#75600 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Aug 27, 2007 6:00 pm Subject: Re: Making comparisons indriyabala Dear Connie, - That toddler Connie was not ordinary at all, because she was observant enough and smart enough to discover relationships all by herself. C: But the biggest book I have is still this 'fathom long' one named 'Connie Belle'... I take it that the bell thing is to draw my attention back to whatever it is in there that I'm supposed to understand, but now at 50 years, I'm still waiting for the light to come on. T: I think I have a lot to learn before I can read your post like a newspaper. For example, I cannot figure out if there is a connection between the "Belle" in Connie Belle and the "bell" in the bell thing. C: Also, smiling, let me add that there's just a tinge of jealousy when I remember you have the Pa.tisambhidaa so often quoted in the Vism! Good on ya, or anumodana, as they say. T: I am nothing to be jealous of, Connie. I have studied the Pa.tisambhidaa book both in Thai and English for a few decades, yet there still are passages that I cannot penetrate -- like a soup spoon hanging in a soup pot, so to speak. Tep === #75601 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Mon Aug 27, 2007 6:52 pm Subject: Re: Making comparisons nichiconn Dear Tep, Tep: I cannot figure out if there is a connection between the "Belle" in Connie Belle and the "bell" ... Connie: Sorry! Just more of my ridiculous word play since they're pronounced the same. T: I am nothing to be jealous of, Connie. I have studied the Pa.tisambhidaa book both in Thai and English for a few decades, yet there still are passages that I cannot penetrate -- like a soup spoon hanging in a soup pot, so to speak. C: Hearty appetite! Talk with you again later. Thank you. #75602 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Aug 27, 2007 3:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 8/27/07 8:49:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > Hi Howard (& Jon), > > >1) Hearing is an act of consciousness, and I am unaware of any basis > >for assuming that such has been developed by computer engineers, > > It's impossible to develop robotics consciousness, isn't it? > > >2) Music and conversations, as such, are mind-door phenomena, not > >ear-door phenomena. While I literally hear sounds, I cognize music & > >conversations and only figuratively hear them. > > I would like you to consider a passage from DN 22: > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.22.0.than.html > > "And what is endearing &alluring in terms of the world? The eye is > endearing &alluring in terms of the world. That is where this > craving, when arising, arises. That is where, when dwelling, it > dwells. > > "The ear... The nose... The tongue... The body... The intellect... > > "Forms... Sounds... Smells... Tastes... Tactile sensations... Ideas... > > "Eye-consciousness... Ear-consciousness... Nose-consciousness... > Tongue-consciousness... Body-consciousness... Intellect- > consciousness... > > "Eye-contact... Ear-contact... Nose-contact... Tongue-contact... Body- > contact... Intellect-contact... > > "Feeling born of eye-contact... Feeling born of ear-contact... > Feeling born of nose-contact... Feeling born of tongue-contact... > Feeling born of body-contact... Feeling born of intellect-contact... > > "Perception of forms... Perception of sounds... Perception of > smells... Perception of tastes... Perception of tactile sensations... > Perception of ideas... > > "Intention for forms... Intention for sounds... Intention for > smells... Intention for tastes... Intention for tactile sensations... > Intention for ideas... > > "Craving for forms... Craving for sounds... Craving for smells... > Craving for tastes... Craving for tactile sensations... Craving for > ideas... > > "Thought directed at forms... Thought directed at sounds... Thought > directed at smells... Thought directed at tastes... Thought directed > at tactile sensations... Thought directed at ideas... > > "Evaluation of forms... Evaluation of sounds... Evaluation of > smells... Evaluation of tastes... Evaluation of tactile sensations... > Evaluation of ideas is endearing &alluring in terms of the world. > That is where this craving, when arising, arises. That is where, when > dwelling, it dwells. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > In your knowledge &experience, do you have intention &craving for > audible data that lasts for a split second? --------------------------------------- Howard: You are assuming that I view paramattha dhammas in the same way as others here.I do not. But the issue isn't what we crave. We certainly crave conceptual material at least as much as phenomena independent of thinking. The issue was what we see and hear rather than cognize. We don't literally hear music, but we do cognize it, love it, and are attached to it. ------------------------------------- > > You can try playing a piece of music or a piece of conversation and > pressing the pause button repeatedly on &off. > > Do you think what the Buddha taught here in DN 22 is figurative or > literal? ----------------------------------- Howard: Quite literal. What in it do you think I would not take literally? ---------------------------------- > > Swee Boon > ===================== With metta, Howard #75603 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:12 am Subject: Fwd: prayer service and lecture by Sayadaw U Uttama in San Marino, CA 91108, US abhidhammika Dear All How are you? If you live around San Marino, CA 91108, USA, here is a Buddhist event. Sayadaw U Uttama is my former Uni mate while I was doing Pali at Mandalay University before I did English at University of Education for 4 years in Yangon, in Myanmar. With regards, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org --- In BuddhistWellnessGroup@yahoogroups.com, DESMOND CHIONG wrote: Des Dharma Center, will have the monthly prayer service led by abbot Ven. Sayadaw U Uttama at 8 A. M. and a lecture on Theravadin Buddhism by Desmond B. Chiong, M. D. at 9 A.M. on Sunday September 2, 2007 at: Suite "E" [upstairs] 1455 San Marino Ave., San Marino, CA 91108 Call Lidia at 626-577-9010 for reservation. Burmese salad noodle will be served. [there will be no prayer service for October, 2007] #75604 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness nilovg Dear Tep, Op 28-aug-2007, om 0:55 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > T: (#75589) : But it is so clear by the wordings of MN 20 that "this > has to precede that; if that fails, then follow another", for > example : > " ... If evil, unskillful thoughts continue to arise in a bhikkhu who > ponders on their disadvantageousness, he should in regard to them, > endeavor to be without attention and reflection. Then the evil > unskillful thoughts are eliminated; they disappear. .. --------- I retrieved an old message where we discussed this: message 52778. I quote: Tep: I understand your suggestion as follows: by listening to satipatthana, > and understanding only one nama or rupa at a time, direct knowledge > may arise in the mind and that is the panna that can conquer akusala. > Is my understanding correct? ------ N: Paññaa must overcome wrong view first before other types of akusala can be eliminated stage by stage. Thus we have foremost in mind: understanding of the dhammas that are appearing, by being aware of their characteristics.> (end old message) I shall send you as an attachment to you personally the sutta and Co I translated. Then you can read at ease. -------- T: When thinking with delusion arises the bhikkhu should depend on five dhammas. T: What "five dhammas" and how should he depend on them? ---------- N: When the Bhikkhu has thoughts of delusion he should depend on five dhammas: 1. He should be together with a teacher, 2. he should study the Dhamma, 3. he should ask questions on the Dhamma, 4. he should listen to the Dhamma at a suitable time, 5. he should inquire into cause and effect. As to the first point, the Co. states that when he is together with a teacher he respects, the teacher can punish him with a task, such as making him dip up water to fill even a hundred pots. N: He has respect for the teacher and thus, he will do this with kusala citta. The bhikkhu should do all such tasks with mindfulness of nama and rupa. If he performs this task with aversion he will have more delusion. The teacher gives him this punishment in order to help him to have less delusion. The Co states as to the second point that the teacher will punish him when he does not study the Dhamma at the proper time, when he does not recite the texts well, or does not recite them at all. As to the third point, he should go to another bhikkhu he respects and he should asks questions concerning the meaning of the Dhamma. In this way his doubts will be allayed and he can abandon delusion. He should listen to the Dhamma at the appropriate time with respect and thus the meaning of what he hears will become clear to him. Thus he can abandon ignorance of the Dhamma. He should inquire as to the right cause that can bring the appropriate result. In this way he can abandon ignorance of the Dhamma. ------- These points make it clear that the development of understanding is all important. I cannot see all these instructions as steps to be taken in order. Cittas of different persons are varied. At one moment and for one person this point is helpful, for someone else that point. But above all: one should not be neglectful and be aware of nama and rupa. If we just read them as steps one by one we could say: anybody can advise in this way. But it is the Buddha and his teaching is anatta. There is no person involved, whatever we do. This helps us to understand the deepest sense of this sutta and all suttas. Satipatthana is always implied also in those suttas where it is not mentioned. --------- T: DN 22 has a large collection of methods (including kayagatasati). I do not believe that all these methods in DN 22 can ever be practiced at the same time -- in a single moment, so to speak. It would be very interesting if you could show me how they (the four frames of reference) can be practiced simultaneously ! -------- N: The four applications of mindfulness point to all namas and rupas of daily life. But there can be awareness of only one nama or rupa at a time. Does this answer your question? Nina. #75605 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Childers' Pali Dictionary on 'Sankappo' sarahprocter... Hi Howard & all, --- upasaka@... wrote: >.... The > volition and > decision, however, which do continue, are forms of thinking, and I > believe > that sankappa is closer to them than vitakka. .... Here's a quote from an earlier post of mine: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/24886 "As we know, when vitakka is a factor of the eightfold path it is referred to as sammaa-sankappa (Right Thinking). I came across the following quote regarding its importance to samma-di.t.thi (Right View)and the money-changer simile: Sammohavinodanii 441: “ Also as regards Right View and Right Thinking, understanding cannot of its own nature determine an object as “impermanent, painful, no-self”, but with applied thought giving [assistance] by repeatedly beating [upon the object] it can. How? Just as a money-changer, having had a coin placed in his hand and being desirous of looking at it on all sides equally, cannot turn it over with the power of his eye only, but by turning it over with his finders he is able to look at it on all sides; likewise understanding cannot of its own nature determine an object as impermanent, etc, but with applied thought with its characteristic of focussing the mind and its function of striking and threshing, as it were beating and turning over, it can take what is given and determine it. Therefore Right View only is included here in the understanding group as being of the same kind, but Right Thinking is included because of its action [of assisting].” (The 3 groups are the virtue group, the concentration group and the understanding group). Nina also writes more about vitakka in ‘Cetasikas’." http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas10.html .... S: Here's one quote from 'Cetasikas' on vitakka which summarises the above quote nicely, I think: "When there is right understanding of a nåma or rúpa which appears, there are both vitakka and vicåra accompanying the citta, but vicåra is not a factor of the eightfold Path. Sammå-saòkappa has its specific function as path-factor. Sammå-saòkappa “touches” the nåma or rúpa which appears so that sammå-diììhi can investigate its characteristic in order to understand it as it is. Thus, sammå-diììhi needs the assistance of sammå-saòkappa in order to develop." I'm glad you're pursuing this important topic. I'll look forward to reading any further comments on it. Metta, Sarah ======= #75606 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:27 am Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge jonoabb Hi Swee Boon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi Jon, > > > Of course there is no conscious awareness of the many thought > > processes that are going on all the time. There seems to be just > > "the music" or the conversation or whatever. But without a lot of > > processing there could be no conversation (or piece of music). > > How is this relevant to satipatthana? It is very relevant. Satipatthana is awareness of a presently arising dhamma. Unless there is a clear understanding at the intellectual level of what those "dhammas" are that may be taken as an object by awareness, there can be no chance of awareness occurring. > > Yes, but exactly what is it that is heard through the ear. Is it > > music/conversation, or is it audible data? > > Robots hear audible data. Conventionally and informally (as Howard notes), this may be said. However, hearing is used used in the suttas to refer to a function of consciousness. Without consciousness there could be no hearing. When sound is experienced by consciousness, the consciousness is called "hearing" (or "hearing consciousness"). > Humans hear music, conversations and audible data. Audible data that has been heard may be perceived as music or words forming part of a conversation, but "music" and "words" is a product of thinking about (i.e., processing) the audible data. The world is not at all the way it appears to be ;-)). Jon #75607 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 3:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Confucian mentality sarahprocter... Hi Ken E, On points 2 and 3, i.e what I called 'the heart-base thorny issue' and 'Path and Fruition consciousness in succession', as I suggested, we've discussed these topics in depth before, but that doesn't mean they can't be discussed again. I'd like to suggest you take a look in 'Useful Posts' under 'Heart-base', 'Dighanakha Sutta, MN74' and 'Path3 (magga) & Fruition (phala) consciousness' when you have time. A few brief comments: --- Kenneth Elder wrote: > Then there is the issue of the organ bases of the 6 > fields of consciousness, eye for visual consciousness, > ear for visual consciousness, etc., ... S: I think we need to realise that these pasada rupas (sense-bases) are impermanent elements, completely different from our usual ideas of organs. .... >until mental > consciousness where in the Sutta, Buddha did not > (except in one metaphorical poetic passage) designate > a specific organ and just said, “That physical basis > for mental consciousness.” Some Abhidhamma passage or > passages lists the heart as the bases for mental > consciousness. .... S: Again, we're talking about an impermanent element which arises and falls away instantly all the time. In this sense, it really doesn't matter very much where it is located. We can either accept from the texts say or not. The important thing is not to think of it in terms of any permanent, substantial organ. .... ..... >Then there is the issue of whether the > Fruition moments of Nibbana always comes immediately > after the first attainment of the Path moment of one > of the Four Paths of Nibbana or whether as multiple > Sutta imply that the Fruition attainment can come at a > later time. .... S: I don't read the suttas as implying this. I think it's a mis-reading. I agree however, that it is spelled out very clearly in the Abhidhamma that these cittas follow in succession by anantara paccaya (proximity condition). It is the only time vipaka (result)immediately succeeds kamma. I'm very happy to discuss your references further, but only if you'd like to discuss these points further. So please give me some indication either way. Otherwise, I'll leave you to read the U.P. referred to above of them and briefly refer to the last points in my list of your comments later. Thx again for your interesting message. Metta, Sarah ======== #75608 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 3:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) sarahprocter... Dear Han, Scott, Tep (Nina, Mike & all), I liked the comments and question you raised, Han. --- han tun wrote: > The more interesting point is when you wrote: > > “I like this very much: when an object is repulsive > one can see it as unrepulsive, in the case of beings, > by applying metta to him, and in the case of inanimate > objects by seeing them as elements. Or one can see > them all as impermanent.” > > I also like the above statement. It is like looking > at the brighter and more positive aspect of things > that I wrote. > > However, in SN 36.5 Datthabba Sutta (translated by > Nyanaponika Thera) the Buddha said that, > “Pleasant feelings should be known as painful (sukha > vedanaa dukkhato datthabbaa), painful feelings should > be known as a thorn (dukkha vedanaa sallato > datthabbaa), and neither-painful-nor-pleasant feelings > should be known as impermanent (adukkha-masukha > vedanaa aniccato datthabbaa).” > > So I wonder how I can reconcile “when an object is > repulsive one can see it as unrepulsive (MN 152 Co)” > with “pleasant feelings should be known as painful (SN > 36.5)” ..... S: I was also very curious about 'when an object is repulsive > one can see it as unrepulsive' and see that Nanamoli/Bodhi give a long note to the following part of the text: MN152: "And how, Ananda, is one a noble one with developed faculities? [note: 'Ariya bhaavitindriya: the arahant is meant']......... If he should wish: 'May I abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive,' he abides perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive. If he should wish: 'May I abide perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive,' he abides perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive......'unrepulsive in the repulsive and unrepulsive......'