. I simply used your example and analyzed it as a scientist would analyze a sample under a microscope. That's all I chose to do. However, you interpreted my analysis as a personalization, which you did next and you qualified that personalization in a very classic buddhist manor, way. I'm very sorry to > say. I agree that this should all be stopped. Out, damned spot. colette: but this isn't worthy of our limited time to bother with such things as if in the entire sceme of life a fact is going to make that much difference in our situation today whether or not you stole a few pennies worth of candy from a 5 & 10 store. There are far bigger fish to fry, ;-). ------------------------------------------ > C: "Perpetuation is synonimous with continuation, no? Citta "falls" as > soon as it "rises" and the same with Dhamma." > > Scott: Yeah, I think that its fair to say this, at least your first > statement. Dhamma, as in the sense of the teachings, well, it seems > this just keeps getting more and more variably colette: now we are talking about CAUSE & CONDITIONS since the "variance" comes from somewhere and effects something somewhere else. The effect I believe I'm speaking of is YOUR thoughts, conceptions, CONDITIONING! This is one problem I have with almost ALL educated peoples: they absolutely refuse to allow for any and all responsibility to possessing WRONG VIEW! They deliberately and knowingly place WRONG VIEW on myself as though they were making a deposit at the bank and then they sit back on their fat arse expecting the gratification of a return on their investment of PLACING BLAME FOR THEIR ACTIONS ONTO ANOTHER PERSON. -------------------- and thoroughly > misunderstood over time, but this may be a whole other discussion... colette: Indeed it is which is why I simply set the stage for the performance of that discussion so that if that discussion arises again sometime in the future I can find the same stage and it is already set with the baubles & trinkets -- the only thing I have to do is usher in the actors onto the stage where they can perform. ----------------------- > > c: "That statement concerning "intention to kill" is way out there. > shouldn't we be examining the factors leading to the consciousness of > killing as in terms of CAUSE & CONDITIONS? Maybe the urge to go > hunting is a right of passage for males in certain cultures and > therefore they've totally associated the actual ACT, ACTION, of > killing, hunting, with a pleasurable experience such as eating or > being a member of a group, or... the intent may not be as simple as > killing. There may be an entire host of illusionary qualities to the > act of killing which you fail to recognize consciously in samsara. It > is a possibility isn't it?" > > Scott: I think I just wanted to be with my dad, when it comes to my > own experience. But, yeah, I think the 'rite of passage' thing makes > sense. colette: again, back to personalization. This somehow shows YOUR EXPERIENCE with and to this phenomina so at least you have a small bit of consciousness already. Now you've just gotta remember to examine it closely during meditation. Here is where Nina and I disagree: I simply apply the definition of Vipissana as being an "Insight" into nature of..., but a sana is another thing. Is seems, appears, as though Nina wants me to adopt a position on Vipisana which I neither have time for nor the desire to thus SHE, in her POSSESSIVE nature takes offense that I would not and I do not VALUE something that SHE possesses ie. greed, avarice, topor, etc. ----------------------------- I guess its still killing though, eh? colette: THAT IS THE ONLY VALID POINT! -------------------------- I think that there are > certainly rationalisations and thinking about killing which are held > unconsciously. colette: again, we suddenly find our friend Nina at center stage since now you've gone and raised the issues of Yogacara, the "mind only" schools, as well as the "phenominalogical only" schools. This "unconscious" you speak of, I interpret as BEING ALAYA-VIJNANA, the storehouse consciousness. Here we can find the "seeds" which are planted and grow through further experiences and it is these experiences which are hallucinatory, illusions. We could discuss what conditions and causes akusala > citta. It would be a chance to study the stuff. We could start a > whole new thread... colette: Indeed. -------------------- > > colette: "OUCH, are you a forensic psychologist in your professional > daily life?..." > > Scott: No, to the great relief of all forensics everywhere. I did > work in a prison for three years during grad school though - does that > count? colette: "grad school" for what discipline? Prisons are a veritable gold mine for behaviors and psychologies. ... ... ******************************************************** sorry, but I've spent 40 minutes on this reply and only have 20 minutes left to do research, clean mail, etc. Notice that I seperated this differently since the below is rather interesting and I'd like to respond to it. I also need time to research where it was I picked up that thought on the "thinking" statement since I know it's a part of Western Theological traditions. The reason it stayed with me in my consciousness is because it's a concept in equilibrium around the world which makes me wonder about that. toodles, colette #70451 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 11:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavana and the body nilovg Hi Howard, You took great trouble in explaining, hard stuff, very tough for me. It is above my head. Perhaps it would be helpful if you had textual supports. I can still say a few things on bhavana, avoiding what is too complex for me, avoiding speaking about: reality or concept. Usually I want to avoid this. What was our thread again? You asked: is bhaavana pa~n~naa? Remember, when I try to explain something, I like to view many aspects, I try to see the context of a whole range of different aspects. One can see bhaavanaa from different angles. You may well think: < this or that is not the issue, what are you talking about>, but that is my way of approach. I cannot approach matters in a mathematical way or as black or white. We could take as an example the Eightfold Path. The development of it is a way of bhaavanaa. When we look at the factors of the eightfold Path: these are cetasikas, and they develop together, strengthening each other, and right view (pa~n`naa) is the leader. These factors are not developed in isolation, separately. The development of the eightfold Path and each form of bhaavanaa can be seen as kusala kamma: this is kusala volition, cetanaa. The sutta also explains: kamma is volition. This occurs in a moment, the present moment. I say this to show that it is not theory, but the application of the Dhamma. That is the reason I like to emphasize the momentary aspect of bhaavanaa. Even so I see right effort you are debating now with Jon. Right effort arises together with right understanding and it is not theory. It can arise now, while you are aware of a nama or a rupa. I read in a post by Sarah on the four right efforts: I see bhaavanaa, the eightfold Path, satipatthaana as occurring in a moment. Perhaps you do too, I do not know. I had a specific purpose to quote Suan's text on the twofold way of teaching. I thought of the Buddha delivering a discourse and the listeners who at that very moment applied bhaavanaa so that gained insight and ignorance was removed. They listened, considered and were mindful of nama and rupa right at that moment. That is bhaavana, that is the eightfold Path development, or the development of satipatthana. We read about the twofold teaching, and, by the way, at this time, being far away from the Buddha's time, we need both ways of teaching. We need all the details given in the abhidhamma and commentaries, otherwise we go hopelessly astray. Now we come back to listening you so often ask me about. It is bhaavana, applied right at the present moment. Here is a text from the Co. to the abhidhammattha Sangaha (T.A. p. 186): I like the phrase: no expectation of gain or honour. The purpose of listening is to have more understanding of realities, and it has to be with a pure inclination. The Visuddhimagga reminds me time and again that human birth is difficult and also precious: we have the opportunity on this list to help one another with kusala citta. Nina. Op 9-apr-2007, om 14:52 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > our experiences of trees, cars, people, and bhavana are all mental > constructs > resulting from fabrication working upon dhammas in complex ways. #70452 From: "m_nease" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 12:27 pm Subject: Bangkok 2005 CD m_nease Hi Sarah, Just received the latest cd, thanks a million. Great discussion, right from the beginning. mike #70453 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 8:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavana and the body upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 4/9/07 3:03:50 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > You took great trouble in explaining, hard stuff, very tough for me. > It is above my head. Perhaps it would be helpful if you had textual > supports. -------------------------------- Howard: But why? Would someone else making the points make it any more understandable? It happens that 99% of all pa~n~natti are collections, and, I assert here and now that there is no collection at all that can be pointed out that is, itself, a paramattha dhamma. All the elements of the collection may be, Nina, but not the collection, per se. -------------------------------- > > I can still say a few things on bhavana, avoiding what is too complex > for me, avoiding speaking about: reality or concept. Usually I want > to avoid this. > What was our thread again? You asked: is bhaavana pa~n~naa? --------------------------------- Howard: No, not exactly. I asked whether *you* take it to be such. I do not believe it is pa~n~na or any other single paramattha dhamma, but a complex of processes that, together, condition the arising of kusala dhammas. -------------------------------- > > Remember, when I try to explain something, I like to view many > aspects, I try to see the context of a whole range of different > aspects. One can see bhaavanaa from different angles. You may well > think: , > but that is my way of approach. I cannot approach matters in a > mathematical way or as black or white. > > We could take as an example the Eightfold Path. The development of it > is a way of bhaavanaa. > When we look at the factors of the eightfold Path: these are > cetasikas, and they develop together, strengthening each other, and > right view (pa~n`naa) is the leader. These factors are not developed > in isolation, separately. > The development of the eightfold Path and each form of bhaavanaa can > be seen as kusala kamma: this is kusala volition, cetanaa. The sutta > also explains: kamma is volition. This occurs in a moment, the > present moment. I say this to show that it is not theory, but the > application of the Dhamma. That is the reason I like to emphasize the > momentary aspect of bhaavanaa. ------------------------------------ Howard: Ninety percent of what you are saying here about bhavana I agree with. There remains the question of whether you consider bhavana to be a single paramattha dhamma or not. I do not. ------------------------------- > Even so I see right effort you are debating now with Jon. Right > effort arises together with right understanding and it is not theory. > It can arise now, while you are aware of a nama or a rupa. ------------------------------- Howard: That's all well and good, Nina, but beside the point of whether bhavana is a paramattha dhamma or not. I'm not addressing everything under the sun, but only a simple, single matter. What right effort is is another issue. I'm content with the Buddha's definition as regards that. --------------------------- > I read in a post by Sarah on the four right efforts: 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).