.....'repulsive in the unrepulsive and repulsive.....'May I, avoiding both the repulsive and unrepulsive, abide in equanimity, mindful and fully aware,' he abides in equanimity towards that, mindful and fully aware." Note: "The P.tisambhidaamagga calls this practice "the noble supernormal power" (ariya iddhi) and explains it thus (ii.212): To abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive, one pervades a repulsive being with loving-kindness, or one attends to a repulsive object (either animate or inanimate) as a mere assemblage of impersonal elements. To abide perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive, one pervades a (sensually) attractive person with the idea of the foulness of the body, or one attends to an attractive object (either animate or inanimate) as impermanent. The third and fourth methods involve the application of the first and second contemplations to both repulsive and unrepulsive objects, without discrimination. The fifth method involves the avoidance of joy and sorrow in response to the six sense objects, thus enabling one to abide in equanimity, mindful and fully aware. "Although this fivefold contemplation is ascribed to the arahant as a power perfectly under his control, elsewhere the Buddha teaches it to bhikkhus still in training as a way to overcome the three unwholesome roots. See AN 5:144/iii 169-70; and for a thoughtful commentary on that sutta, see Nyanaponika Thera, 'The Roots of Good and Evil, pp 73-78." **** S: It might be useful if any of you can check the Patisambhidaamagga text (and Pali) and also the other AN ref on this. Plenty of meat for a discussion on 'control' and Nanamoli/Bodhi's note as well, perhaps! (I see Scott and Mike sharpening their pencils..) I liked Nina's further comment: "....if we do not forget that what we take for a person is citta, cetasika and ruupa which arise because of their own conditions, it will be clearer that there is no rule for the application of a certain kind of kusala. It all occurs in a moment. Then we can read this sutta with right understanding, not with an idea of self who should exert will power to do this or that. Whatever wholesomeness occurs depends on conditions. The equanimity refers to insight knowledge, to the stage of sankhaarupekkhaa. This is insight, not thinking or applying will power." Metta, Sarah ======= #75609 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 3:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- upasaka@... wrote: > Nibbana is unconditioned and not relative to anything else. Any > "knowing" of nibbana would be quite different from ordinary citta and > cetasika. It > would be the featureless vi~n~nanam anidassanam of the Kevatta Sutta. ... S: vinnanam anidassana refers to nibbana, not to the 'knowing' of nibbana. This is from an old message I wrote: “The word 'consciousness' is translated from 'vi~n~naa.na.m' to be understood as 'cognizable' (vijaanitabba.m) and not consciousness according to the Pali com. as Jim explained to me. As I mentioned, B.Bodhi also added in his notes (513): "MA takes the subject of the sentence to be Nibbana, called 'consciousness' in the sense that "it can be cognized" '. ----------------------------------- Perhaps another translation of the first line could be: 'Cognizable (vi~n~naa.na.m), invisible (anidassana.m), shinining in all directions (ananta.m sabbatopabha)'” ... S: I also wrote that I found no problem with 'it can be cognized' because: "It conforms with other passages, such as the ones from the Udana and Itivuttaka where nibbana is specifically mentioned in the commentaries referring to similar contexts." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15418 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16744 ***** (S: Of course, there is lots more in U.P. under 'vinnana - nibbana, anidassana') ... >I > find > the idea of a nibbana that is an object hit upon or touched by vitakka > to be > inappropriate as regards the unconditioned. Nibbana is not just some > object to be > examined. Nibbana is not known - it is realized. .... S: Whenever vitakka arises, it has the same characteristic (lakkhana): "It has the characteristic of directing the mind (citta) onto an object (aaramma.na) (mounting the mind on its object)." (Vism, 1V, 88). Without the arising of vitakka, samma-sankappa, samma-ditthi could not arise to realize nibbana. .... Metta, Sarah ====== #75610 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:21 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (65) nichiconn Dear Friends, 12. So.lasanipaato 1. Pu.n.naatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa part 6 Verse: 236. "udahaarii aha.m siite, sadaa udakamotari.m; ayyaana.m da.n.dabhayabhiitaa, vaacaadosabhaya.t.titaa. 236. I am a water carrier. [Even] in the cold weather I have always gone down to the water, terrified by fear of punishment from noble ladies, harrassed by fear of verbal abuse and displeasure. Cy: Tattha udahaariiti gha.tena udaka.m vaahikaa. Siite tadaa udakamotarinti siitakaalepi sabbadaa rattindiva.m udaka.m otari.m. Yadaa yadaa ayyakaana.m udakena attho, tadaa tadaa udaka.m paavisi.m, udakamotaritvaa udaka.m upanesinti adhippaayo. Ayyaana.m da.n.dabhayabhiitaati ayyakaana.m da.n.dabhayena bhiitaa. Vaacaadosabhaya.t.titaati vaciida.n.dabhayena ceva dosabhayena ca a.t.titaa pii.litaa, siitepi udakamotarinti yojanaa. Pruitt: 236. There, water carrier means: a carrier of water in a pot. [Even] in the cold weather (siite) I have always (sadaa) gone down to the water means: at the time of cold weather (siita-kaale), night and day, I have always (sabbadaa) gone down to the water. Whenever the mistreses needed water, then I entered the water, I went down into the water, I brought water. That is the meaning. Terrified by fear of punishment (da.n.da-bhaya-bhiitaa) from noble ladies (ayyaana.m) means: terrified (bhiitaa) through fear of punishment (da.n.da-bhayena) from my mistresses (ayyakana.m). Harassed by fear of verbal abuse and displeasure (vaacaa-dosa-bhay'-a.t.titaa) means: harassed (a.t.titaa), oppressed by fear of abuse (dosa-bhayena) and fear of verbal punishment (vaci-da.n.da-bhayena), I have gone down to the water. That is the connection. Verse: 237. "Kassa braahma.na tva.m bhiito, sadaa udakamotari; vedhamaanehi gattehi, siita.m vedayase bhusa.m. 237. What are you afraid of, brahman, when you constantly go down to the water? With trembling limbs, you experience very great cold. Cy: Athekadivasa.m pu.n.naa daasii gha.tena udaka.m aanetu.m udakatittha.m gataa. Tattha addasa a~n~natara.m braahma.na.m udakasuddhika.m himapaatasamaye mahati siite vattamaane paatova udaka.m otaritvaa sasiisa.m nimujjitvaa mante jappitvaa udakato u.t.thahitvaa allavattha.m allakesa.m pavedhanta.m dantavii.na.m vaadayamaana.m. Ta.m disvaa karu.naaya sa~ncoditamaanasaa tato na.m di.t.thigataa vivecetukaamaa "kassa, braahma.na, tva.m bhiito"ti gaathamaaha. Tattha kassa, braahma.na, tva.m kuto ca naama bhayahetuto bhiito hutvaa sadaa udakamotari sabbakaala.m saaya.m paata.m udaka.m otari. Otaritvaa ca vedhamaanehi kampamaanehi gattehi sariiraavayavehi siita.m vedayase bhusa.m siitadukkha.m ativiya dussaha.m pa.tisa.mvedayasi paccanubhavasi. 237. Then one day, the slave girl Pu.n.naa went to a ghat to fetch water in a pot. There, she saw a certain brahman who was intent on purification by water during the season of snowfall when it was very cold weather going down into the water early in the morning. He plunged in up to his head and mumbled charms. Then coming up from the water with wet clothes and wet hair, he trembled and his teeth chattered.* When she saw him, her mind was stimulated by compassion; then wanting to separate him from his wrong views, she spoke the verse beginning, What are you afraid of, brahman. There [the meaning is:] what are you afraid of, brahman, indeed, where does the cause of your fear come from when you constantly go down to the water, when you always go down to the water in the evening and morning? And having gone down with trembling, with shaking limbs, limbs of the body, you experience very great cold (siita.m), you experience, you suffer from, the pain of cold (siita-dukkha.m) that is exceedingly [great], insupportable. *Danta-vii.na.m vaadayamaana.m, lit.: his teeth played like a lute. ===tbc, connie. #75611 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Control is Popular scottduncan2 Dear Mike, Thanks for the reply; a very good and subtle point: M: "...in the Bodhi translation, is the word 'kaama.m' the one translated as 'willingly'? If not, which word is translated as 'willingly'? I think this may have considerable bearing on our discussion." Scott: While in the Note it is said that "[t]he development of the faculties carries this process of control through to the point where, by an act of will, one can immediately set up insight even in the course of sense perception...", I can't see where, even in the translation, there is reference to willing. I'll post the text again: "Now, Aananda, how is the supreme development of the faculties in the Noble One's Discipline? (Katha~ncaananda, ariyassa vinaye anuttaraa indriyabhaavanaa hoti:) Here, Aananda, when a bhikkhu sees a form with the eye, there arises in him what is agreeable, there arises in him what is disagreeable, there arises in him what is both agreeable and disagreeable. (idhaananda, bhikkhuno cakkhunaa ruupa.m disvaa uppajjati manaapa.m, uppajjati amanaapa.m, uppajjati manaapaamanaapa.m.) He understands thus, 'There has arisen in me what is agreeable, there has arisen in me what is disagreeable, there has arisen in me what is both agreeable and disagreeable. (So eva.m pajaanaati: 'uppanna.m kho me ida.m manaapa.m uppanna.m amanaapa.m uppanna.m manaapaamanaapa.m.) But that is conditioned, gross, dependently arisen; this is peaceful, this is sublime, that is, equanimity. (Ta~nca kho sa"nkhataa o.laarika.m pa.ticcasamuppanna.m, eta.m santa.m eta.m pa.niita.m yadida.m upekkhaa'ti.) The agreeable that arose in him, the disagreeable that arose in him, and the both agreeable and disagreeable that arose cease in him and equanimity is established. (Tassa ta.m uppanna.m manaapa.m uppanna.m amanaapa.m uppanna.m manaapaamanaapa.m nirujjhati, upekkhaa sa.n.thaati.) Just as a man with good sight, having opened his eyes might shut them or having shut his eyes might open them, so too concerning anything at all, the agreeable that arose, the disagreeable that arose, and the both agreeable and disagreeable that arose cease just as quickly, just as rapidly, just as easily, and equanimity is established. (Seyyathaapi aananda, cakkhumaa puriso ummiiletvaa vaa nimiileyya nimiiletvaa vaa ummiileyya. Evameva kho aananda, yassa kassaci eva.m siigha.m eva.m tuva.ta.m eva.m appakasirena uppanna.m manaapa.m uppanna.m amanaapa.m uppanna.m manaapaamanaapa.m nirujjhati, upekkhaa sa.n.thaati.) This is called the in Noble One's Discipline the supreme development of the faculties regarding forms cognisable by the eye. (Aya.m vuccataananda, ariyassa vinaye anuttaraa indriyabhaavanaa cakkhuvi~n~neyyesu ruupesu.)" Scott: I don't see the word 'kamma.m' appearing in the Paa.li. I don't see any mention of willing at all. This was all added as neo-commentary. Sincerely, Scott. #75612 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Childers' Pali Dictionary on 'Sankappo' sarahprocter... Hi Howard & all, A little more!! --- upasaka@... wrote: >....The > volition and > decision, however, which do continue, are forms of thinking, and I > believe > that sankappa is closer to them than vitakka. ... S: From the Vibhanga (2nd book of the Abhidhamma Pitaka), under 'Analysis of Jhaana'(PTS transl), 565: "Therein what is initial application? That which is mentation, thinking, thought, fixation, focussing, application of the mind, right thought. This is called initial application." The Paali: "Tattha katamo vitakko? Yo takko vitakko sa"nkappo appanaa vyapannaa cetaso ahiniropanaa sammaasa"nkappo: aya.m vuccati vitakko." S: So note that here sankappa is clearly given as a synonym of vitakka. Metta, Sarah ====== #75613 From: "jimdale827" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:13 am Subject: Hi jimdale827 Hi, I have been reading about Buddhism for a few months to see if it had anything to offer me or constructive advice. I do not know any Buddhists so there is nobody to talk to about it. It is also clear that there are many different varieties and beliefs within Buddhism, as with all other religions and structured philosophies, no real agreement in any of them. However, having read the little that I have as yet I find there are some things which I cannot get my head around as yet. Wondered whether I could ask. The first one is about non attachment. Having a wife and children, a job to earn a living, an interest in politics and social policies, I do not see how one can bet detached or why one would want to be detached from what goes on in this world. So, what is the point of detachment? The next bit is wanting off incarnation. I find this world to be a beautiful and inspirational place to be, and so much variety; so why would one not want to be here? Also, if one did not want to be here we have the option of suicide? The other big one I cannot get my head around is about there not being somebody in the machine observing all this and taking part in it. If I am an illusion then who or what is having the illusion and what it the point of illusion? Also, If I and my experience of existing is an illusion then presumably everything I experience is an illusion too. So, are my kids real? Do they really need to eat? Or am I imagining all this? Jim. #75614 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re Q: Some Questions Arising Out of Abhidhamma Study sarahprocter... Dear Dieter & all, --- Dieter Möller wrote: > Brings me back to the question of including nibbana among the 4 > categories of Abhidhamma (Paramattha Dhammas) . > Citta, Cetasika and Rupa are more or less identical with the 3 > respectively 5 Khandas . .... S: Let's just make this clear for everyone: All cittas are included in vinnana khandha, All cetasikas are included in sanna, vedana and sankhara khandhas All rupas are included in rupa khandha. Another way of saying the same is that all the khandhas are included in citta, cetasika and rupa. ... > though cetasika includes the element of quality (kusala/akusala ..) > so more or less in line with the Law of Dependent Orgination . ... S: Referring to the khandhas, all nama khandhas include kusala and akusala cittas and cetasikas (as well as kiriya and vipaka cittas and cetasikas). I'm sorry, but I'm not sure what you mean by 'more or less in line with the Law of D.O.'??? .... >But by > adding nibbana , the common ground is left with the consequence of > contradiction and confusion. ... S: Again, please elaborate on this contradiction and confusion as you see it. Let's get to the bottom of this! ... > Therefore it is still not clear to me whether the grouping of the 4 > categories is indeed stated within the Abhidhamma Pitaka (with reason) > , or interpretation by commentaries like the Abhidhamma Sangaha (?) .... S: The first book of the Abhidhamma Pitaka just deals with these paramattha dhammas (realities) in detail, elaborating on all cittas, cetasikas and rupas in detail. Nibbana is included in the relevant sections. For example (from U Kyaw Khine's transl): 1099-1100, p 574, refer to the mundane dhammas (the khandhas which are objects of aasavas) and then the supramundane dhammas: "There are: the Supramundane Paths, the Fruits of those Paths, and the Unconditioned Element (Nibbaana)." 1183, p 614, under the subject heading 'Paraama.t.tha', it refers to the dhammas which 'are objects of misconception'(the various khandhas) and then those which are not 'objects of misconception': "There are: The Supramundane Paths, the Fruits of those Paths, and the Unconditioned Element (Nibbaana)." 1234, p632, under Upaadaana, refers to those dhammas not associated with clinging, nor objects of clinging (after elaborating on the khandhas which are associated with and objects of clinging): "These are: The Supramundane Paths, the Fruits of those Paths, and the Unconditioned Element (Nibbaana). These are the dhammaa which are neither associated with Clinging nor are objects of Clinging." .... S: Dieter, the Ab.Sangaha is a very reliable summary and guide to the Abhidhamma Pitaka. It's a lot more user-friendly too, so persist!! It has been used and memorised by the bhikkhus in Burma (and elsewhere)for centuries as a summary of the Abhidhamma. Appreciating your efforts. Pls keep letting us know about any difficulties/confusions in the text. We all learn from them! Metta, Sarah ========== #75615 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 5:29 am Subject: Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Here's the Paa.li for the section you quoted (I'm pretty sure): MN152: "...Katha~ncaananda, ariyo hoti bhaavitindriyo. Idhaananda, bhikkhuno cakkhunaa ruupa.m disvaa uppajjati manaapa.m. Uppajjati amanaapa.m. Uppajjati manaapaamanaapa.m. So sace aaka"nkhati: 'pa.tikkuule appa.tikkuulasa~n~nii vihareyya'nti. Appa.tikkuulasa~n~nii tattha viharati. Sace aaka"nkhati: appa.tikkule pa.tikkulasa~n~nii vihareyya'nti. Pa.tikkuulasa~n~nii tattha viharati. Sace aaka"nkhati: 'pa.tikkuule ca appa.tikkuule ca appa.tikkuulasa~n~nii vihareyya'nti. Appa.tikkaalasa~n~nii tattha viharati. Sace aaka"nkhati: appa.tikkuule ca pa.tikkuule ca pa.tikkuulasa~n~nii vihareyya'nti. Pa.tikkuulasa~n~nii tattha viharati. Sace aaka"nkhati: 'pa.tikkuula.m ca appa.tikkuula.m ca taduubhaya.m abhinivajjetvaa upekkhako vihareyya.m sato sampajaano'ti. Upekkhako tattha viharati sato sampajaano. Puna ca para.m aananda, bhikkhuno sotena sadda.m sutvaa uppajjati manaapa.m... Puna ca para.m aananda, bhikkhuno ghaanena gandha.m ghaayitvaa uppajjati manaapa.m. Uppajjati amanaapa.m. Uppajjati manaapaamanaapa.m... Puna ca para.m aananda, bhikkhuno jivhaaya rasa.m saayitvaa uppajjati manaapa.m. Uppajjati amanaapa.m. Uppajjati manaapaamanaapa.m.... Puna ca para.m aananda, bhikkhuno kaayena pho.t.thabba.m phusitvaa uppajjati manaapa.m. Uppajjati amanaapa.m. Uppajjati manaapaamanaapa.m... Puna ca para.m aananda, bhikkhuno manasaa dhamma.m vi~n~naaya uppajjati manaapa.m. Uppajjati amanaapa.m uppajjati manaapaamanaapa.m. Eva.m kho aananda, ariyo hoti bhaavitindriyo." Sincerely, Scott. #75616 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Childers' Pali Dictionary on 'Sankappo' upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 8/28/07 5:27:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > Hi Howard &all, > > --- upasaka@... wrote: > >.... The > >volition and > >decision, however, which do continue, are forms of thinking, and I > >believe > >that sankappa is closer to them than vitakka. > .... > Here's a quote from an earlier post of mine: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/24886 > > "As we know, when vitakka is a factor of the eightfold path it is referred > to as sammaa-sankappa (Right Thinking). -------------------------------------- Howard: The notions are similar. Many different terms are. It's really hard to distinguish. Actually, identifying vitakka with sankappa is support for rendering 'sankappa' as "resolve", for vitakka definitely has an intentional aspect to it. It is an intentional initial "hitting against" or "application". However, volition and decision and attention persist in the higher jhanas after vitakka has ceased. Incidentally, while all of these are likely active in "entering" a state of realization (path or fruit), I doubt the existence of volition or decision at the moment of path/fruition consciousness, and even the attention wouldn't be the same. ------------------------------------ > > I came across the following quote regarding its importance to > samma-di.t.thi (Right View)and the money-changer simile: > > Sammohavinodanii 441: > > “ Also as regards Right View and Right Thinking, understanding cannot of > its own nature determine an object as “impermanent, painful, no-selfâ€?, but > with applied thought giving [assistance] by repeatedly beating [upon the > object] it can. How? Just as a money-changer, having had a coin placed in > his hand and being desirous of looking at it on all sides equally, cannot > turn it over with the power of his eye only, but by turning it over with > his finders he is able to look at it on all sides; likewise understanding > cannot of its own nature determine an object as impermanent, etc, but with > applied thought with its characteristic of focussing the mind and its > function of striking and threshing, as it were beating and turning over, > it can take what is given and determine it. Therefore Right View only is > included here in the understanding group as being of the same kind, but > Right Thinking is included because of its action [of assisting].â€? ------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I suppose something can be called by many words. This sounds like attention to me. During the jhanas there is rapt attention. But beyond the first jhana, attention is automatic, not requiring the intentional "push" characteristic of vitakka. I would imagine that an automatic attention in some sense could hardly be stronger when nibbana is the "object" of consciousness. In any case, though, automatic attending intensely, raptly, and energetically to what is present doesn't strike me as a form of thinking. That issue aside, there is decision and volition to leave behind "inadequate" conditions in moving to higher jhanas, and that is well after vitakka has ceased upon entry to the second jhana. So, I remain hesitant in identifying sankappo and vitakka. ----------------------------------------- > > (The 3 groups are the virtue group, the concentration group and the > understanding group). > > Nina also writes more about vitakka in ‘Cetasikas’." > http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas10.html > .... > S: Here's one quote from 'Cetasikas' on vitakka which summarises the above > quote nicely, I think: > > "When there is right understanding of a nÃ¥ma or rúpa which appears, there > are both vitakka and vicÃ¥ra accompanying the citta, but vicÃ¥ra is not a > factor of the eightfold Path. SammÃ¥-saòkappa has its specific > function as path-factor. SammÃ¥-saòkappa “touchesâ€? the nÃ¥ma or > rúpa which appears so that sammÃ¥-diììhi can investigate its > characteristic in order to understand it as it is. Thus, sammÃ¥-diììhi > needs the assistance of sammÃ¥-saòkappa in order to develop." ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Contact "touches", consciousness "touches", feeling "touches". Any operation dealing with an object "touches" it. Vitakka, as I understand it, is the initial, intentional application of consciousness to a phenomenon. It amounts to the intentional initiation of attention. Vicara, as I understand it is the continuation of that application - a sort of mental "rubbing" against the object, and still intentional. -------------------------------------------- > > I'm glad you're pursuing this important topic. I'll look forward to > reading any further comments on it. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======================== With metta, Howard #75617 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 8/28/07 6:58:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > --- upasaka@... wrote: > > > Nibbana is unconditioned and not relative to anything else. Any > >"knowing" of nibbana would be quite different from ordinary citta and > >cetasika. It > >would be the featureless vi~n~nanam anidassanam of the Kevatta Sutta. > ... > S: vinnanam anidassana refers to nibbana, not to the 'knowing' of nibbana. > > This is from an old message I wrote: > > “The word 'consciousness' is translated from 'vi~n~naa.na.m' to be > understood as 'cognizable' (vijaanitabba.m) and not consciousness > according to the Pali com. as Jim explained to me. As I mentioned, B.Bodhi > also added in his notes (513): > > "MA takes the subject of the sentence to be Nibbana, called > 'consciousness' in the sense that "it can be cognized" '. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Yeah, I know, and this makes no sense to me. I don't "buy it"! (Hey, Ken, hear that? LOL!) ------------------------------------------- > ----------------------------------- > Perhaps another translation of the first line could be: > 'Cognizable (vi~n~naa.na.m), invisible (anidassana.m), shinining in all > directions (ananta.m sabbatopabha)'â€? > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: The word 'vi~n~nanam', which we usually give as 'vi~n~nana', simply means "consciousness". If it meant "cognizable", then all dhammas would be vi~n~nana! Hardness would be, and sights, sounds, tastes, odors, and so on. -------------------------------------------- > > S: I also wrote that I found no problem with 'it can be cognized' because: > > "It conforms with other passages, such as the ones from the Udana and > Itivuttaka where nibbana is specifically mentioned in the commentaries > referring to similar contexts." > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15418 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16744 > ***** > (S: Of course, there is lots more in U.P. under 'vinnana - nibbana, > anidassana') > ... > >I > >find > >the idea of a nibbana that is an object hit upon or touched by vitakka > >to be > >inappropriate as regards the unconditioned. Nibbana is not just some > >object to be > >examined. Nibbana is not known - it is realized. > .... > S: Whenever vitakka arises, it has the same characteristic (lakkhana): "It > has the characteristic of directing the mind (citta) onto an object > (aaramma.na) (mounting the mind on its object)." (Vism, 1V, 88). > > Without the arising of vitakka, samma-sankappa, samma-ditthi could not > arise to realize nibbana. > .... > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======================== With metta, Howard #75618 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Childers' Pali Dictionary on 'Sankappo' upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 8/28/07 7:55:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > Hi Howard &all, > > A little more!! > > --- upasaka@... wrote: > >....The > >volition and > >decision, however, which do continue, are forms of thinking, and I > >believe > >that sankappa is closer to them than vitakka. > ... > S: From the Vibhanga (2nd book of the Abhidhamma Pitaka), under 'Analysis > of Jhaana'(PTS transl), 565: > > "Therein what is initial application? That which is mentation, thinking, > thought, fixation, focussing, application of the mind, right thought. This > is called initial application." --------------------------------------- Howard: LOL! Then "right thought" is present in the first jhana, but is left behind in going beyond. That is SO wrong. ;-) ----------------------------------------- > > The Paali: > "Tattha katamo vitakko? > Yo takko vitakko sa"nkappo appanaa vyapannaa cetaso ahiniropanaa > sammaasa"nkappo: aya.m vuccati vitakko." > > S: So note that here sankappa is clearly given as a synonym of vitakka. ------------------------------------------- Howard: I think it is a poor usage. ------------------------------------------ > > Metta, > > Sarah > ===================== With metta, Howard #75619 From: "colette" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 5:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Confucian mentality ksheri3 A Very Good Morning Sarah, Often I don't feel that I've connected with my peers when I begin but today you've, surprisingly, noticed some very subtle realities that I was alluding to, but you picked up on and verbalized very well thank you. I speak of the impermeneance and transience of senses and the sense's cognition, interpretation, the mano-vijnana? As I said to Ken, it is only a view, now to expand, it is only a view at a particular time, mooment CONDITIONED by an appearance of NAME & FORM. Last night I tried to put a few more hanging file folders to use and clean up some of my files. A few months ago a friend from San Francisco sent me a post card of the Godlen Gate Bridge by Ken Glaser Jr. that I have been looking for since as a meditation tool, mendala, device, et al, but couldn't find. Las night I opened a drawer and there on top of a paper entitled: THE MAGIC OF CONSCIOUSNESS: AN INQUIRY INTO THE CONCEPT OF OBJECT IN YOUGACARA BUDDHISM by Lin Chen-Kuo. here is a transient, impermanent, tangent: "As recorded in the Vimsatika (The Twenty Verses), a philosophical debate on the issue of whether or not the existence of external objects can be denied might have occurred in Vasubandhu's lifetime. For realists, knowledge cannot be explained if the existence of an external object is not postulated, however, Vasubandhu would call into question that very postulate." Isn't that a VERY THREATENING cognition of what Vasubandhu might have done, but more importantly VERY THREATENING now by what we in our educated condition might do with those cognitions? BEfore ending here I read a post by a Western PhD. and was put back by the potentials of his one paragraph statement. I was going to comment on it but thought no, lets meditate on it first because of the depth of the implications but now thought to at least give it some recognition here. thanx for the thoughts of tangent intersections of consciousness and their transience as well as their impermanence. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Ken E, > > On points 2 and 3, i.e what I called 'the heart-base thorny issue' and > 'Path and Fruition consciousness in succession', as I suggested, we've > discussed these topics in depth before, but that doesn't mean they can't > be discussed again. > > I'd like to suggest you take a look in 'Useful Posts' under 'Heart- base', > 'Dighanakha Sutta, MN74' and 'Path3 (magga) & Fruition (phala) > consciousness' when you have time. > > A few brief comments: > > --- Kenneth Elder wrote: > > Then there is the issue of the organ bases of the 6 > > fields of consciousness, eye for visual consciousness, > > ear for visual consciousness, etc., > ... > S: I think we need to realise that these pasada rupas (sense-bases) are > impermanent elements, completely different from our usual ideas of organs. <....