> > I see bhaavanaa, the eightfold Path, satipatthaana as occurring in a > moment. Perhaps you do too, I do not know. > ---------------------------------- Howard: No, I see bhavana as a process extending over time. Throughout that development many namic activities are occurring, and, together, they constitute the bhavana. ---------------------------------- > > I had a specific purpose to quote Suan's text on the twofold way of > teaching. I thought of the Buddha delivering a discourse and the > listeners who at that very moment applied bhaavanaa so that gained > insight and ignorance was removed. > ------------------------------------ Howard: What is that bhavana they were applying? A cetasika? Which one? Is bhavana listed anywhere as a cetasika? ------------------------------------ They listened, considered and were > > mindful of nama and rupa right at that moment. That is bhaavana, that > is the eightfold Path development, or the development of satipatthana. ------------------------------------ Howard: No, that was sati and attention. The ability to be mindful and attentive had indeed been cultivated, and the process of cultivation that led to that ability was the bhavana. It consisted of a multitude of mental activities operation at various moments throughout the course of a multitude of mindstates. ------------------------------------- > We read about the twofold teaching, and, by the way, at this time, > being far away from the Buddha's time, we need both ways of teaching. > We need all the details given in the abhidhamma and commentaries, > otherwise we go hopelessly astray. > > Now we come back to listening you so often ask me about. It is > bhaavana, applied right at the present moment. Here is a text from > the Co. to the abhidhammattha Sangaha (T.A. p. 186): > inclination that is undefiled, occurring by way of the wish to > further one's own or others' wellbeing, thinking that, having heard > the dhamma, by putting it into practice as instructed one will become > one who partakes of the different ordinary and transcendent > qualities, or, having become learned, one will help others by > teaching the dhamma, is called hearing the dhamma. The volition that > consists in studying blameless [subjects of ordinary] learning, etc., > is included in this. > The volition that consists in [giving] beneficial advice of one who > brings to mind clearly with no expectation of gain or honour, etc., > is called teaching the Dhamma. ...> ---------------------------------------- Howard: Nina, we all know what listening is, and it also, like bhavana, is a complex and not a paramattha dhamma. --------------------------------------- > > I like the phrase: no expectation of gain or honour. The purpose of > listening is to have more understanding of realities, and it has to > be with a pure inclination. > The Visuddhimagga reminds me time and again that human birth is > difficult and also precious: we have the opportunity on this list to > help one another with kusala citta. > Nina. > ====================== With metta, Howard #70454 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 7:09 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Leading to stream entry scottduncan2 Good Morning colette, Thanks for the reply. I'm rushing too, at the moment, so apologies for the hastiness of my reply. c: "Again we've gotta put on the breaks, as in Stop this crazy thing, so that we don't go chasing after hallucinations." Scott: I'm often doing that, I guess (the chasing). colette: "I have no concern for an act you may have or may not have performed...There are far bigger fish to fry, ;-)." Scott: Yeah. A very good point, colette. Onward. colette: "now we are talking about CAUSE & CONDITIONS since the 'variance' comes from somewhere and effects something somewhere else. The effect I believe I'm speaking of is YOUR thoughts, conceptions, CONDITIONING! This is one problem I have with almost ALL educated peoples: they absolutely refuse to allow for any and all responsibility to possessing WRONG VIEW! They deliberately and knowingly place WRONG VIEW on myself as though they were making a deposit at the bank and then they sit back on their fat arse expecting the gratification of a return on their investment of PLACING BLAME FOR THEIR ACTIONS ONTO ANOTHER PERSON." Scott: I don't know what to respond to some of the above. My arse is not fat, although I do sit back on it. Oh, you meant the collective arse. Apart from that cosmetic (cosmic) detail, we can examine WRONG VIEW as something IMPERSONAL, if you wish. Does it have location? Or just object? Is it a possession? My thoughts are conditioning (a-la Pavlov?). How do you understand the idea of wrong view? Is wrong view alienating? I think you are discussing a social situation but what about wrong view as it conditions a moment of consciousness? colette: "Indeed it is which is why I simply set the stage for the performance of that discussion so that if that discussion arises again sometime in the future I can find the same stage and it is already set with the baubles & trinkets -- the only thing I have to do is usher in the actors onto the stage where they can perform." Scott: This is rehearsal then, this stage setting? Or preparation? Or fear? Or just repitition? Can one control the future? colette: "again, back to personalization. This somehow shows YOUR EXPERIENCE with and to this phenomina so at least you have a small bit of consciousness already. Now you've just gotta remember to examine it closely during meditation. Here is where Nina and I disagree: I simply apply the definition of Vipissana as being an "Insight" into nature of..., but a sana is another thing. Is seems, appears, as though Nina wants me to adopt a position on Vipisana which I neither have time for nor the desire to thus SHE, in her POSSESSIVE nature takes offense that I would not and I do not VALUE something that SHE possesses ie. greed, avarice, topor, etc." Scott: Yeah, I am personalising again - I'm referring to my own experience. Not a good idea? Do you mean 'meditate' as in ponder and consider the phenomenon closely? How do you see the role of sa~n~na in all this, by the way? Me: "I guess its still killing though, eh?" colette: "THAT IS THE ONLY VALID POINT!" Scott: Yeah, I agree. colette: "again, we suddenly find our friend Nina at center stage since now you've gone and raised the issues of Yogacara, the "mind only" schools, as well as the "phenominalogical only" schools. This "unconscious" you speak of, I interpret as BEING ALAYA-VIJNANA, the storehouse consciousness. Here we can find the "seeds" which are planted and grow through further experiences and it is these experiences which are hallucinatory, illusions." Scott: I read the sutra but forget the name now. I detoured past most of that literature, I'm afraid. I was actually only thinking of the psychoanalytic 'unconscious' which is not a place but a thought outside of awareness - a functional thing I guess. I don't like to compare apples with oranges, though. I sort of imagine that, due to the speed of it, a moment of conciousness is here and then gone so quickly that it does not become an object of awareness (I guess mundane awareness here) or sati, when this is well-developed. So in this case it is functionally outside of awareness, but this whole fantasy is no good. Me: "We could discuss what conditions and causes akusala citta. It would be a chance to study the stuff. We could start a whole new thread..." colette: "Indeed." Scott: Okay, lets finish this dialogue and then do that. colette: "grad school" for what discipline?..." Scott: Clinical psychology. c: "...I also need time to research where it was I picked up that thought on the "thinking" statement since I know it's a part of Western Theological traditions. The reason it stayed with me in my consciousness is because it's a concept in equilibrium around the world which makes me wonder about that." Scott: Okay, I'll wait until you get this clarified and written out. See you later, colette. Sincerely, Scott. #70455 From: connie Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 7:31 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (50) nichiconn Dear Friends, continuing with what Mrs. R-D calls "Patacara's 'Five Hundred' bereaved mothers whom she comforted and ordained": Taa tassaa dhamma.m sutvaa sa~njaatasa.mvegaa theriyaa santike pabbaji.msu. Pabbajitvaa vipassanaaya kamma.m karontiyo vimuttiparipaacaniiyaana.m dhammaana.m paripaaka.m gatattaa na cirasseva saha pa.tisambhidaahi arahatte pati.t.thahi.msu. Atha taa adhigataarahattaa attano pa.tipatti.m paccavekkhitvaa udaanavasena "yassa magga.m na jaanaasii"ti-aadikaahi ovaadagaathaahi saddhi.m- 131. "Abbahii vata me salla.m, duddasa.m hadayassita.m; yaa me sokaparetaaya, puttasoka.m byapaanudi. 132. "Saajja abbuu.lhasallaaha.m, nicchaataa parinibbutaa; buddha.m dhamma~nca sa"ngha~nca, upemi sara.na.m munin"ti.- Imaa gaathaa visu.m visu.m abhaasi.msu. They heard her Doctrine, a profound stirring arose, and they went forth in the presence of the therii. Having gone forth, they devoted themselves to insight, brought to maturity the characteristics leading to freedom, and in a very short time they were established in Arahatship together with the [four] discriminations. Then after they attained Arahatship, they looked over their attainments and as a solemn utterance they spoke together the verses of instruction beginning [You cry, "My son,"] for the one whose way you do not know. Then one by one, they spoke these verses: 131. Truly she has plucked out my dart, hard to see, nestling in my heart. She has thrust away that grief for my son for me, overcome by grief. 