> #75620 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 5:57 am Subject: Conditions, Ch 12, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, As to the mental nutriment which is volition, manosañcetanå [1], this is cetanå cetasika which accompanies all eightynine types of citta, thus it can be of the jåti which is kusala, akusala, vipåka or kiriya. It coordinates the tasks of the citta and cetasikas it accompanies, and it maintains and supports them; thus, it conditions them by way of nutriment-condition. It also conditions the rúpa produced by citta by way of nutriment-condition. As we have seen, cetanå conditions the associated dhammas also by way of conascent kamma-condition, sahajåta kamma-paccaya (see Ch 11). As to the mental nutriment which is viññåna or citta, this refers to each citta. Citta is the chief in cognizing an object, it is the “leader”. Without citta cetasikas could not arise and experience an object. Thus, citta supports and maintains the accompanying cetasikas, it conditions them by way of nutriment-condition. When citta produces rúpa it also conditions that rúpa by way of nutriment- condition. Thus, at each moment the three mental nutriments of contact, volition and citta support and maintain the dhammas arising together with them, and the rúpa produced by them, by way of nutriment-condition. The mental nutriments can be considered according to the method of the Patthåna and also according to the method of the “Dependent Origination” (Paticca samuppåda), the chain of conditionally arisen phenomena which cause the continuation of the cycle of birth and death [2]. According to the method of the Dependent Origination contact, cetanå and viññåna are considered as nutriments which condition the continuation of life in the cycle of birth and death. When we see them as links in this cycle we are reminded that life is dukkha. Contact is a link in the Dependent Origination and as such it is the condition for feeling, the following link. Contact contacts an object and feeling experiences the “flavour” of that object. Contact conditions the feeling which arises together with it. Because of contact there is feeling, because of feeling there is craving; because of craving there is clinging and this leads to the process of becoming, and thus there is rebirth. The conditions which will lead to rebirth occur now. We want to live and we have attachment to sense objects, we are never satisfied, and therefore there are conditions for life to go on. It is not by mere chance that we experience objects through the six doors; all these experiences can occur because of the cooperating of the appropriate conditions. ---------- 1. Mano is mind and cetanå is volition. In the context of åhåra- paccaya the word manosañcetanå, mental volition, is used to denote cetanå cetasika. 2. Twelve factors are links in the chain of the Dependent Origination, and each one conditions the following one. They are: ignorance, kamma-formations (sankhåra, rebirth producing volitions), consciousness (viññåna), nåma and rúpa, the six bases, contact, feeling, craving, clinging, becoming, birth, old age and death. See “Visuddhimagga” XVII, 101-344. ******* Nina. #75621 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 6:03 am Subject: Asoka, Ch 3, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, Hearing Khun Sujin’s explanation about sati only once is not sufficient; we should not expect to grasp the meaning of her words immediately. We have to listen again and again and then gradually we can learn the difference between the moment of sati and the moment there is no sati. When sati is aware of a reality, there will be more understanding from moment to moment, we are on the right way. Rúpas such as sound and hardness appear time and again in daily life, their characteristics can be directly experienced. Nåma is more subtle than rúpa. We know in theory that when sound appears there must also be hearing which experiences sound, but it is difficult to know the true nature of hearing, to know it as an element which experiences, a kind of nåma, different from rúpa. We do not have to call it nåma, it has the function of experiencing an object. We are so used to taking it for “I”, it is difficult to eradicate the idea of self from seeing or hearing. When we learn to be aware of the reality appearing at this moment there can be some understanding, even if it is very little. It is useful to know that only at the first stage of insight knowledge, vipassanå ñåna, the difference between the characteristics of nåma and of rúpa are clearly distinguished. Before that stage has been reached we cannot expect to understand nåma as nåma, completely different from rúpa. For example, at this moment there is seeing which sees visible object, but it is difficult to clearly distinguish the difference between seeing and visible object. When sati arises there can be a beginning of right understanding of nåma and rúpa. Some people may wonder what the result is of listening to the Dhamma. I have been listening for over thirty years and someone asked of what use this was to me. What has it brought me? I find that each moment of listening is most beneficial, since it brings a little more understanding. The Buddha has taught the Dhamma which was unknown to us before. The Dhamma is deep and difficult to understand. We should listen again and again and understand a little more. Thirty years is nothing compared to the aeons it took to bring me to the present day when I can hear the Dhamma again. It took the Bodhisatta an infinitely long time to accumulate understanding to the degree that he could become a Buddha. Each moment of accumulating understanding is beneficial, we do not have to think of the future. The reason that people become bored of hearing the same words about realities is that they hope for something, for the stages of vipassanå ñåna and for enlightenment. In the scriptures the person who has attained enlightenment, the ariyan, is called “someone who has heard much”, in Påli: bahussutta. He has not only listened much but he also has considered and investigated realities and he has developed satipaììhåna. Thus, we should value each moment of listening, whatever we learn is very precious. ****** Nina. #75622 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:26 am Subject: What is Concentration? upasaka_howard Hi, all - Concentration is said to be one-pointedness of mind/attention. What can that mean? At any time, there is but one object of consciousness - exactly one. Does that mean that concentration is always maximal? Clearly not. There are degrees of concentration. So, how is this to be understood? The following is my thinking: A given phenomenon may persist for up to 17 mind-moments it is said. That is, as many as 17 moments of change (arisings and cessations) in cetasikas may occur while the same phenomenon is object of awareness. But change of object may occur more frequently than once each 17-moment interval. I see concentration as the operation that supports continuation of the object of consciousness. Put another way, it resists the adverting of attention elsewhere. Thought anyone? With metta, Howard #75623 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 6:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness nilovg Hi Howard, Op 27-aug-2007, om 16:44 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Nibbana is unconditioned and not relative to anything else. Any > "knowing" of nibbana would be quite different from ordinary citta > and cetasika. It > would be the featureless vi~n~nanam anidassanam of the Kevatta > Sutta. I find > the idea of a nibbana that is an object hit upon or touched by > vitakka to be > inappropriate as regards the unconditioned. Nibbana is not just > some object to be > examined. Nibbana is not known - it is realized. -------- Sarah answered: Whenever vitakka arises, it has the same characteristic (lakkhana): "It has the characteristic of directing the mind (citta) onto an object (aaramma.na) (mounting the mind on its object)." (Vism, 1V, 88). Without the arising of vitakka, samma-sankappa, samma-ditthi could not arise to realize nibbana. .... N: I could add: In the suttas we read about the factors pertaining to enlightenment. These are sobhana cetasikas under different aspects. Also the Path factors are among them, including right thinking. Lokuttara citta that experiences nibbaana needs all these cetasikas to assist it. ------- Howard wrote to Sarah: The notions are similar. Many different terms are. It's really hard to distinguish. Actually, identifying vitakka with sankappa is support for rendering 'sankappa' as "resolve", for vitakka definitely has an intentional aspect to it. It is an intentional initial "hitting against" or "application". However, volition and decision and attention persist in the higher jhanas after vitakka has ceased. Incidentally, while all of these are likely active in "entering" a state of realization (path or fruit), I doubt the existence of volition or decision at the moment of path/fruition consciousness, and even the attention wouldn't be the same. ------------------------------------ N: Volition and attention,manaasikara, accompany each citta and thus also lokuttara citta. You suggest attention would not be the same. No, they are not the same as when they are lokiya because nibbaana is the object and they are thus lokuttara, beyond this world. As to the luminous mind (another topic), I saw messages 7296 and 7792, in U.P. We discussed this many times. Now again another topic which still is connected with enlightenment. When one reads lokuttara citta, beyond this world, it may seem that one has to be alone to be enlightened and that there are many moments of lokuttara cittas. It takes place in the midst of daily life, even when lighting a candle or like Khemaka preaching Dhamma. He was talking. Cittas are so fast, it can occur in the midst of talking. This makes the Dhamma very much down to earth and that is good. No special preparations are necessary, when pa~n~naa has been developed to that extent, lokuttara cittas arise. Nina. #75624 From: han tun Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 7:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) hantun1 Dear Sarah and All, Here is the Patisambhidaamagga text in Pali for Ariya iddhi. The numberings were made by me to be clear. I do not have English translation. Katamaa ariyaa iddhi? (1) Idha bhikkhu sace aakankhati “pa.tikuule appa.tikuula sa~n~nii vihareyya”nti, appa.tikuula sa~n~nii tattha viharati. (2) Sace aakankhati “appa.tikuule pa.tikuula sa~n~nii vihareyya”nti, pa.tikuula sa~n~nii tattha viharati. (3) Sace aakankhati “pa.tikuule ca appa.tikuule ca appa.tikuula sa~n~nii vihareyya”nti appa.tikuula sa~n~nii tattha viharati. (4) Sace aakankhati “appa.tikuule ca pa.tikuule ca pa.tikuula sa~n~nii vihareyya”nti, pa.tikuula sa~n~nii tattha viharati. (5) Sace aakankhati “pa.tikuule ca appa.tikuule ca tadubhayam abhinivajjetvaa upekkhako vihareyyam sato sampajaano”ti upekkhako tattha viharati sato sampajaano. (1) Katham pa.tikuule appa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati? Ini.t.thasmim vatthusmim mettaaya vaa pharati, dhaatuto vaa upasamharati, evam pa.tikuule appa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati. (2) Katham appa.tikuule pa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati? I.t.thasmim vatthusmim asubhaaya vaa pharati, aniccato vaa upasamharati, evam appa.tikuule pa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati. (3) Katham pa.tikuule ca appa.tikuule ca appa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati? Ani.t.thasmim ca i.t.thasmim ca vatthusmim mettaaya vaa pharati, dhaatuto vaa upasamharati, evam pa.tikuule appa.tikuule ca appa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati. (4) Katham appa.tikuule ca pa.tikuule ca pa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati? I.t.thasmim ca ani.t.thasmim ca vatthusmim asubhaaya vaa pharati, aniccato vaa upasamharati, evam appa.tikuule ca pa.tikuule ca pa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati. (5) Katham pa.tikuule ca appa.tikuule ca tadubhayam abhinivajjetvaa upekkhako viharati sato sampajaano? Idha bhikkhu cakkhunaa ruupam disvaa neva sumano hoti na dummano, upekkhako viharati sato sampajaano. Sotena saddam sutvaa – pe – Ghaanena gandham ghaayitvaa – pe – Jivhaaya rasam saayitvaa – pe – Kaayena pho.t.thabbam phusitvaa – pe - Manasaa dhammam vi~n~naaya neva sumano hoti na dummano, upekkhako viharati sato sampajano. Evam pa.tikuule ca appa.tikuule ca tadubhayam abhinivajjetvaa upekkhako viharati sato sampajaano, ayam ariyaa iddhi. Respectfully, Han > S: It might be useful if any of you can check the > Patisambhidaamagga text (and Pali) #75625 From: han tun Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 7:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) hantun1 Dear Sarah. Correction in. (1) Katham pa.tikuule appa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati? Ini.t.thasmim vatthusmim mettaaya vaa pharati, dhaatuto vaa upasamharati, evam pa.tikuule appa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati. Please read “Ani.t.thasmim” instead of “Ini.t.thasmim” Sorry for the mistake. Han --- han tun wrote: > Dear Sarah and All, > Here is the Patisambhidaamagga text in Pali for > Ariya iddhi. The numberings were made by me to be > clear. I do not have English translation. #75626 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 7:21 am Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nidive Hi Howard, > The issue was what we see and hear rather than cognize. We don't > literally hear music, but we do cognize it, love it, and are > attached to it. I don't understand. What do you mean by 'cognize'? Is perception of sounds a cognization? Is thought directed at sounds a cognization? Is evaluation of sounds a cognization? Swee Boon #75627 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 3:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 8/28/07 10:27:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > >The issue was what we see and hear rather than cognize. We don't > >literally hear music, but we do cognize it, love it, and are > >attached to it. > > I don't understand. > > What do you mean by 'cognize'? -------------------------------------- Howard: To know by thinking, by conceptualizing. We hear sounds but cognize music. When we "see" a tree, it is a mode of thinking, typically a subliminal thought process. We don't literally see a tree. We literally see, at any moment of seeing, the entire sight presented to consciousness. There is major, complex mental processing involved, including multiple instances of selection, recognition, conceptual combining, recollection, and so on before a "tree is seen". --------------------------------------- > > Is perception of sounds a cognization? ------------------------------------- Howard: Not at the most elementary level, but at higher levels - yes. ----------------------------------- > Is thought directed at sounds a cognization? ------------------------------------ Howard: Yes. ------------------------------------ > Is evaluation of sounds a cognization? ----------------------------------- Howard: Yes. ---------------------------------- > > Swee Boon > ================= With metta, Howard #75628 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 7:49 am Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nidive Hi Jon, > It is very relevant. Satipatthana is awareness of a presently > arising dhamma. I don't accept this definition of satipatthana, as I have said in a recent post to Sarah. > Audible data that has been heard may be perceived as music or words > forming part of a conversation, but "music" and "words" is a > product of thinking about (i.e., processing) the audible data. How is the processing done? Describe with an example. > The world is not at all the way it appears to be ;-)). Is this a claim that you have insighted a rupa that lasts for a billionth of a second? Swee Boon #75629 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:23 am Subject: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nidive Hi Howard, > > Is thought directed at sounds a cognization? > Howard: Yes. > > > Is evaluation of sounds a cognization? > Howard: Yes. One more question: Are you saying that sounds is a ear-door phenomenon but thought directed at sounds & evaluation of sounds are mind-door phenomena? Swee Boon #75630 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:55 am Subject: Re: What is Concentration? nidive Hi Howard, > Put another way, it resists the adverting of attention elsewhere. Agree. A concentrated mind sees things as they actually are. To see things as they actually are, attention cannot be like a butterfly that flutters from flower to flower. Continuous & focused attention allows one to see as if under a microscope the object of contemplation, ie. one of the four frames of reference. I remember Bhikkhu Samahita likened concentration to a stone that sharpens a sword. Swee Boon #75631 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 8/28/07 11:38:12 AM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > Are you saying that sounds is a ear-door phenomenon but thought > directed at sounds &evaluation of sounds are mind-door phenomena? > ================== Yes. When we are thinking about something, even something directly apprehensible by sight, hearing, smelling, tasting, or bodily sensing, one is conceptualizing, what is apprehended is concept, and it is apprehended via the mind door. When we think of a sound, we are no longer dealing with an ear-door rupa. With metta, Howard #75632 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 9:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nidive Hi Howard, > Yes. When we are thinking about something, even something directly > apprehensible by sight, hearing, smelling, tasting, or bodily > sensing, one is conceptualizing, what is apprehended is concept, > and it is apprehended via the mind door. When we think of a sound, > we are no longer dealing with an ear-door rupa. From what I understand, you are saying that there is a shift from the ear-door to the mind-door when listening to music for example. I can think of one sutta that could possibly refute such a shift of doors. -------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.018.than.html "Dependent on eye & forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives (labels in the mind). What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one complicates. Based on what a person complicates, the perceptions & categories of complication assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye. "Dependent on ear & sounds, ear-consciousness arises... "Dependent on nose & aromas, nose-consciousness arises... "Dependent on tongue & flavors, tongue-consciousness arises... "Dependent on body & tactile sensations, body-consciousness arises... "Dependent on intellect & ideas, intellect-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives (labels in the mind). What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one complicates. Based on what a person complicates, the perceptions & categories of complication assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future ideas cognizable via the intellect. -------------------------------------------------------------------- There is no mention of a door shift in the process of contact -> feeling -> perception -> thinking -> complicating. Also, a door shift would defeat the purpose of such an elaboration with respect to each door. It would imply that there is only one door that we should ever care about, the mind-door, since it is from this door that perceptions & categories of complication would assail anyone. Swee Boon #75633 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 5:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 8/28/07 12:23:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > >Yes. When we are thinking about something, even something directly > >apprehensible by sight, hearing, smelling, tasting, or bodily > >sensing, one is conceptualizing, what is apprehended is concept, > >and it is apprehended via the mind door. When we think of a sound, > >we are no longer dealing with an ear-door rupa. > > From what I understand, you are saying that there is a shift from the > ear-door to the mind-door when listening to music for example. ---------------------------------------- Howard: The sound as such is apprehended (at least initially) via the ear door. The music as such is apprehended via the mind door. (There is also a non-conceptual apprehending of the sound itself via the mind door after the hearing of the sound, according to Abhidhamma. I can't testify for or against that.) -------------------------------------- > > I can think of one sutta that could possibly refute such a shift of > doors. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.018.than.html > > "Dependent on eye &forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of > the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is > feeling. What one feels, one perceives (labels in the mind). What one > perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one complicates. > Based on what a person complicates, the perceptions &categories of > complication assail him/her with regard to past, present, &future > forms cognizable via the eye. > > "Dependent on ear &sounds, ear-consciousness arises... > > "Dependent on nose &aromas, nose-consciousness arises... > > "Dependent on tongue &flavors, tongue-consciousness arises... > > "Dependent on body &tactile sensations, body-consciousness arises... > > "Dependent on intellect &ideas, intellect-consciousness arises. The > meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite > condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives (labels in > the mind). What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks > about, one complicates. Based on what a person complicates, the > perceptions &categories of complication assail him/her with regard > to past, present, &future ideas cognizable via the intellect. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------- Howard: I don't see that as refuting a switch at all. The following points to the shift to conceptualization via the mind door: "What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one complicates. Based on what a person complicates, the perceptions &categories of complication assail him/her with regard to past, present, &future forms cognizable via the eye." --------------------------------------- > > There is no mention of a door shift in the process of contact -> > feeling -> perception -> thinking -> complicating. > > Also, a door shift would defeat the purpose of such an elaboration > with respect to each door. It would imply that there is only one door > that we should ever care about, the mind-door, since it is from this > door that perceptions &categories of complication would assail > anyone. > > Swee Boon > ========================= With metta, Howard #75634 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 11:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hi nilovg Dear Jim, welcome to our group. You ask very relevant and well thought out questions. I can see already that you will be an asset to our group. I try to give some answers, but I hope others will as well. Op 28-aug-2007, om 13:13 heeft jimdale827 het volgende geschreven: > J: The first one is about non attachment. Having a wife and > children, a > job to earn a living, an interest in politics and social policies, I > do not see how one can bet detached or why one would want to be > detached from what goes on in this world. So, what is the point of > detachment? -------- N: The Buddha taught us to understand our life, ourselves, all phenomena within ourselves and around ourselves. We should not try not to have attachment or be different from what we are. His followers were monks, nuns, unmarried laypeople and married laypeople. They could, each in their own situation, develop wisdom in following his teachings. We shall learn that whatever attachment, anger, generosity arises now is conditioned. We shall come to understand the phenomena of our life as they naturally arise, without having to force ourselves. There is much more to say, but I leave it at this for now. --------- > > J: The next bit is wanting off incarnation. I find this world to be a > beautiful and inspirational place to be, and so much variety; so why > would one not want to be here? Also, if one did not want to be here > we have the option of suicide? -------- N: We are here in this world already because there were conditions for it. But we learn also that we were born to die. We can understand that birth is followed by old age and death and then rebirth again. That is the cycle of birth and death. It is of no use to wish for the end of rebirth or for the end of life in this world. Best is to develop understanding of the present moment and not think of the future. What happens because of conditions has to happen, who can alter that? The perfect fully developed wisdom finally leads to the end of the cycle, but that is far away now. -------- > > J: The other big one I cannot get my head around is about there not > being somebody in the machine observing all this and taking part in > it. If I am an illusion then who or what is having the illusion and > what it the point of illusion? Also, If I and my experience of > existing is an illusion then presumably everything I experience is an > illusion too. So, are my kids real? Do they really need to eat? Or > am I imagining all this? -------- N: You should lead your normal life in the world and take care of your kids. If we ask ourselves: is all this an illusion, we should understand this wondering as a moment of thinking that is conditioned. It does not last. The following moment your kids call our for you and there you go. Do not worry about illusion. The Buddha teaches that a person is in reality mental phenomena and physical phenomena that do not last. Take thinking, that is a moment of consciousness that comes and then goes again. Or seeing, it is another moment of consciousness. As we learn more we come to understand better that the great big me we find so important is only ephemeral phenomena. But this does not prevent us to have kindness and compassion for others. Let us not dwell on the past nor on the future, but try to understand this very moment. Nina. #75635 From: Dieter Möller Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 11:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re Q: Some Questions Arising Out of Abhidhamma Study moellerdieter Hi Sarah , all thanks for your care to my questions. you wrote: (D:Brings me back to the question of including nibbana among the 4 categories of Abhidhamma (Paramattha Dhammas) . Citta, Cetasika and Rupa are more or less identical with the 3 respectively 5 Khandas .) .... S: Let's just make this clear for everyone: All cittas are included in vinnana khandha, All cetasikas are included in sanna, vedana and sankhara khandhas All rupas are included in rupa khandha. Another way of saying the same is that all the khandhas are included in citta, cetasika and rupa. (D:though cetasika includes the element of quality (kusala/akusala ..) so more or less in line with the Law of Dependent Orgination . ) ... S: Referring to the khandhas, all nama khandhas include kusala and akusala cittas and cetasikas (as well as kiriya and vipaka cittas and cetasikas). D: the khandas have to be understood within the framework of D.O. , right?.. not to talk about what they present by attachment , i.e. dukkha in brief (1st Noble Truth). So we talk about the part (avijja-sankhara-) vinnaya -nama/rupa (- etc. )... (?) S: I'm sorry, but I'm not sure what you mean by 'more or less in line with the Law of D.O.'??? D: refering to the addition of quality ..kusala ..akusala S: (D: But by adding nibbana , the common ground is left with the consequence of contradiction and confusion.)... Again, please elaborate on this contradiction and confusion as you see it. Let's get to the bottom of this! D: yes, let us try.. the addition of quality (kusala etc) is not in contradiction of the D.O. , but the adding of nibbana is .. By the D.O. the ' whole mass of suffering ' is described and its relation to tanha , i.e. a kind of blue print in respect to the 1st and 2nd Noble Truth.. Understood that Abhidhamma analyses in detail vinnaya and nama- rupa , its relation with the links and so goes deeper than what is usually mentioned by D.O. , the involvement of nibbana appears to me claiming to exceed , to be 'higher' than D.O. . .. S:' (D: Therefore it is still not clear to me whether the grouping of the 4 categories is indeed stated within the Abhidhamma Pitaka (with reason) , or interpretation by commentaries like the Abhidhamma Sangaha (?) .... The first book of the Abhidhamma Pitaka just deals with these paramattha dhammas (realities) in detail, elaborating on all cittas, cetasikas and rupas in detail. Nibbana is included in the relevant sections. For example (from U Kyaw Khine's transl)..snip ' D: thanks for the quotation , but the definition of the Paramattha Dhammas as in § 2 of the Abh. Sangaha , I do not recognise .. Tattha vutt' abhidhammattha - catudha paramatthato Cittam cetasikam rupam - Nibbanam' iti sabbatha. In an ultimate sense the categories of Abhidhamma, mentioned therein, are fourfold in all:- (1.) consciousness, (2.) mental states, (3.) matter, and (4.) Nibbana. S: Dieter, the Ab.Sangaha is a very reliable summary and guide to the Abhidhamma Pitaka. It's a lot more user-friendly too, so persist!! It has been used and memorised by the bhikkhus in Burma (and elsewhere)for centuries as a summary of the Abhidhamma. D: Sarah, without respect of this work, I would not continue with questions. I like to understand what Ven. Anuruddha had in mind , when he presented his manual of the Abhidhamma. and the great attention the Burmese Sangha is giving to this work for such a long time is certainly not unfounded. . Hence , there is a lot of reason to have an open mind while studying it. Being a 'Kalama by heart' I follow Digha Nikaya Sutta 26,in which the Buddha said: "Monks, be a lamp (island,light) unto yourselves, be a refuge unto yourselves, with no other refuge. Take the Dhamma as your lamp, take the Dhamma as your refuge, with no other refuge." And in case of doubt , I recall what has been said in the Pari Nibbana Sutta in respect to the 4 Great References : judge whether something has been said or not , is the Sutta/Vinaya Pitaka ... S: Appreciating your efforts. Pls keep letting us know about any difficulties/confusions in the text. We all learn from them! D: Yes, we learn from them by helping eachother for better understanding. Please believe me , that no disrespect is meant to the third basket or commentaries of the Tipitaka but finally- we should not forget - we are on our own... with Metta Dieter #75636 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 11:38 am Subject: Re: Hi indriyabala Hi Jim, - I found your message interesting because you ask a question on the purpose of detachment. Let me give you my one-cent answer below. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jimdale827" wrote: > > Hi, I have been reading about Buddhism for a few months to see if it > had anything to offer me or constructive advice. I do not know any > Buddhists so there is nobody to talk to about it. It is also clear > that there are many different varieties and beliefs within Buddhism, > as with all other religions and structured philosophies, no real > agreement in any of them. > > However, having read the little that I have as yet I find there are > some things which I cannot get my head around as yet. Wondered > whether I could ask. > The first one is about non attachment. Having a wife and children, a >job to earn a living, an interest in politics and social policies, I do not >see how one can be detached or why one would want to be detached >from what goes on in this world. So, what is the point of detachment? T: Your message shows that you do not see anything wrong with the enjoyable things in life: having a good job with good incomes, a good family, having fun with friends and politics, etc. Now imagine this, if some or all of these enjoyments become less enjoyable or very disappointing one day; would you be happy or unhappy? Some people kill themselves because of that. The point of learning the Buddha's Teachings to become intelligently detached from these pleasurable things is: so that you won't suffer, become unhappy, or lose your mind when they change. Of course, they will change -- sooner or later ! Tep ==== #75637 From: Dieter Möller Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Hi moellerdieter Hi Jim , just another comment .. Buddhism is all about suffering, its origin , its end and the way how to end suffering .. when you recognise, understand suffering, the Buddha Dhamma will be of great meaning to you .. and if not : don't worry, be happy .. ;-) with Metta Dieter #75638 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Hi indriyabala Hi Dieter, - You said it all. Tep ==== #75639 From: "Andrew" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:55 pm Subject: Virtue & Demerit corvus121 Hello everyone In my papers, I recently re-discovered Sister Uppalawanna's booklet of translated excerpts from the Anguttara Nikaya (published by the Buddhist Society of Queensland). The following passage interests me but unfortunately Sister U hasn't provided notes and I don't have the Pali to assist: "Are all virtues necessary? [Tika Nipata (Maha Vagga), Seelabbatham] Venerable Ananda approached the Blessed One ... re ... sat on a side, then the Blessed One said 'Ananda, are all virtues necessary for the holy life to bear fruit?' Venerable Ananda said 'Not all venerable Sir.' Then the Blessed One said 'Explain it, Ananda.' 'Venerable Sir, when observing a certain virtue if demeritorious things increase and meritorious things decrease, the observance of that virtue if not fruitful. And if demeritorious things decrease and meritorious things increase, the observance of that virtue is fruitful, for the holy life to bear fruit.' Having said it venerable Ananda waited for the approval of the Teacher. Then knowing the Teacher approves got up from his seat worshipped circumbulated the Blessed One and went away. Soon after the departure of venerable Ananda the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus 'O bhikkhus, Ananda is a rare one.'" How can observing a virtue increase demeritorious things? For the Abhidhammikas, is this saying that kusala can condition akusala? For the non-Abhidhammikas, how can this question possibly be answered conventionally in respect of a mind not "dissected" into mind moments? Any ideas? Best wishes Andrew PS I am reminded of Ken H's recent discussion re crossing the flood and his note (from the commentaries) that mundane kusala can "sweep us away". Not sure if this is relevant to the above. #75640 From: "Andrew" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 5:08 pm Subject: Arguments corvus121 Hi again Another question thanks to the work of Sister Uppalawanna, this one headed: Arguments [Catukka Nipatha (Puggala Vagga) Vadi] In the passage, the Buddha distinguishes 4 "ways of arguments" thus: A certain argument goes to completion - 1. in the essence not in words 2. in words not in essence 3. in essence and words 4. does not go to completion in essence or words. The passage says that "there is no possibility that a bhikkhu endowed with the fourfold analytical powers should go to completion in the essence and words of an argument." The fourfold analytical powers (catuhi patisambhidha) are attha - the analysis of meanings dhamma - the reasons and conditions nirutti - the intended or hidden meanings patibhana - the presentation of the above 3 knowledges. Does anyone know why a bhikkhu with the fourfold analytical powers does not "go to completion in the essence and words of an argument"? All help greatly appreciated. Best wishes Andrew #75641 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 5:36 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness indriyabala Dear Nina, - Again, I appreciate your sincere effort to explain, although it has not yet answered my question now in the year 2007. N: I retrieved an old message where we discussed this: message 52778. I quote: Tep: I understand your suggestion as follows: by listening to satipatthana, and understanding only one nama or rupa at a time, direct knowledge may arise in the mind and that is the panna that can conquer akusala. Is my understanding correct? ............. T: My question above back in 2005 was about ciita, panna, and satipatthana. Although we discuss the same sutta today as we did in 2005, the focus now in 2007 is very different. This time I only ask you just one simple question : "Can you deny that clear precedence?" The "clear precedence" was elaborated in the recent message #77598 as follows. >T (#77598): Please forgive my short question and let me have another chance to explain what the message #75589 was trying to ask you to clarify, concerning your interpretation of MN 20 (Vitakkasanthana Sutta, not MN 2. Sorry for the wrong code MN 2 that appeared in the previous post.). >In this MN 20 sutta the Buddha taught his monks the five ways (same as 5 'methods', 5 'practices', or 5 'instructions') to deal with arisen akusala vitakkas. These five ways are as follows (the words in quote are Soma Thera's, not mine): >1."When evil unskillful thoughts connected with desire, hate, and delusion arise in a bhikkhu through reflection on an adventitious object, he should, (in order to get rid of that), reflect on a different object which is connected with skill. ... By their elimination the mind stands firm, settles down, becomes unified and concentrated, just within." >T: If that first method failed to work, the Buddha then gave the second one as follows. (It should be clear that 1 precedes 2.) >2. "If the evil unskillful thoughts continue to arise in a bhikkhu, who in order to get rid of an adventitious object reflects on a different object which is connected with skill, he should ponder on the disadvantages of unskillful thoughts thus: Truly these thoughts of mine are unskillful, blameworthy, and productive of misery." >T: So, method 2 is conditional on method 1. If this second method failed to work again, the Buddha then gave the third one as follows. (It should be clear that 2 precedes 3.) >3. "If evil, unskillful thoughts continue to arise in a bhikkhu who ponders on their disadvantageousness, he should in regard to them, endeavor to be without attention and reflection." >T: If this third method failed to work again, the Buddha then gave the fourth one as follows. (It should be clear that 3 precedes 4.) >4."If evil, unskillful thoughts continue to arise in a bhikkhu in spite of his endeavor to be without attention and reflection as regards evil, unskillful thoughts, he should reflect on the removal of the (thought) source of those unskillful thoughts." >T: If this fourth method failed to work again, the Buddha then gave the fifth one as follows. >5. "If evil, unskillful thoughts continue to arise in a bhikkhu in spite of his reflection on the removal of a source of unskillful thoughts, he should with clenched teeth and the tongue pressing on the palate, restrain, subdue and beat down the (evil) mind by the (good) mind." >T: So you may see, according to the Buddha, if 1 has failed then use 2; if 2 has failed then use 3; if 3 has failed then use 4; if 4 has failed then use 5. The last one is the very powerful struggle to keep the mind above the strong stream of akusala vitakkaa. >This 5-step procedure is for a non-ariyan monk to follow, and it is sequential and inter-related. Of course, sometimes the monk may be able to eliminate the akusala vitakka by the end of method 2, or 3, or 4, so that he doesn't have to use the drastic "mind control" of method 5. Of course you can imagine other possible combinations of these 5 methods, but the sutta does not suggest, for example, that 3 is tried first then 2, if 3 fails. The sutta says that 2 precedes 3, and 3 precedes 4 -- not the other way around, or in any random manner. >I hope my explanation is now clear about what my question was meant to say. >T: Can you deny that clear precedence? [end of quotes message #77598] ......................... T: I do not see how the 5 methods in MN 20 are related to satipatthana. Of course I agree that we can think about how satipatthana can be applied as an ALTERNATIVE approach to eliminate akusala vitaka. But that is not my concern. My purpose now is to look at MN 20 all by itself, without bringing in the satipatthana or other methods, such as asubha sanna and matta bhavana, that are not the focus of MN 20. Thank you for your time and effort, Nina. I will understand if you want to drop the discussion now, because you don't want to answer that question about precedence (because it does not agree with your view). However, if you wish to continue, then I will be glad to give my reply to the (remaining) second half of your message #75604. Tep === #75642 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 5:45 pm Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nidive Hi Howard, > I don't see that as refuting a switch at all. The following points > to the shift to conceptualization via the mind door: "What one > perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one > complicates. Based on what a person complicates, the perceptions > &categories of complication assail him/her with regard to past, > present, & future forms cognizable via the eye." Does it not concern you that such a switch implies that "perceptions & categories of complication" all arise out of the mind-door? I don't see MN 18 as saying that. When listening to music, of the 6 paragraphs of the sutta that I quoted, is it the paragraph concerning the ear that applies or is it the paragraph concerning the intellect that applies? Or both? Swee Boon #75643 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 8/28/07 8:55:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > >I don't see that as refuting a switch at all. The following points > >to the shift to conceptualization via the mind door: "What one > >perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one > >complicates. Based on what a person complicates, the perceptions > >&categories of complication assail him/her with regard to past, > >present, &future forms cognizable via the eye." > > Does it not concern you that such a switch implies that "perceptions > &categories of complication" all arise out of the mind-door? > > I don't see MN 18 as saying that. > > When listening to music, of the 6 paragraphs of the sutta that I > quoted, is it the paragraph concerning the ear that applies or is it > the paragraph concerning the intellect that applies? Or both? > > Swee Boon > > ======================== No, it does not bother me. All our higer level thinking and conceptualizing ultimately works upon raw material that consists not of paramattha dhammas but of conceptualized versions of paramattha dhammas. As for music, without thought processing, there is no experience of music. Without thought there is no experience of a melody or harmony or rhythm. And even at the most basic level, a sound that is thought about is not the heard sound, but a mind-door correspondent. With metta, Howard #75644 From: "colette" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 3:30 pm Subject: Re: Hi ksheri3 Hi Jim, Glad to have you along for the ride! In the few minutes I have you speak of "illusions" and this is a very well thought out position. I'm having a great time with it and Vasubandhu at the moment. the problems I'm working with at the moment deal with just what a lot of realists have been ranting to me about things actually existing opposed to my stance of non-EXISTANCE. They take it too literally and I haven't found the situation as of yet to spring it on them that they are CONDITIONED (see the Abhidhamma) to think in a way which germinates the bija (seeds) of the alaya-vijnana (store house consciousness). Take your time, now that you've found a place to open up and let it all out. chilland get accustomed to the temperature of the water here and elsewhere. I myself am about to be pondering such momumental questions found in Yogacara concerning the actual reality of things, their suchness, tangibility. gotta go. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jimdale827" wrote: > > Hi, I have been reading about Buddhism for a few months to see if it > had anything to offer me or constructive advice. I do not know any > Buddhists so there is nobody to talk to about it. It is also clear > that there are many different varieties and beliefs within Buddhism, > as with all other religions and structured philosophies, no real > agreement in any of them. <...> #75645 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:49 pm Subject: Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) indriyabala Hi, Sarah and all - Sarah: Note: "The P.tisambhidaamagga calls this practice "the noble supernormal power" (ariya iddhi) and explains it thus (ii.212): To abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive, one pervades a repulsive being with loving-kindness, or one attends to a repulsive object (either animate or inanimate) as a mere assemblage of impersonal elements. To abide perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive, one pervades a (sensually) attractive person with the idea of the foulness of the body, or one attends to an attractive object (either animate or inanimate) as impermanent. The third and fourth methods involve the application of the first and second contemplations to both repulsive and unrepulsive objects, without discrimination. The fifth method involves the avoidance of joy and sorrow in response to the six sense objects, thus enabling one to abide in equanimity, mindful and fully aware." T: The original words of the Patism. are as follows: 27. What is Noble Ones' success? Here if the Bhikkhu should wish (1) 'May I abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive', he abides perceiving the unrepulsive there. If he should wish (2) 'May I abide perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive', he abides perceiving the repulsive there. If he should wish (3) 'May I abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive and the unrepulsive', he abides perceiving the unrepulsive there. If he should wish (4) 'May I abide perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive and the repulsive', he abides perceiving the repulsive there. If he should wish (5) 'Avoiding both [aspects] in the repulsive and the unrepulsive, may I abide in equanimity towards that, mindful and fully aware', he abides in equanimity towards that, mindful and fully aware. (1) How does he abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive? In the case of a disagreeable object he is intent upon it with loving- kindness, or he connects it with principles. That is how he abides perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive. (2) How does he abide perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive? In the case of an agreeable object he is intent upon it as foul, or he connects it with impermanence. That is how he abides perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive. (3) How does he abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive and the unrepulsive? In the case of a disagreeable and agreeable object he is intent upon it with loving-kindness, or he connects it with principles. That is how he abides perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive and the unrepulsive. (4) How does he abide perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive and the repulsive? In the case of an agreeable and disagreeable object he is intent upon it as foul, or he connects it with impermanence. That is how he abides perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive and the repulsive. (5) How does he, avoiding both [aspects] in the repulsive and the unrepulsive, abide in equanimity towards that, mindful and fully aware? [213] Here a bhikkhu, on seeing a visible object with the eye, is neither glad nor sorry; he abides in equanimity and fully aware. On hearing a sound with the ear, ... On smelling an odour with the nose, ... On tasting a flavour with the tongue, ... On touching a tangible object with the body, ... On cognizing an idea with the mind, he is neither glad nor sorry; he abides in equanimity, mindful and fully aware. That is how he, avoiding both [aspects] in the repulsive and the unrepulsive, abides in equanimity towards that, mindful and fully aware. This is the Noble Ones' success. .................................. A note: principles = dhatus. Success = iddhi. Succeeding = ijjhana. Tep === #75646 From: han tun Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:52 pm Subject: Perfections Corner (06) hantun1 Dear All, The end part of the chapter on “Introduction.” The following is taken from “The Perfections leading to Enlightenment” by Sujin Boriharnwanaket and