132. Today, I have my dart plucked out. I am without hunger, quenched. I go to the Buddha, the sage; to the Doctrine; and to the Order as a refuge. RD: They, hearing her doctrine, were filled with agitation, and, under the Therii, renounced the world. Exercising themselves henceforth in insight, their faculties growing ripe for emancipation, they soon became established in Arahantship, with thorough grasp of the Norm in form and in meaning. Thereafter, pondering on their attainment, they exulted in those words, 'The way by which men come,' adding thereto other verses, and repeating them in turn, as follows: Lo! from my heart the hidden shaft is gone, The shaft that nestled there she hath removed, And that consuming grief for my dead child Which poisoned all the life of me is dead. (131) To-day my heart is healed, my yearning stayed, Perfected the deliverance wrought in me. *254 Lo! I for refuge to the Buddha go - The only wise - the Order and the Norm. *255 (132) *254 Parinibbuttaa, Cf. ver. 53. *255 Cf. p. 40, n 3. {c: A little flashback to Sister (33) Ubbirii: To-day my heart is healed, my yearning stayed, And all within is purity and peace. *160 Lo! I for refuge to the Buddha go - The only wise - the Order and the Norm. *161 (53) *160 A free rendering of the one word parinibbutaa. Cf. ver. 132. *161 The orthodox sequence is Norm, Order, here inverted metri causa. The inversion is actually met with in later Buddhism. } === to be continued, connie #70456 From: han tun Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 8:09 pm Subject: Daana Corner (36) hantun1 Dear Dhamma Friends, The following is taken from “Generosity: The Inward Dimension” by Nina Van Gorkom Questions, comments and different views welcome:-) ------------------------------ The three beautiful roots are: non-attachment or generosity, non-aversion or kindness, and understanding or wisdom. Each type of wholesome consciousness is rooted in non-attachment and non-aversion, and it may be rooted in understanding as well. Each of these beautiful roots has many degrees. Without the assistance of non-attachment and non-aversion wholesome consciousness could not arise motivating acts of generosity. Attachment cannot exist at the same time as generosity. When one is truly generous one gives impartially and does not restrict one's generosity to people one likes or to the members of one's family. The purpose of all kinds of wholesomeness should be to eliminate defilements, to get rid of selfishness. The Buddha taught the wisdom that can eradicate the clinging to the idea of self, but if one does not learn to get rid of stinginess and clings to one's possessions, one cannot give up the clinging to self. When we see that true generosity is beneficial and that selfishness and stinginess are harmful, we would like to have more moments of generosity. However, in spite of our wishes, we notice that unwholesome types of consciousness often arise. Then we are disappointed with ourselves. We should acquire understanding of what conditions the arising of unwholesome consciousness. We must have been full of attachment, aversion and ignorance in the past, even in past lives. Such tendencies have become deeply rooted; they have been accumulated. What is past has gone already, but the unwholesome tendencies that have been accumulated can condition the arising of unwholesome consciousness at the present time. We have accumulated not only tendencies to evil but also inclinations to the wholesome. That is why there can also be moments of generosity and kindness at the present time. When an unwholesome type of consciousness arises we accumulate more unwholesomeness; when a wholesome type arises we accumulate more wholesomeness. To be continued. metta, Han #70457 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 8:14 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: bhaavana and the body rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Nina - > > In a message dated 4/9/07 3:03:50 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > vangorko@... writes: > > > > Hi Howard, > > You took great trouble in explaining, hard stuff, very tough for me. > > It is above my head. Perhaps it would be helpful if you had textual > > supports. > > -------------------------------- > Howard: > But why? Would someone else making the points make it any more > understandable? > > -------------------------------- > Dear Howard According to your view is akusala cittani such as somanassa- sahagatam, ditthigatasampayuttam, asankharikam ekam (unprompted citta, accompanied by pleasant feeling and wrong view) not paramattha? .. Robert #70458 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 4:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavana and the body upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 4/9/07 11:14:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, rjkjp1@... writes: > Dear Howard > > According to your view is akusala cittani such as somanassa- > sahagatam, ditthigatasampayuttam, asankharikam ekam (unprompted > citta, accompanied by pleasant feeling and wrong view) not > paramattha? .. > Robert > > ===================== Any citta - any knowing of object, regardless of the accompanying cetasikas, is a paramattha dhamma. The citta is named according to the accompanying cetasikas, but the knowing is a knowing, and it is a paramattha dhamma. It is not a collection, Robert, and it is not the result of sankharic fabrication. Just to be perfectly clear - a citta is a knowing. It is the primary mental operation in any mindstate, but it is not the mindstate. The citta/knowing is a nama, a mental activity. The mindstate is a bundle consisting of citta and cetasikas, and that bundle is *not* a paramattha dhamma, it is concept. A *collection* of citta and cetasikas is 1) not a citta, 2) not a cetasika, and, of course, 3) not a rupa and 4) not nibbana, and that means that it is not a paramattha dhamma. With metta, Howard #70459 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 9:39 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: bhaavana and the body rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 4/9/07 11:14:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, rjkjp1@... > writes: > > > Dear Howard > > > > According to your view is akusala cittani such as somanassa- > > sahagatam, ditthigatasampayuttam, asankharikam ekam (unprompted > > citta, accompanied by pleasant feeling and wrong view) not > > paramattha? .. > > Robert > > > > > ===================== > Any citta - any knowing of object, regardless of the accompanying > cetasikas, is a paramattha dhamma. The citta is named according to the > accompanying cetasikas, but the knowing is a knowing, and it is a paramattha dhamma. It > is not a collection, Robert, and it is not the result of sankharic fabrication. > Just to be perfectly clear - a citta is a knowing. It is the primary > mental operation in any mindstate, but it is not the mindstate. The > citta/knowing is a nama, a mental activity. The mindstate is a bundle consisting of citta > and cetasikas, and that bundle is *not* a paramattha dhamma, it is concept. A > *collection* of citta and cetasikas is 1) not a citta, 2) not a cetasika, > and, of course, 3) not a rupa and 4) not nibbana, and that means that it is not a > paramattha dhamma. > ========= Dear Howard If we are to adopt your way of clasifying realities and concepts, how do we cope with Abhidhamma texts, where, for example, kusala and kusala cittas are considered as paramattha dhammas? Do you see any difference -typology wise- between a tree (which is a concept according to Abhidhamma ) and kusala citta (not a concept according to Abhidhamma). Robert #70460 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 10:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Meditation Tip buddhatrue Hi Robert and Dan, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > > Dear Robert, > I think you are right. The word in DN 2 is "kaayo", which is "group, > heap, collection, aggregate, body", and the rupas of the "body" > cannot be what is referred to here. > > Dan > > > In the sutta you quote the translation is a little misleading. > > The "body' refered to is actually the body of cetasikas, not rupa, > if > > I remember correctly. In first jhaana it is, of course, impossible > to > > perceive any physical data at all. > > Robert This is not the way I see it. During the RUPA JHANAS one is still aware of the rupas of the body. It is only during the ARUPA JHANAS that one loses physical data. That is why one is called "rupa jhanas" and the other is "arupa jhanas". Metta, James #70461 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 11:39 pm Subject: Re: Letters on Vipassana 11, no 2. kenhowardau Hi Azita (and James), ------ > James: That was my summary of how I view her teaching. She stresses > that no effort must be made toward enlightenment. azita: No, I think you have it wrong. Her stresses come from the position of if its 'self' that making all this effort and trying to 'see' dhammas then that is wrong path and that the 'no effort' position comes from understanding even if that understanding is very weak, that the arising and falling of dhammas NOW are not within 'our' control. ------ Yes, as you explain, James did have it wrong. So near and yet so far! Ken H #70462 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Apr 9, 2007 11:46 pm Subject: Stopping Physical Pain! bhikkhu5 Friends: The ability to Feel Pain ceases in the 1st Jhâna! The Blessed Buddha once said: Here, Bhikkhus, while a Bhikkhu is dwelling diligent, enthusiastic, & resolute, there arises in him the ability to feel pain. He understands thus: There has arisen in me an ability to feel pain. That has a cause, a source, a causal condition. It is impossible for that ability to feel pain to arise without a cause, without a source, without a condition. He thereby understands the ability to feel pain; he understands the causal origin of the ability to feel pain; he also understands the very ceasing of the ability to feel pain; & he understands when the ability to feel pain ceases without any remaining trace... And where, Bhikkhus & Friends does the arisen ability to feel pain cease without remains? Here, Bhikkhus, aloof & above of any lust, quite secluded from any sense desire, thus protected from every disadvantageous mental state, one enters & dwells in the 1st JhÄ?na mental absorption; full of joy & pleasure born of solitude, joined & fused with single-pointed directed thought & sustained thinking.... It is right there that the arisen ability to feel pain ceases without remainder. This, friends, is thus a Bhikkhu who has understood the ceasing of the ability to feel pain! He directs his mind accordingly! More on ending Pain: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Ending_Physical_Pain.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Ending_Pain_Itself.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Craving_is_Pain.htm Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V:213] section 48: The Abilities. 36: Irregular Order ... Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Ceylon * #70463 From: "gazita2002" Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 1:17 am Subject: Re: Letters on Vipassana 11, no 2. gazita2002 hello Herman, Maybe you could read the other threads here, and you will see that James and I have been 'debating' - then you will understand the who and what of this discussion. Patience, courage and good cheer, azita. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Egbert" wrote: > > Azita, > > > azita: No, I think you have it wrong. Her stresses come from the > > position of if its 'self' that making all this effort and trying > > to 'see' dhammas then that is wrong path and that the 'no effort' > > position comes from understanding even if that understanding is > > very weak, that the arising and falling of dhammas NOW are not > > within 'our' control. > > Is it important to you to make sense? When you talk about "her > stresses" what do you mean? Who, or what, is her? > > > Herman > Reply | Forward | Messages in this Topic (61) #70464 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 2:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok 2005 CD nilovg Hi Mike, It is very helpful to all if you quote a little, even if it is one line. This reminds me to quote from a Thai session I just heard: N: We know this in theory, but it has to be verified right now. I think it has to be verified again and again, before we are really convinced. That to me is bhaavanaa which is so much in our discussions. quote: < Aayatanas, khandhas, dhaatus. There is no need to name them. They have characteristics. If characteristics of realities do not appear we cannot speak of aayatanas, khandhas, dhaatus. First the difference between nama and rupa has to be realized, and this not by naming them. After that the characteristic of dhaatu appears. Also of paccaya, of aayatana. This happens by more understanding of nama and rupa.> N: I could add: and of khandha. Khandha is not theory. I find this insistence on 'not naming' helpful. Otherwise we know only words and terms. Naama is the dhaatu that knows, but only when we do not mix naama and ruupa this can be understood. Nina. Op 9-apr-2007, om 21:27 heeft m_nease het volgende geschreven: > Just received the latest cd, thanks a million. Great discussion, > right from the beginning. #70465 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 2:10 am Subject: Re: Letters on Vipassana 11, no 2. buddhatrue Hi Azita, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > Unfortunately, James, I am runing out of time, I have to go to > work. so will continue later to answer your following questions. Just so you know, I am waiting for your second post so that I can reply to both at the same time. But I hope it won't be too long as it appears you are starting to build a cheering section (Ken H.) ;-)). Metta, James #70466 From: Dieter Möller Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 1:39 am Subject: Fw: [dsg] Stopping Physical Pain! moellerdieter Hi Howard ( and friends), this message from Bhikkhu Samahita reminds me on a previous discussion concerning a quote from Sylvia Boorstein, It's Easier Than You Think '>from Everyday Mind, edited by Jean Smith, a Tricycle book: : 'The First Noble Truth declares unflinchingly, straight out, that pain is inherent in life itself just because everything is changing. The Second Noble Truth explains that suffering is what happens when we struggle with whatever our life experience is rather than accepting and opening to our experience with wise and compassionate response. From this point of view, there's a big difference between pain and suffering. Pain is inevitable; lives come with pain. Suffering is not inevitable. If suffering is what happens when we struggle with our experience because of our inability to accept it, then suffering is an optional extra.' You seemed quite to agree with that distinction ..I hope you do not mind when repeating from your posting in another list 2 months ago : '..While I found that I had a few minor bones to pick with Ms Boorstein's article, I do think the distinction se made between pain and suffering is very important. Some dhammas are simply unpleasant, and no practice in the world will change their nature. As I understand the terminology, pain is any unplesantness associated with sense-door contacts, most especially body door (physical pain) and mind door (mental pain), and it is the latter, mental pain, that is the Dhammic sense of 'dukkha'.snip' I still have difficulties to get your point of 'no practice in the world will change their nature' and feel not comfortable with the distinction seeing a kind of contracdiction : physical pain is incl. within the definition of Dukkha of the first Noble Truth. 'Stopping physical pain' means it is not inevitable and the way out is obviously Jhana ( the Buddha used to encounter pain due his aged body (see e.g. D.N.16. ) What do you think? with Metta Dieter #70467 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 2:37 am Subject: bhaavanaa and the body. nilovg Hi Howard, -------- I can still say a few things on bhavana, avoiding what is too complex > for me, avoiding speaking about: reality or concept. Usually I want > to avoid this. > What was our thread again? You asked: is bhaavana pa~n~naa? --------------------------------- Howard: No, not exactly. I asked whether *you* take it to be such. I do not believe it is pa~n~na or any other single paramattha dhamma, but a complex of processes that, together, condition the arising of kusala dhammas. -------------------------------- N: Yes and no, it depends from what angle one sees it. There is no clearcut definition like in mathematics. As you saw in my quote, it can be seen as kusala kamma, thus, as cetanaa: the Co. to the abhidhammattha Sangaha (T.A. p. 186): > inclination that is undefiled, occurring by way of the wish to > further one's own or others' wellbeing... > But there is also dynamics, as Scott explained, there is a growing of understanding, though very slow. As you also say: < a complex of processes that, together, condition the arising of kusala dhammas.> ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Ninety percent of what you are saying here about bhavana I agree with. There remains the question of whether you consider bhavana to be a single paramattha dhamma or not. I do not. ------------------------------- N: See above: yes and no. It depends. --------- Right > effort arises together with right understanding and it is not theory. > It can arise now, while you are aware of a nama or a rupa. ------------------------------- Howard: That's all well and good, Nina, but beside the point of whether bhavana is a paramattha dhamma or not. --------------------------- N: No, not beside the point, it is all connected. I avoid now the issue of paramattha dhamma or not, otherwise we go into the direction of: is a computer a concept. Remember the countless posts? Better not :-)) I would say: you can call bhaavanaa anything according to your wish, but understand bhaavanaa right now. Is there bhaavanaa now while we are discussing Dhamma, please? It is urgent to know this! ----------- > I had a specific purpose to quote Suan's text on the twofold way of > teaching. I thought of the Buddha delivering a discourse and the > listeners who at that very moment applied bhaavanaa so that gained > insight and ignorance was removed. > Howard: What is that bhavana they were applying? A cetasika? Which one? Is bhavana listed anywhere as a cetasika? ------------------------------------ N: See above my text quote: kusala cetanaa. But as said, there are many angles of viewing it. I explain. --------- They listened, considered and were > > mindful of nama and rupa right at that moment. That is bhaavana, that > is the eightfold Path development, or the development of satipatthana. ------------------------------------ Howard: No, that was sati and attention. The ability to be mindful and attentive had indeed been cultivated, and the process of cultivation that led to that ability was the bhavana. It consisted of a multitude of mental activities operation at various moments throughout the course of a multitude of mindstates. ------------------------------------- N: Sati when together with understanding is bhaavanaa. To be mindful right now of nama or rupa, that is bhaavanaa. It can grow. There is seeing now and no person is seen in the visible object. If we are very honest, we do see persons and tables. But we considering again and again of the truth that this is not so. This is bhaavanaa. One tiny moment of bhaavana is good, it accumulates and then there can be more. As you say: This shows that pa~n~naa grows slowly, we need patience and perseverance. Here the right effort comes in! right effort at the present moment. I hear you say: this is not the issue :-)) ---------- > Now we come back to listening you so often ask me about. It is > bhaavana, applied right at the present moment. Here is a text from > the Co. to the abhidhammattha Sangaha (T.A. p. 186): ---------------------------------------- Howard: Nina, we all know what listening is, and it also, like bhavana, is a complex and not a paramattha dhamma. --------------------------------------- N: Listening is one of the pu~n~na kiriya vatthus and classified under bhaavanaa. That is why I quoted that text. Yes, a complex of many cittas succeeding one another. I do not think everyone understands what listening really means. It is a good subject to discuss further, it is important. The listener has to be ready to receive the dhamma, it has to be the right time. Sometimes we listen, and many moments pass by that we do not get anything. Sometimes we get a lot from one sentence: everything is dhamma. How do you view listening? Nina. #70468 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 5:00 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Agreeable and Disagreeable scottduncan2 Dear Larry, Sorry for the delay. L: "Technically it occurs at javana, but I think we could say it occurs in a subsequent mind-door process." Scott: I've yet to get clear on the mind-door aspect of this. There are vipaaka-cittas at the mind-door as well. Do you know how these are involved? I'd guess that its the 'same' object as in the sense-door but passed-along and already through a series of javana. L: "The idea is that vipallaasa _isn't_ a part of the experience of the object itself. It's a wrong (perverted) reaction. The "correct" reaction is also not part of the resultant experience. Vipallaasa is kamma, not kamma vipaka." Scott: Okay, thanks for the clarification. And that makes sense, too. I guess here we're talking about all of the distortions in this case - sa~n~na-vipallasa, citta-vipallasa and di.t.thi-vipallas? How are these differentiated? L: "Maybe I'm wrong here. My thought was conascent predominance would determine whether we experience pain or heat, for example, when there is contact between body consciousness and fire. But I see that conascent predominance only arises in javana. So maybe this won't work." Scott: These are deep waters and I'm floating on the surface here. I think we're dealing only with pre-javana moments of consciousness when it comes to the resultant. U Narada (ibid, p. 18) offers a bit when stating: "Except for Fruition-consciousnesses, all the other resultant consciousnesses are very weak. Although these mundane resultant consciousnesses are caused by volitions, they take effect after long periods of time, separated by existences and worlds. Therefore they do not inherit the full forces of the volitions of the impulsions that brought them about as in the case of proximity force. In short, mundane resultant consciousnesses are weak because the volitions of the impulsions are not related to them by proximity force." I guess this suggests that the volition doesn't predominate over the resultant because proximity force is absent. But this doesn't help get us closer to trying to determine how the object is either agreeable or disagreeable. Back to the drawing board... Sincerely, Scott. #70469 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 1:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavana and the body upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 4/10/07 12:41:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time, rjkjp1@... writes: > Dear Howard > If we are to adopt your way of clasifying realities and concepts, > how do we cope with Abhidhamma texts, where, for example, kusala and > kusala cittas are considered as paramattha dhammas? ------------------------------------- Howard: I don't follow you, Robert. I had said that a citta is named according to the accompanying cetasikas. And citta that is accompanied by kusala roots is called "kusala". The citta, however, isn't a collection - it is a single act of knowing. On the other hand, if by 'citta' you informally mean an entire mindstate, we are then dealing with a conventional phenomenon, a citta-cetasika bundle, which also can be called "kusala" or not depending on the roots. The Buddha talked about people, and he referred to some as arahants, but that doesn't mean he viewed them as paramattha dhammas. They, too, are bundles, and merely conventional. ----------------------------------- > Do you see any difference -typology wise- between a tree (which is a > concept according to Abhidhamma ) and kusala citta (not a concept > according to Abhidhamma). ------------------------------------ Howard: Yes. A citta in the primary sense of vi~n~nana, not a bundle of phenomena, is a paramattha dhamma, and not a concept. A tree is a concept. ---------------------------------- > Robert ================== With metta, Howard P.S. Another example, Robert: Let us consider eye consciousness and visible object. They always co-occur. When there is seeing, the eye consciousness is a paramattha dhamma and the seen rupa is a paramattha dhamma, but the PAIR consisting of the two is neither nama nor rupa, but pa~n~natta. #70470 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 1:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] bhaavanaa and the body. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 4/10/07 6:17:20 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > I do not think everyone understands what listening really means. It > is a good subject to discuss further, it is important. The listener > has to be ready to receive the dhamma, it has to be the right time. > Sometimes we listen, and many moments pass by that we do not get > anything. Sometimes we get a lot from one sentence: everything is > dhamma. > How do you view listening? > ====================== As I said, as a compex of activities. It consists of attending to speech, hearing, thinking over. Attending to speech is itself a complex conventional activity extending over time as is thinking over. It is an extraordinarily complex process consisting of multi-millions of paramattha dhammas. It is certainly an important constituent of bhavana, an even greater complex of phenomena. With metta, Howard #70471 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 5:32 am Subject: Re: bhaavanaa and the body. scottduncan2 Dear Howard and Nina, If bhaavanaa is considered to be 'mental development' in the broad sense, then I'm thinking it is the process whereby, moment-by-moment, consciousness 'evolves' (to use a word with baggage). Wouldn't this 'evolution' be reflected in the very composition of consciousness at a given moment, that is, in the constellation of mental factors arising from moment-to-moment? In other words, development, a very complex process, is a function of the changing composition of mental factors conascent with citta. It would have to involve the presence of the mental factors associated with what is development as defined in Dhamma, and these, I guess, would be kusala. These mental factors would be growing in strength and influence 'over time' as they develop. Bhaavanaa itself is not paramattha dhamma but refers to what happens to these dhammas in process. Critique, clarifications please. Sincerely, Scott. #70472 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 2:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 4/10/07 8:33:32 AM Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: > > Dear Howard and Nina, > > If bhaavanaa is considered to be 'mental development' in the broad > sense, then I'm thinking it is the process whereby, moment-by-moment, > consciousness 'evolves' (to use a word with baggage). Wouldn't this > 'evolution' be reflected in the very composition of consciousness at a > given moment, that is, in the constellation of mental factors arising > from moment-to-moment? ------------------------------------ Howard: Certainly. :-) --------------------------------- > > In other words, development, a very complex process, is a function of > the changing composition of mental factors conascent with citta. > -------------------------------- Howard: Yes. It is a function of that changing composition, or *is* that process of change. And the factors that "evolve" are both result and condition for further cultivation. -------------------------------- It> > would have to involve the presence of the mental factors associated > with what is development as defined in Dhamma, and these, I guess, > would be kusala. These mental factors would be growing in strength > and influence 'over time' as they develop. ------------------------------ Howard: Yes! ---------------------------- > > Bhaavanaa itself is not paramattha dhamma but refers to what happens > to these dhammas in process. ------------------------------ Howard: Precisely. :-) ---------------------------- > > Critique, clarifications please. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. ======================= Scott, you've addressed the actual matter. It happens that we are in agreement on this, a fact which should probably concern you (LOL!). But what pleases me most is not the agreement, but that you have addressed the actual issue and not matters at best tangential to it. Thank you! BTW, before closing this post, I would like to apologize to you for having lost my cool in my last post to you. I was exasperated/frustrated, and I expressed that way too strongly. I'm sorry about that. I'll try to do better in the future. With metta, Howard #70473 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 6:48 am Subject: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Thank you for: H: "Scott, you've addressed the actual matter. It happens that we are in agreement on this, a fact which should probably concern you (LOL!)." Yes, it does. Very much. And right before I have to go to work. I believe this Concern would have persisted, as some Mental Factor or other, developing on and on were it not for: H: "...BTW, before closing this post, I would like to apologize to you for having lost my cool in my last post to you. I was exasperated/frustrated, and I expressed that way too strongly. I'm sorry about that. I'll try to do better in the future." Scott: Which, due to other Mental Factors such as Gratitude, calm the mental body. Sincerely, Scott. #70474 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 6:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body.citta and cetasikas. nilovg Dear Scott and Howard, I just listened to the discussions, March 2006 (no C) , and this may be of interest, since it touches on citta and cetasika. Of course, Howard, this is not 'the actual issue' and only 'a matter at best tangential to it', but never mind. Moreover, you may find yourself in the following words: Kh Sujin reminds us not to mind the term. I find it interesting how she explains the functions of citta and cetasika, namely anger, in this matter. She had explained before, that we can only understand the difference between citta and cetasika after the first vipassana ~naa.na, when the difference between the characteriustic of nama and of rupa is directly realized. Howard, I do not mean by thinking, we all can understand this by thinking. Visible object and seeing are there at the same time, but they appear to sati only one at a time. To us ignorant people it seems that they are a whole. But they are completely different realities. How difficult to realize this, but only pa~n`naa can when it is developed to the stage of vipassana ~naa.na. Bhaavanaa again! Nina. Op 10-apr-2007, om 15:14 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > It happens that we are in > agreement on this, #70475 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 3:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body.citta and cetasikas. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 4/10/07 10:00:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Visible object and seeing are there at the same time, but > they appear to sati only one at a time. > To us ignorant people it seems that they are a whole. But they are > completely different realities. =================== Yes, different phenomena. And they seem different to me, and not "a whole". And their interdependence is clear to me as well. With metta, Howard #70476 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:54 am Subject: ahosi kamma nilovg Dear Sarah, Mike and all, there were so many posts, I cannot remember which passages were quoted. Was Mike not posting on this subject? My eye caught a passage in Guide to Conditional Relations, U Narada, p. 53: Nina. #70477 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:42 am Subject: Perfections N, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 1 THE PERFECTION OF DETERMINATION The Bodhisatta developed the perfection of determination, aditthãna parami. He was unshakable in his resolution to develop all the perfections until he would attain Buddhahood. We too have to be determined to develop the perfections life after life. Today we listen to the Dhamma and we discuss satipatthãna. This interest in the Dhamma is conditioned by our accumulations in the past. We may have listened to the Dhamma also in former lives and we will have to listen to the Dhamma, consider it and be aware of realities again and again, in many lives to come, because right understanding develops very gradually. Are we determined to continue to develop right understanding until we have reached the goal? In the "Thera- therigatha" (Psalms of the Brothers and Sisters) we read about men and women in the Buddha’s time who had developed the perfections together