translated by Nina van Gorkom. Questions, comments, and different opinions are welcome. ------------------------------ We should carefully consider the perfections so that we have correct understanding of them, otherwise we shall not be able to develop them. We may listen to the Dhamma every day, but we should know and consider why we listen: we should listen with the firm determination and intention to have right understanding of the Dhamma so that we can apply it, now and during each life to come. We should know the right purpose of listening: the development of pa~n~naa that can eradicate defilements. In this way the perfections can begin to develop while we listen. When we listen, the perfection of determination can develop. We should know the meaning of the perfection of determination; without mental strength one cannot fulfil this perfection. Some people who perform kusala, such as generosity, express their determination by prayer, but they do not know the meaning of determination. When one has the firm, unshakeable determination to reach the goal, the eradication of akusala, determination is a perfection, and this is an essential condition for the development of pa~n~naa. If we do not study the perfections, we may continue just to listen without knowing the right purpose of it, and because of this we surely shall not realize the four noble Truths. We should consider whether the perfections begin to develop while we listen to the Dhamma. Whenever we have the firm determination to listen with the right purpose, the development of pa~n~naa, we develop and accumulate all ten perfections so that they can reach accomplishment. ------------------------------ This is the End of chapter on “Introduction.” One of the chapters on ten perfections will start from next post. metta, Han #75647 From: Dieter Möller Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 11:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Hi moellerdieter Hi Tep, thanks and greetings.. with Metta Dieter #75648 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 12:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge sarahprocter... Hi Swee Boon, --- nidive wrote: > > S: Yes, dhammaanupassanaa includes all objects not included in the > > first three 'frames' of satipatthana. So, actually, all conditioned > > dhammas are included and satipatthana is the development of > > understanding and awareness of whatever is conditioned at this > > moment. No need to think about whether the hardness or sound is > > internal or external. When there's awareness, there's no idea of > > 'my body' vs computer hardness. > >SB: I find it amazing that you could condense the whole of DN 22 into a > single statement: Satipatthana is the development of understanding > and awareness of whatever is conditioned at this moment. .... S: I could refine it further by saying that it is the development of understanding and awareness of whatever conditioned dhamma *appears* at this moment. There are many dhammas arising and passing away at any moment, but only one dhamma ever appears at a time. .... >SB: I don't buy that, Sarah. If satipatthana is so simple, there would be > no need for the Buddha to give so much elaborations in DN 22, much > less split into four different frames of reference. There would be no > need for the commentaries as well. Would something that simple to > explain require any commentaries at all? .... S: If we really understood what dhammas are, what understanding is, what awareness is, what anatta means, then there'd be no need for further elaboration. In a way it is simple - Sariputta didn't need long explanations to get the message. However, we're so used to being lost in a world of concepts, so used to think Self can direct the show, so used to thinking in terms of people and things existing, so very unused to understanding what seeing is, what visible object is, that we need to hear a lot of explanation and detail to get the point. .... >SB: The "this moment" theory also contradicts what you said: > > > S: What about the khandhas first of all (which you refer to)? These > > include all conditioned dhammas. Rupa khandha includes all rupas > > (past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, > > inferior or superior, far or near) and so also for the other > > khandhas. > >SB: Surely, satipatthana does not only include "this moment". It includes > the past & future as well. ... S: Thanks for raising this important point. No, satipatthana only refers to the understanding of a dhamma at "this moment". By understanding the characteristic of visible object as visible object (rupa khandha) at this moment, it is evident that any other visible object (past, future, internal, external....etc) all are just rupa khandha, mere elements, not things or body or people. .... >SB: You could possibly say we could 'insight' past objects by way of > unclassifiable objects and that is still contemplation on "this > moment", ... S: No, these are still referred to (and for all intents and purposes) are present objects. ... >SB: but what about the future objects? Are they not mere > concepts at "this moment"? And how could satipatthana as expounded by > you take concepts as objects of insight? ... S: yes, future objects are concepts now and could not be the objects of insight. The thinking (about them) is of course a reality and could be. As I suggested, when we read about all kinds of rupas (inc. future rupas) as included in rupa khandha, it is referring to how even future rupas will be merely rupa khandha. No person or thing now, no person or thing in the past, no person or thing in future. .... > >S: When it comes to the ayatanas, again contemplation of 'mental > > qualities' is a mis-leading translation of dhammanupassana. > >SB: I cannot speak for Thanissaro Bhikkhu whether or not he is mis- > leading the world. ... S: I wasn't referring to TB but to the most common translation of dhammanupassana. Nyantiloka also uses 'mind-objects'. I'm just glad I'm not a translator....! We always have to consider and reflect on what these key terms mean for ourselves, I think. .... > >S: It is also the actual ayatanas that have to be understood as well > > as the fetters which arise. > > "Here, o bhikkhus, a bhikkhu understands the eye and material forms > > and the fetter that arises dependent on both (eye and forms)..." ... >SB: Yes, the material forms have to be understood. But they are not the > focus of the fourth frame of reference. Neither is the eye the focus. > It is the fetter - the arising, abandoning & ceasing of which are > described following the above paragraph - that is the focus. .... S: I think it's also stressing that without eye-base and visible object, there'd be no eye-consciousness and no fetters on account of them. No attachment to what is seen or proliferations on account of it either. This is the meaning of ayatana, the coming together of the various dhammas such as eye, forms, citta and cetasikas. .... > > >S: "Here, o bhikkhus, a bhikkhu thinks; 'Thus is material form; thus > > is the arising of material form, and thus is the disappearance of > > material form....." > > As discussed in the other thread and in great detail in the Vism, > > before there can be any direct understanding of the qualities of > > arising and dissolution, first the characteristics of the various > > khandhas have to be understood. >SB: But how can there be direct understanding of the qualities of arising > & dissolution of the future aggregates using your method of > satipatthana? .... S: No, only the understanding of the qualities of the arising and dissolution of the present dhamma appearing. By understanding present dhammas as khandha, as anatta, it is apparent that this is the characteristic of other dhammas too. ... >SB: Is there a corresponding "back to the future" Abhidhammic principle > just like the "unclassifiable object" principle? ... S: LOL! No! Stick to the present! Now what was present is past and now what was future is present. One dhamma that can be known only - the present one! Keep firing! Metta, Sarah ======== #75649 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 1:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge sarahprocter... Hi Tep, (Han & Scott*) --- Tep Sastri wrote: > Lately I just thought I was getting closer to understand your > teaching. But the message # 75468 puts me back at the square zero > again. ... S: :-) Yes, it's always like that, isn't it? That's why lots of discussions are important, I think - to really understand the various opinions. ... > S: If there is annoyance now, trying to change it merely indicates > attachment (and possibly wrong view). What is more important is to > develop panna regardless of what arises. By understanding and > appreciating more what are the realities, what is kusala, what is > akusala, what is merely an idea, there will be conditions for sila to > gradually be purified. Whilst we cling to an idea of self in charge, > this can never happen. > > T: That sounds good in theory. However, when an annoyance (or any > defilements of the mind) arises in a worldling, the panna that is > just an intellectual understanding of the Teachings is not effective > enough. ... S: That's right. That's why intellectual understanding can never eradicate defilements. It's just the 'marker', the 'map' of the right path, not the actual journey. ... >The only panna that abandons an arisen akusala in that moment > is the direct knowing (See MN 47, Note 489) of at least at the > Sotapanna stage. ... S: Yes. This is why the path needs a lot of patience and acceptance of whatever dhammas are conditioned at this moment rather than expectations and wishes to change them. ... >I believe direct knowing is the consequence of > abiding with wise attention which is the nutriment for developing > sati-sampajanna. Sati-sampajanna then supports sense restraint > (indriya-samvara) that is necessary for the three right conducts in > any moment.[See AN 10.61] .... S: Yes, of course (as discussed) there is wise attention with all kusala, inc. pariyatti and patipatti (the development of sati-sampajanna in satipatthana. As you say in effect, it is the development of satipatthana that leads to sense-restraint and purified sila. .... > S: When we talk about eyes, hands, brain and computer, these are > concepts, > ideas. Actually, there are just a complex process of different cittas, > cetasikas and rupas arising and falling away. > > T: In principles, according to the paramattha-dhamma, yes. But that > view is the looking at the real world with the internal Dhamma Eye of > the ariyans. I believe that the ariyans themselves also see the world > through the ayatanas like we do; the only difference is they do not > have upadana in the external & internal ayatanas. ... S: Several points here: 1. Only paramattha dhammas exist at this moment. There are never any eyes, hands, brains or computers, except as concepts, objects of thinking. 2. Let's not worry about the ariyans - what actually appears now? Paramattha dhammas. It can be tested out so that we become more and more used to them. 3. I'm not sure what you mean by 'see the world through the ayatans like we do'??? 4. Only the arahant has no more clinging at all and only the anagami and arahant have no more clinging to sense-objects. Look forward to any further discussion. Let's hope we can get past 'square zero' this time! Metta, Sarah *p.s Thank you, Scott and Han very, very much for all your work copying and typing out the passages relevant to the Psm quote. Perhaps we can incorporate them all together when anyone has the time. Great team effort! ========== #75650 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 2:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge sarahprocter... Hi Connie & Swee Boon, Thanks, for the Vism quotes from Ch XX --- L G SAGE wrote: > The part ($73) on natural materiality reads: << Having attributed the > three characteristics to that arising from nutriment, etc., he again > attributes the three characteristics to natural materiality. Natural > materiality is a name for external materiality that is bound up with > faculties and arises along with the aeon of world expansion....<...> ... S: Going back to XX, 13 under 'Comprehension by Groups', here is another part which is relevant to our discussion about khandhas, clearly known at the 3rd stage of insight being discussed here: "Here is the application of the directions dealing with the aggregates: 'Any materiality whatever (i-iii) whether past, future or present (iv-v) internal or external, (vi-vii) gross or subtle, (viii-ix) inferior or superior, (x- xi)far or near - he defines all materiality as impermanent: this is one kind of comprehension. He defines it as not-self: this is one kind of comprehension. He defines it as painful: this is one kind of comprehension. (see #6). At this point this bhikkhu [takes] all materiality, which is described without specifying as 'any materiality whatever', and having delimited it in the eleven instances, namely, with the past triad and with the four dyads beginning with the internal dyad, he 'defines all materiality as impermanent', he comprehends it as impermanent. How? In the way stated next. For this is said: 'Materiality, whether past, future or present, is impermanent in the sense of destruction'." And later in #72, we also have one of our DSG favourites which is also relevant here: "When he discerns consciousness-originated materiality and attributes the three characteristics to it in this way, this meaning becomes evident to him: 'Life, person, pleasure, pain - just these alone Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. Gods, though they live for four-and-eighty thousand Aeons, are not the same for two such moments. Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive Are all alike, gone never to return; And those that break up meanwhile, and in future, have traits no different from those ceased before. No [world is] born if [consciousness is] not Produced; when that is present, then it lives; When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead: The highest sense this concept will allow' No store of broken states, no future stock; Those born balance like seeds on needle points. Breakup of states is foredoomed at their birth; Those present decay, unmingled with those past. They come from nowhere, break up, nowhere go; Flash in and out, as lightning in the sky'.(Nd.1,42)." ***** Metta, Sarah ======= #75651 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 2:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) sarahprocter... Dear Tep (Han & Nina), We were discussing old-age and decay. I appreciated the further messages. --- Tep Sastri wrote: > T: I am glad to hear a real case of this elderly, who overcame self- > pity and could rise above her physical limitations to be > magnanimous. Being unable to move around is bad enough, let alone > the blindness that is like getting trapped in a completely dark space > for a long time. I wonder how she did it, assuming she knew nothing > about satipatthana. .... S: I think so much depends on one's natural inclinations/accumulations. Some people (with or without hearing the Dhamma) are by nature, very cheerful and 'positive' in outlook. She was one and as a result everyone loved to visit her and I'd always spend more time with such people on my rounds. My mother (as Nina knows) is the same, even though she has almost no interest in the Dhamma. .... > T: Yes, I think the old lady's story is an excellent example of > continuously bright kusala cittas that work through time, "one at a > time". My mom lived through her pains and immobility the same way. It > was not difficult for her because she was a true Buddhist. She never > complained about anything, or showed even a slight frustration. .... S: Thanks for sharing the wonderful example of your mother's patience and kusala too, especially as you mentioned she lived to 99! As a side-note, I read an interesting article about Mother Theresa's letters. Apparently, behind the smile, she was wracked with doubts and angst, questioning whether there really was a God and thereby a soul or Christ. She said in one letter that her smile was a mask for these thoughts that no one knew of. An interesting example of how we really cannot tell from appearances perhaps. In the end, we can only know our own cittas at best. .... > T: The tough thing to do when the old body is rapidly disintegrating > is to have sati-sampajjanna that rides along with the ageing process-- > in other words, the mind also rapidly adjusts and accepts the > deteriorating body with equanimity. Hence, no dosa arises. ... S: I think this (sati-sampajanna) is tough at any time! So much ignorance has been accumulated. However, when there is awareness, there's no idea of 'ageing process' or 'deteriorating body' - mere dhammas arising and falling away. No me, no age, no body! .... > As we read a couple of times in the Vism (#74579): > ""The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII > 171. Now it was also asked, 'Whose is the fruit, since there is no > experiencer?' Herein: > > 'Experiencer' is a convention > For mere arising of the fruit; > They say 'It fruits' as convention, > When on a tree appears its fruit. > > 172. Just as it is simply owing to the arising of tree fruits, which > are one part of the phenomena called a tree, that it is said 'The tree > fruits' or 'The tree has fruited', so it is simply owing to the > arising of the fruit consisting of the pleasure and pain called > experience, which is one part of the aggregates 'deities' and 'human > beings', that it is said 'A deity or human being experiences or feels > pleasure or pain'. There is therefore no need at all here for a > superfluous experiencer."