with satipatthãna, not merely during one life but during countless lives, until their wisdom reached maturity in their last life. We read that they had made the resolution to develop the conditions for enlightenment time and again. We read for example about the former lives of the Theri Capa (Canto 68) in the commentary to this Canto She too, having made her resolve under former Buddhas, and heaping up good of age—enduring efficacy in this and that rebirth, till she had accumulated the sources of good, and matured the conditions for emancipation, was, in this Buddha— age, reborn in the Vankahära country, at a certain village of trappers, as the daughter of the chief trapper, and named Capa. We then read that after she had met the Buddha she attained arahatship. We may find that the development of right understanding hardly seems to make any progress but we should remember that the Buddha and his enlightened disciples had for innumerable lives maintained an unshakable resolution to reach the goal. We may give expression to our resolution to develop right understanding when we pay homage at the holy places with flowers, candles and incense, and we may express our resolution in words, but that is not enough. The Bodhisatta did not merely think, "I resolve to attain Buddhahood’, he developed all the conditions to reach the goal, he developed understanding of the realities appearing at the present moment. He was resolute with regard to the present moment. We need determination for the development of all the perfections; determination serves as their foundation. The perfections have to be developed together with right understanding of nãma and rupa, so that there will be conditions to eventually attain enlightenment. When there is mindfulness of the näma or rupa which appears now we actually develop the perfection of determination, aditthana, without there being the need to think, "I have to develop determination". ******* Nina. #70478 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:42 am Subject: Rupas Ch 7, no 3 nilovg Dear friends, We read in the “Visuddhimagga” (VIII, 28) about the disturbance of the elements: ... But with the disturbance of the earth element even a strong man’s life can be terminated if his body becomes rigid, or with the disturbance of one of the elements beginning with water if his body becomes flaccid and putrifies with a flux of the bowels, etc., or if he is consumed by a bad fever, or if he suffers a severing of his limb-joint ligatures. When one is healthy, there are conditions for lightness, plasticity and wieldiness of body. The “Atthasåliní” states that these three qualities are not produced by kamma, but that they are produced by citta, temperature or nutrition. This commentary states (in the same section, 327): ... Thus ascetics say, “Today we have agreeable food... today we have suitable weather... today our mind is one-pointed, our body is light, plastic and wieldy.” When we have suitable food and the temperature is right we may notice that we are healthy, that the body is not rigid and that it can move in a supple way. Not only food and temperature, also kusala citta can influence our physical condition. When we apply ourselves to mental development it can condition suppleness of the body. Thus we can verify in our daily life what is taught in the Abhidhamma. Lightness, plasticity and wieldiness condition our bodily movements to be supple. When we are speaking they condition the function of speech to be supple and “workable”. Whenever we notice that there are bodily lightness, plasticity and wieldiness, we should remember that they are qualities of rúpa, conditioned by citta, temperature or nutrition. Rúpas always arise in groups (kalapas) consisting of at least eight rúpas, the eight inseparable rúpas. There are rúpas other than these eight and these arise together in a group together with the eight inseparable rúpas. Our body consists of different groups of rúpas and each group is surrounded by infinitesimally tiny space, and this is the rúpa that is called space (akåsa) 3. The rúpas within a group are holding tightly together and cannot be divided, and the rúpa space allows the different groups to be distinct from each other. Thus, its function is separating or delimiting the different groups of rúpas, and therefore it is also called pariccheda rúpa, the rúpa that delimits (pariccheda meaning limit or boundary). The rúpa space is a rúpa without its own distinct nature (asabhåva rúpa), and it arises simultaneously with the different groups of rúpa it surrounds. ******* Nina. #70479 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 1:25 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Leading to stream entry kenhowardau Hi Scott, ------------- <. . .> S: > Isn't this the way the argument always goes: What about the 'other being'? I think all I mean to say is that, although it is clear that one moment is the world, as it were, there is, nonetheless, a reality to the killing of the moose and hence a reality to the act of killing - you can't have one without the other. --------------------- I think I get your point, and I agree that we can't justify moose- hunting with quotes from the Visudhimagga: "Mere suffering exists: no sufferer is found." And yet it is true, isn't it? No sufferer is found. ---------------------------- S: > This is so, I think, since (i) there is this series of thought moments including cuti-citta and patisandhi-citta for 'the moose' which are proof of death and are real, and (ii) the act of killing must be real as well since the events in (i) transpired. In this way it is killing - a being died because jiivitindriya ceased due to 'actions outside of it'. ---------------------------- Starting with point (ii): the act of killing is ultimately an akusala citta in which cetana cetasika is at the level of akusala kamma patha. It (the citta or the cetasika) can be known by the next mind- door citta as a mere, fleeting dhamma - devoid of self. (No sufferer found.) The object of that citta and cetasika was a concept (of a moose). Concepts are not fleeting, devoid-of-self dhammas, and it would be wrong to see them that way. Even so, the Buddhist moose-hunter knows that external dhammas (such as the cuti-citta of the moose) are just like his own - anicca dukkha and anatta. Therefore, having seen the terrible akusala kamma patha that has just fallen away he is not filled with remorse or guilt. He knows there are only dhammas. He knows the akusala kamma patha has the potential to result in undesirable rebirth, but so what if it does? There are only dhammas! There arises in the BMH dispassion for rebirth of any kind. He has dispassion for, and renunciation of, all conditioned dhammas, and Nibbana is realised right there on the Canadian tundra. :-) --------------------- S: > I don't think it is correct to argue that there are 'beings' which are the 'recipients of my actions' because this is missing the point. I do think that one can't throw out the baby with the bathwater either by invoking the ka.nikaa clause too stringently. And this being said, I don't for a minute think that it is other than this moment but when it comes to discussing conceptually one then speaks of the next moment or the last moment without needing to lose sight of this moment, if you know what I mean. Past and future are relevant, and I think in an ultimate sense, although God knows what I've just unleashed in saying this... -------------------- I agree; we can understand cause (the second NT) without conceiving a past. Whenever kusala and akusala dhammas arise in the non-arahant they can be directly known as what they are - the cause of dukkha. --------------------------------- K: > > "What do you think? When it comes to insight development, can you see any value in concepts other than as descriptions of dhammas?" S: > Yes. Concepts as objects of thinking. And thinking as object of satipa.t.thaana. Descriptions of dhammas understood conceptually with right view and then serving as condition for understanding of, say, the difference between naama and ruupa in reality later - so value as basis for further insight. What say you? -------------------------------- I agree with all of that, so where's the argument you promised me? :-) Ken H #70481 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 5:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Agreeable and Disagreeable lbidd2 Hi Scott, S: "Back to the drawing board..." L: Who needs kamma anyway? Can't we figure out an ethics and a deliverance that doesn't have anything to do with rebirth? Larry #70482 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:46 pm Subject: Re: Letters on Vipassana 11, no 2. buddhatrue Hi Azita, Well, I guess I will go ahead and respond to this first post and then respond to your second post if you write one. Azita: No, I think you have it wrong. Her stresses come from the position of if its 'self' that making all this effort and trying to 'see' dhammas then that is wrong path and that the 'no effort' position comes from understanding even if that understanding is very weak, that the arising and falling of dhammas NOW are not within 'our' control…. James: No, I don't think I have it wrong. In essence, what she is teaching stops development of the path. There is no need for one to have concern over the "self" having "desire" for enlightenment. That isn't the wrong path. Actually, that is exactly what the Buddha taught: "Monks, I do not say that the attainment of gnosis is all at once. Rather, the attainment of gnosis is after gradual training, gradual action, gradual practice. And how is there the attainment of gnosis after gradual training, gradual action, gradual practice? There is the case where, when conviction has arisen, one visits [a teacher]. Having visited, one grows close. Having grown close, one lends ear. Having lent ear, one hears the Dhamma. Having heard the Dhamma, one remembers it. Remembering, one penetrates the meaning of the teachings. Penetrating the meaning, one comes to an agreement through pondering the teachings. There being an agreement through pondering the teachings, desire arises. When desire has arisen, one is willing. When one is willing, one contemplates. Having contemplated, one makes an exertion. Having made an exertion, one realizes with the body the ultimate truth and, having penetrated it with discernment, sees it. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.070.than.html So, Azita, it is very important that you pay close attention to this process outlined by the Buddha: 1.Conviction (leads to) 2.Visit a teacher (leads to) 3.Lending an ear (leads to) 4.Hearing the dhamma (leads to) 5.Penetrate the meaning (leads to) 6.Agreement through pondering the teachings (leads to) 7.Desire (leads to) 8.Willingness (leads to) 9.Contemplation (leads to) 10.Exertion (leads to) 11.Gnosis K. Sukin teaches the importance of steps 1-6, but she directly contradicts the Buddha when she states that we should not have desire for enlightenment. Because she is so overly concerned about the false idea of self, she has eliminated the need for wholesome desire in her teachings. Without wholesome desire, there isn't the remainder of the path leading to enlightenment. Azita: sounds a bit elitist! whats tje difference bet a librarian, a teacher, a monk if they all have right view about the Buddha's teachings? James: There is no difference between them. But someone who really has right view about the Buddha's teachings doesn't need to consult books to find the answers to questions (easy or difficult questions); he/she would automatically know the answers. Azita: remarked to a friend recently, that I have observed less and less reasons for being mean and unkind to others, more reasons to give, maybe more patience and that I have not actively tried to be/do these things- they appear to be the result of listening, contemplating and living in accordance with understanding, when is arises. James: These are all good things, but they aren't inner-peace. If you are not feeling increased inner-peace, you should be making the direct effort that the Buddha taught. You should want and desire that inner peace! If you don't want it, you won't ever get it. Metta, James #70483 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. egberdina Hi Scott and Howard and Nina, > > Bhaavanaa itself is not paramattha dhamma but refers to what happens > to these dhammas in process. > > Critique, clarifications please. > This would leave a situation where paramattha dhammas were occuring (bhavaned) in a framework, such as time, that pre-existed the paramattha dhammas. Time must also be a parmattha dhamma to make sense of this. To be in a process requires duration, and for paramattha dhammas to have duration must put the the doctrine of the momentary nature of paramattha dhammas to the sword. Herman #70484 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 6:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavana and the body egberdina Hi Nina and Howard, On 09 Apr 2007 12:02:37 -0700, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > Hi Howard, > You took great trouble in explaining, hard stuff, very tough for me. > It is above my head. Perhaps it would be helpful if you had textual > supports. > This is from Nyanatiloka's entry on khandas. (My highlights) The fact ought to be emphasized here that these 5 groups, correctly speaking, merely form an abstract classification by the Buddha, but that they as such, i.e. as just these 5 complete groups, have no real existence, ***since only single representatives of these groups, mostly variable, can arise with any state of consciousness***. For example, with one and the same unit of consciousness only one single kind of feeling, say joy or sorrow, can be associated and never more than one. Similarly, two different perceptions cannot arise at the same moment. Also, of the various kinds of sense-cognition or consciousness, only one can be present at a time, for example, seeing, hearing or inner consciousness, etc. Of the 50 mental formations, however, a smaller or larger number are always associated with every state of consciousness, as we shall see later on. ***Some writers on Buddhism who have not understood that the five khandha are just classificatory groupings, have conceived them as compact entities ('heaps', 'bundles'), while actually, as stated above, the groups never exist as such, i.e. they never occur in a simultaneous totality of all their constituents***. Also those single constituents of a group which are present in any given body- and -mind process, are of an evanescent nature, and so also their varying combinations. Feeling, perception and mental formations are only different aspects and functions of a single unit of consciousness. They are to consciousness what redness, softness, sweetness, etc. are to an apple and have as little separate existence as those qualities. Herman #70485 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:18 pm Subject: Stopping Mental Frustration! bhikkhu5 Friends: The ability to be Frustrates ceases in the 2nd Jhâna! The Blessed Buddha once said: Here, Bhikkhus, while a Bhikkhu is dwelling diligent, enthusiastic, & resolute, there arises in him the ability to feel mental frustration. He notes and understands it thus: There has arisen in me an ability to feel mental frustration. That has a cause, a source, a basis, & a causal condition. It is impossible for that ability to feel frustration to arise without a cause, without a source, without any condition...! He understands how the ability to feel frustration essentially is.. He understands the causal origin of the ability to feel frustration.. He understands the very ceasing of the ability to feel frustration.. He understands when the ability to feel frustration ceases without any remaining trace... And where does any arisen ability to feel mental frustration cease without remaining trace? Here, Bhikkhus, with the silent stilling of directed & sustained thought, one enters & dwells in the 2nd jhÄ?na, calmed assurance & unification of mind joined with joy & pleasure now born of concentration, devoid of any thought or thinking.... It is right there that the arisen ability to feel frustration ceases without remainder. This, Bhikkhus & friends, is thus a Bhikkhu who has understood the ceasing of the ability to feel frustration! He directs his mind for this purpose! More on ending Frustration: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Ending_Sadness_and_Frustration.htm Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V:214] section 48: The Abilities. 36: Irregular Order ... Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Ceylon * Stopping Mental Frustration! #70486 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Apr 11, 2007 4:10 am Subject: Re: bhaavanaa and the body. kenhowardau Hi Scott and Howard, ----------------- S: > If bhaavanaa is considered to be 'mental development' in the broad sense, then I'm thinking it is the process whereby, moment-by-moment, consciousness 'evolves' (to use a word with baggage). ------------------ I say forget the about the broad sense - forget about moment-by-moment consciousness - and learn about momentary consciousness. The world is a moment of consciousness, and everything the Buddha taught is contained in one moment. There are kirya, akusala, kusala, jhana, mundane-path, and supramundane-path moments of consciousness. They combine with the 52 cetasikas in a total of 89 different ways. There can be no other reality. Sila, dana and bhavana, if they exist at all, exist in one moment of consciousness. Ken H #70487 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Apr 11, 2007 5:05 am Subject: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for this: H: "This would leave a situation where paramattha dhammas were occuring (bhavaned) in a framework, such as time, that pre-existed the paramattha dhammas. Time must also be a parmattha dhamma to make sense of this. To be in a process requires duration, and for paramattha dhammas to have duration must put the the doctrine of the momentary nature of paramattha dhammas to the sword." Scott: 1)Doesn't rise precede fall? 2)What is the concept time based on, if not the reality of rise and fall? The reality of the rise and fall, already present, is what the concept of time depends on. I don't think it 'prexisted' - concepts are time-freed. 3)Impermanence is a characteristic of any given conditioned dhamma, not the dhamma itself, is it not? How would the fact of impermanence negate the fact of an ultimate reality? 4)Can you please elaborate on the suggestion that 'duration' puts the doctrine of momentaneity of conditioned dhammas to the sword? 4)And, finally, is 'bhavaned' a new verb (in past tense)? I was just getting used to the verb 'text-messaged', as in, 'I just text-messaged my friend'. Sincerely, Scott. #70488 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Apr 11, 2007 5:12 am Subject: Re: bhaavanaa and the body. scottduncan2 Dear Ken H., Oh, so, still looking for an argument are you? K: "I say forget the about the broad sense - forget about moment-by-moment consciousness - and learn about momentary consciousness. The world is a moment of consciousness, and everything the Buddha taught is contained in one moment. There are kirya, akusala, kusala, jhana, mundane-path, and supramundane-path moments of consciousness. They combine with the 52 cetasikas in a total of 89 different ways. There can be no other reality. Sila, dana and bhavana, if they exist at all, exist in one moment of consciousness." Scott: I totally agree with the importance of momentary consciousness. You want to dismiss process. If process were irrelevant, I submit, then there could be no progress. The Path moment, for example, is actually two moments - magga-citta followed immediately by phala-citta - isn't it? Sincerely, Scott. #70489 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. upasaka_howard Hi Herman (and cott & Nina) - In a message dated 4/11/07 3:02:03 AM Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > Hi Scott and Howard and Nina, > > > > > Bhaavanaa itself is not paramattha dhamma but refers to what happens > > to these dhammas in process. > > > > Critique, clarifications please. > > > > This would leave a situation where paramattha dhammas were occuring > (bhavaned) in a framework, such as time, that pre-existed the > paramattha dhammas. Time must also be a parmattha dhamma to make sense > of this. To be in a process requires duration, and for paramattha > dhammas to have duration must put the the doctrine of the momentary > nature of paramattha dhammas to the sword. > > > Herman > ========================== As I think you may know, Herman, I don't think that paramattha dhammas are zero-duration affairs either, though I don't think this issue is critical to the Dhamma. It is the tilakkhana and patticasamupada that are. With metta, Howard #70490 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Apr 11, 2007 5:19 am Subject: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. scottduncan2 Dear Herman (II), Do not try to read this or say it aloud: 'prexisted'. It is too dangerous. And it was a typo. Please read and/or say aloud: 'pre-existed'. Sincerely, Scott. #70491 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavana and the body upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Nina) - In a message dated 4/11/07 3:02:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > Hi Nina and Howard, > > On 09 Apr 2007 12:02:37 -0700, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > > > >Hi Howard, > > You took great trouble in explaining, hard stuff, very tough for me. > > It is above my head. Perhaps it would be helpful if you had textual > > supports. > > > > This is from Nyanatiloka's entry on khandas. (My highlights) > > The fact ought to be emphasized here that these 5 groups, correctly > speaking, merely form an abstract classification by the Buddha, but > that they as such, i.e. as just these 5 complete groups, have no real > existence, ***since only single representatives of these groups, > mostly variable, can arise with any state of consciousness***. For > example, with one and the same unit of consciousness only one single > kind of feeling, say joy or sorrow, can be associated and never more > than one. Similarly, two different perceptions cannot arise at the > same moment. Also, of the various kinds of sense-cognition or > consciousness, only one can be present at a time, for example, seeing, > hearing or inner consciousness, etc. Of the 50 mental formations, > however, a smaller or larger number are always associated with every > state of consciousness, as we shall see later on. > > ***Some writers on Buddhism who have not understood that the five > khandha are just classificatory groupings, have conceived them as > compact entities ('heaps', 'bundles'), while actually, as stated > above, the groups never exist as such, i.e. they never occur in a > simultaneous totality of all their constituents***. Also those single > constituents of a group which are present in any given body- and -mind > process, are of an evanescent nature, and so also their varying > combinations. Feeling, perception and mental formations are only > different aspects and functions of a single unit of consciousness. > They are to consciousness what redness, softness, sweetness, etc. are > to an apple and have as little separate existence as those qualities. > > > Herman > > ========================= Herman, thank you for this. The highlighted sections make exactly my point. Of course, this isn't what Nina meant by "textual support", I would suppose. I would imagine Nina had in mind either sutta, Abhidhamma material, or commentary reported by Buddhaghosa, and not the statements of a modern-day scholar-monk. However, perhaps this will, nonetheless, lend *some* more credence in Nina's eyes to what I had written. What do you think, Nina? With metta, Howard #70492 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Apr 11, 2007 5:32 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Leading to stream entry scottduncan2 Dear Ken H., Last things first: K: "I agree with all of that, so where's the argument you promised me? :-)" Scott: Why you... K: "Starting with point (ii): the act of killing is ultimately an akusala citta in which cetana cetasika is at the level of akusala kamma patha. It (the citta or the cetasika) can be known by the next mind-door citta as a mere, fleeting dhamma - devoid of self. (No sufferer found.) The object of that citta and cetasika was a concept (of a moose). Concepts are not fleeting, devoid-of-self dhammas, and it would be wrong to see them that way." Scott: Atthasaalinii "Life taking has a conditioned thing for object, from its having the life force as object," (p. 134). "There are five constituent factors in the crime of murder: - a being, consciousness of there being a living creature, intention of killing, effort and consequent death," (p. 129). Sincerely, Scott. Reply | Forward | Messages in this Topic (94) #70493 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Scott) - In a message dated 4/11/07 7:12:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowa@... writes: > Hi Scott and Howard, > > ----------------- > S: >If bhaavanaa is considered to be 'mental development' in the broad > sense, then I'm thinking it is the process whereby, moment-by-moment, > consciousness 'evolves' (to use a word with baggage). > ------------------ > > I say forget the about the broad sense - forget about moment-by-moment > consciousness - and learn about momentary consciousness. The world is a > moment of consciousness, and everything the Buddha taught is contained > in one moment. There are kirya, akusala, kusala, jhana, mundane-path, > and supramundane-path moments of consciousness. They combine with the > 52 cetasikas in a total of 89 different ways. There can be no other > reality. > > Sila, dana and bhavana, if they exist at all, exist in one moment of > consciousness. > > Ken H > > ========================= There is no cessation in the moment. There is no impermanence in the moment - neither coming nor going, no becoming. There is no temporal conditionality in the moment. Points to ponder perhaps. With metta, Howard #70494 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 11, 2007 6:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavana and the body nilovg Hi Howard, yes, yes! But I will add more. (always this but! ) Nina Op 11-apr-2007, om 14:24 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > However, perhaps this will, nonetheless, lend *some* more credence in > Nina's eyes to what I had written. What do you think, Nina? #70495 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 11, 2007 6:33 am Subject: English Dhamma Discussion. nilovg Dear friends, this is a summary (I added words, because it is spoken language) from the discussion in March 2005, no c, and interspersed with my remarks: Sujin: ---------- N: It is important to know the difference. This is the beginning of its development. Is the object now a 'whole' or one reality at a time as it appears through one of the six doors? ---------- Sujin: ------- N: If one wishes for sati there is lobha, no sati. We have to understand its anattaness and not interfere. Awareness is not thinking. There may even be very quick thinking without words, but that is not sati. Sati of vipassana arises with kusala citta accompanied by pa~n~naa. In this way understanding of the present reality develops. -------- Sujin: ------- N: Listening, considering, these are the conditions for more understanding of the object of sati. Not a certain time or place. -------- S: We know about the difference between the world of concepts and the world of absolute realities in theory, but we have to understand right now: at which moment is there the world of realities and at which moment is there the world of concepts. When we hear the word dhatu or the word dhamma we think that we understand this, but there should not merely be the intellectual understanding of these words. What about now: what is dhamma? Is seeing a dhamma? Is hearing a dhamma? We may just say: everything is dhamma, but we should know our own understanding, to what extent we understand.> ------ N: We can check our own understanding. A reality that arises because of its own conditions is dhamma. To really understand seeing as dhamma means that an idea of my seeing, even a very subtle idea of it is mine, is absent. It is beyond control. ****** Nina. #70496 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 11, 2007 6:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. nilovg Hi Howard, Ken, I see impermanence as momentary: one citta arises, persists for an extremely short moment and then falls away. We can call this falling away also cessation (nirodha). It is the moment of its falling away. Three moments: khaana. Nina. Op 11-apr-2007, om 14:33 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > There is no cessation in the moment. There is no impermanence in the > moment #70497 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavana and the body upasaka_howard Hi again, Herman & Nina - In a message dated 4/11/07 8:24:59 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Upasaka writes: > The fact ought to be emphasized here that these 5 groups, correctly > speaking, merely form an abstract classification by the Buddha, but > that they as such, i.e. as just these 5 complete groups, have no real > existence, ***since only single representatives of these groups, > mostly variable, can arise with any state of consciousness***. ==================== I would add one more thing. Even a group of phenomena that occur simultaneously, is, being a group, *not* itself a paramattha dhamma. No paramattha dhamma is a group. A citta is not itself a group, though it co-ocurs with cetasikas. A vedana is not a group. A sound is not a group. A recognition (sa~n~na) is not a group. A kalapa, however, is a bundle of simultaneously occuring rupas, though, of course, at most one is object of consciousness at any time. Each rupa in that bundle, element, is a paramattha dhamma. The kalapa, however, is not a single phenomenon, but is a set - a concept known through the mind door. The rupas of that kalapa are all fabricationally-independent realties, and their co-occurrence is real, but the group of them - the kalapa - is a product of conceptualization. With metta, Howard #70498 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Ken) - In a message dated 4/11/07 9:36:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, Ken, > I see impermanence as momentary: one citta arises, persists for an > extremely short moment and then falls away. > ------------------------------------- Howard: Whatever persists at all is not momentary. ------------------------------------- We can call this falling > > away also cessation (nirodha). It is the moment of its falling away. > Three moments: khaana. > Nina. > ================= With metta, Howard #70499 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 11, 2007 7:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. nilovg Hi Howard, the Visuddhimagga and Tiika give many aspects of moment. Also the persisting moment of citta is called khaana, moment. Rupa lasts as long as seventeen moments of citta. When we take into account the three submoments of citta, they last as long as 51 moments. Nina. Op 11-apr-2007, om 15:48 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Whatever persists at all is not momentary. #70500 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 11, 2007 7:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body.vipassana. nilovg Hi Howard and all, ---------- Op 10-apr-2007, om 16:54 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > > Visible object and seeing are there at the same time, but > > they appear to sati only one at a time. > > To us ignorant people it seems that they are a whole. But they are > > completely different realities. > =================== > Yes, different phenomena. And they seem different to me, and not "a > whole". And their interdependence is clear to me as well. ---------------- N: I think this is an important subject to pursue for everybody here: when is the object a whole and when is sati aware of one object at a time as it appears through one of the six doors. For those who are interested in the stages of insight I quote from Survey, Chg 30, Stages of Vipassana (p. 325) : --------- N: There is not vipassanana ~naana all the time. It is very natural that when these moments have fallen away, the world appears as usual, as a whole. ---------- ------- N: The moments of vipassana~naana arise in a mind-door process. We have to ask ourselves whether we really know, through direct experience, what a mind-door process of cittas is. The nature of vipassana ~naa.na is non-self, but even now when there is a moment of beginning awareness, or consideration of a present reality, it should be realized that this is due to conditions, to listening, and that it is not 'my awareness'. Clinging can arise so easily, it follows all the time. ----------