< > ***** > T: Thank you very much, Sarah. I like the above extract from the > Vism, because although it is a description using the Abhidhamma > perspective, yet it also blends in the conventional truth of the real- > world; i.e. there are tree-and-its-fruits phenomena, and there is the > abstract view of the beholder who focuses on the ultimate reality. ... S: Thx for your kind comments too, Tep. I quoted it partly in answer to your question about 'deities' and 'human beings' before, of course. ... >I > understand that the arising of a "fruit on a tree" is real, not an > illusion. However, the fruit is seen with the abhidhamma view that it > is just a becoming event -- a phenomenon (dhamma) in abstraction. Of > course, there are no experiencers in the abstract/ultimate world. ... S: Right - no experiencers and no trees or fruit either, except in conventional usage. Thanks again for your useful comments. Never too long! Metta, Sarah ====== #75652 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 2:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: audio: what is satipatthana. nilovg Dear Sarah and all, Op 29-aug-2007, om 9:45 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > I could refine it further by saying that it is the development of > understanding and awareness of whatever conditioned dhamma > *appears* at > this moment. There are many dhammas arising and passing away at any > moment, but only one dhamma ever appears at a time. -------- > N: how true. I just heard on the audio an excellent explanation about sati. it is audio March 2005, 30 A d (to be found in the dsg archives). I add my own remark in between and change the syntaxis somewhat. --------- audio: Kh Sujin: Whenever there is understanding of a characteristic appearing right now, it is satipatthana, even when we do not call it or name it as such. One can learn that satipatthana is conditioned, and then one does not expect its arising at all. We should not have any expectation that satipatthana when it arises should be like this or like that. -------- N: We may have speculations about it that it should be like this or that, but these are motivated by lobha. Then we hinder its arising. ------- S: It is actually so natural, it is like any reality that is appearing. We can learn to see the difference between the moments of sati and the moments it does not arise. When sati arises it arises naturally. There is no thinking of concepts, it attends to the characteristic of a reality very naturally, because the object is not different from the objects that usually appear through the sense-doors or the mind-door. They are ordinary touching, seeing, hearing or thinking. If we think that we shall stand up or do this or that, that is thinking of the next moment, going past the reality that is appearing now. The right sati is attention to the reality that has arisen and is now appearing, we should never go further than that. One understands what satipatthana is when right understanding begins to understand a characteristic which is now appearing naturally and this is the only way not to be enslaved by lobha. One does not realize how much one is enslaved. ------- Azita: What hinders the development of satipatthana? ------- S: Ignorance and craving for other objects. ------ Azita: Can we say that the desire is also a hindrance? ------ S: Instead of being aware there is the idea of 'I who want to be aware'. Understanding of the present reality is the only way to decrease attachment, there is no other way. Lobha is a teacher and a follower. ------ N: In one of the suttas lobha is compared to a teacher one follows and also to a pupil that follows one everywhere. ----- Nina. #75653 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 2:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge sarahprocter... Hi Tep, --- Tep Sastri wrote: > T: I doubt it very much that the "characteristic of no-self" implies > there is no person who suffers. .... S: see the Vism passage just discussed about 'no experiencers' which you liked. ... > The following is a right view of those who know and see things the > way they truly are : "Is it fitting to regard what is inconstant, > stressful, subject to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This > is what I am'?". [SN 22.59] IMHO we have to be careful in > interpreting what "self" (atta) really means. See DN 15, Maha-nidana > Sutta, for the several meanings of 'atta' that are complementary to > SN 22.59 (Anatta-lakkhana Sutta). .... S: Would you care to elaborate and quote from these suttas? It might be useful. ... > T: Why would the Buddha teach people and devas if they did not > suffer? And if they did not suffer, why did they come for His > guidance for overcoming Dukkha? Maybe you cannot answer my questions > because those "people and devas" were nothing but illusion? .... S: Again, pls refer to the Vism quote in the post just sent. People and devas are conventional terms. Pls let me know if it doesn't satisfy. .... > Yes, there were people who suffered in the past, there will be > suffering people in the future, and the are always people who are > suffering now, and the Wheel of Becoming keeps turning ! ... S: But really there are no people, no experiencers - merely dhammas rolling on! Suffering, but no sufferer! .... >Sarah, the > fact that the characteristic of no-self is "unobvious" to the > worldlings is not the sufficient ground for your conclusion that "It > is an illusion that there is a person who suffers now, Tep.". ... S: Let me ask you this: How is Tep experienced? Through what door-way? ... > .......... > > S: This one from SN 12:20 (Bodhi transl) is along similar lines, in > this case with regard to D.O., but it applies to all the teachings: > > "And what, bhikkhus, is dependent originaion? 'With birth as > condition, aging-and-death [comes to be]]: whether there is an > arising of Tathaagatas or no arising of Tathaagatas, that element > still persists, the stableness of the Dhamma, the fixed course of the > Dhamma, specific conditionality. A Tathaagata awakens to this and > breaks through to it....." > *** <...> > T: Yes, very relevant; you have another great sutta here. I agree > completely, sabbe dhamma anatta. As noted earlier, I accept that as > one of the Buddha's main Teachings. No problem. Not-self or non-self > mean 'anatta' as defined by the Anatta-lakkhana Sutta, and we all > think we "know" that truth. .... S: I think that at least we're beginning to consider that it may well be the truth as it conforms with what is experienced now...let's not get too carried away with everyone's great knowledge here! .... >Some of us want to talk as if they were > ariyans already. ... S: Very few and they usually run away when questioned, I think! I'd like to chat to Ken E's room-mate on vipassana for a start! .... >But are you sure that you have no doubt whatsoever > that "all formations are impermanent....that all formations are > subject to suffering...that all things are non-self", or are you just > reciting it from the memory? .... S: Let's be clear that any doubt is a common mental factor which arises and passes away too. No Sarah, no Tep to have doubt! The same applies to any panna - it doesn't belong to anyone. It too arises and passes away, it too is anatta. Not worth clinging onto for an instant. ... > T: I have a lot to learn, Sarah. By not clinging to the Dhamma > (thinking 'I know, I see'), I will neither have impatience nor > illusion. .... S: Oh, there will be lots of impatience, lots of illusion, lots of clinging to every object imaginable for a very long time to come....still impermanent dhammas of no consequence! Again, thank you for your helpful feedback and straight comments. Metta, Sarah ======== #75654 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 2:34 am Subject: Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness jonoabb Hi Swee Boon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi Jon, ... > > I don't think it's safe to ignore the commentaries just because we > > may be inclined to disagree with the reading they give. As far as > > I can see they are consistent with the suttas and consistent among > > themselves. > > The commentaries were not spoken by the Buddha. That's correct. By definition, the commentaries are not the words of the Buddha himself, they are elucidations by others on the words of the Buddha. But I think we all agree that the words of the Buddha need a degree of 'interpretation' in order to make sense for us. For example, in this thread you have been making certain connections between the Ogha- tarana Sutta, DN 22 and the bhojjhangas, and you spoke I think about dispelling the "mystery" of the Ogha-tarana Sutta. Well this is exactly the kind of thing the commentaries might address. They do not declare 'new' doctrine, but they explain and elucidate their sutta in the context of the Tipitaka as a whole. Sometimes, perhaps often, we may have difficulty accepting what the commentaries have to say about the meaning of a passage. However, we should not dismiss them just because their view does not coincide with our own! Jon #75655 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 2:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness nilovg Dear Tep, Op 29-aug-2007, om 2:36 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > T: I do not see how the 5 methods in MN 20 are related to > satipatthana. Of course I agree that we can think about how > satipatthana can be applied as an ALTERNATIVE approach to eliminate > akusala vitaka. But that is not my concern. My purpose now is to look > at MN 20 all by itself, without bringing in the satipatthana or other > methods, such as asubha sanna and matta bhavana, that are not the > focus of MN 20. -------- N: I do not think of of satipatthana as an alternative. It can arise time and again in between all the thinking, speech, actions, if there is right understanding. And the monks at that time could hear the Dhamma from the Buddha personally. What else would they do? They knew: satipatthana is our first and foremost task. They would not be neglectful. Did you get the attachment I sent you all right and did it help? Without the Co. we could well misunderstand this sutta and think of steps to be done, or of a command: do this or that. But when we study the cittas arising in processes we can see that nobody can command any citta. Let us apply anatta all the time: there is no one involved. But more understanding can be developed if we listen and consider carefully. I quoted five points concerning listening and developing understanding as given in the Co. I consider this a reference to sati sampaja~n~na. -------- > > T: Thank you for your time and effort, Nina. I will understand if you > want to drop the discussion now, because you don't want to answer > that question about precedence (because it does not agree with your > view). However, if you wish to continue, then I will be glad to give > my reply to the (remaining) second half of your message #75604. -------- N: Your questions touch on more points, not only on this sutta: namely: are the Buddha's words a command or advice? Do we have to take them as: do this or that? How are the four applications of mindfulness to be seen? How is anatta to be applied all the time in daily life? There are many points. When someone else thinks differently I will not try to convince him. But when he thinks that discussion is helpful, or he wants more clarifications from me, I gladly do so. It entirely depends on your interest. Whatever you like to do is all right for me. Nina. #75656 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 5:00 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (65) nichiconn Dear Friends, 12. So.lasanipaato 1. Pu.n.naatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa part 7 Verse: 238. "Jaanantii vata ma.m bhoti, pu.n.nike paripucchasi; karonta.m kusala.m kamma.m, rundhanta.m katapaapaka.m. 238. Indeed, lady Pu.n.nikaa, knowing me, you ask about doing good action [and thereby] blocking off eveil action. Cy: Jaanantii vata ma.m bhotiiti, bhoti pu.n.nike, tva.m ta.m upacita.m paapakamma.m rundhanta.m nivaara.nasamattha.m kusala.m kamma.m iminaa udakorohanena karonta.m ma.m jaanantii vata paripucchasi. 238. Indeed, lady [Pu.n.nikaa], knowing me means: lady Pu.n.nikaa, knowing me indeed, you ask about doing good action, this [ritual] descent into the water, [and thereby] blocking off, capable of warding off, that evil action which has been accumulated by you. Verse: 239. "Yo ca vu.d.dho daharo vaa, paapakamma.m pakubbati; dakaabhisecanaa sopi, paapakammaa pamuccati. 239. Whoever, whether young or old, does an evil action, even he is released from his evil action by ablution in water. Cy: Nanu ayamattho loke paaka.to eva. Kathaapi maya.m tuyha.m vadaamaati dassento "yo ca vu.d.dho"ti gaathamaaha. Tassattho- vu.d.dho vaa daharo vaa majjhimo vaa yo koci hi.msaadibheda.m paapakamma.m pakubbati ativiya karoti, sopi bhusa.m paapakammanirato dakaabhisecanaa sinaanena tato paapakammaa pamuccati accantameva vimuccatiiti. 239. "Surely this matter is well known in the world, so let me tell you," he said and spoke the verse beginning Whoever, whether [young or] old. This is the meaning: whether young or old or middle-aged, whoever (yo = koci) does an evil action divided into injury, etc, whoever does it excessively. Even he who is greatly attached to evil action, by ablution in water, by bathing, as a result is released from evil action; he is completely freed. Verse: 240. "Ko nu te idamakkhaasi, ajaanantassa ajaanako; 'dakaabhisecanaa naama, paapakammaa pamuccati'. 240. Who indeed told you this, ignorant to the ignorant: "Truly he is released from his evil action by ablution in water"? Cy: Ta.m sutvaa pu.n.nikaa tassa pa.tivacana.m dentii "ko nu te"ti-aadimaaha. Tattha ko nu te idamakkhaasi, ajaanantassa ajaanakoti kammavipaaka.m ajaanantassa te sabbena sabba.m kammavipaaka.m ajaanato ajaanako aviddasu baalo udakaabhisecanahetu paapakammato pamuccatiiti, ida.m atthajaata.m ko nu naama akkhaasi, na so saddheyyavacano, naapi ceta.m yuttanti adhippaayo. Idaanissa tameva yutti-abhaava.m vibhaaventii "sagga.m nuuna gamissantii"ti-aadimaaha. 240. Hearing this, Pu.n.nikaa, giving him a reply, spoke the verse beginning Who indeed [told] you. There, who indeed told you this, ignorant (ajaanako) to the ignorant (ajaanantassa) means: [an] ignorant [person], not intelligent, a fool, ignorant (ajaanato) concerning the result of deeds in every way, to the ignorant [person], to you, who indeed (nu = naama) told [you] this (ida.m = attha-jaata.m), "He is released from his bad action by reason of ablution in water"? His speech should not be trusted, nor is this proper. This is the meaning. ..to be continued! connie #75657 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 5:08 am Subject: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Regarding: Sarah: "...Perhaps we can incorporate them all together when anyone has the time..." Scott: I can work on this tonight and tomorrow morning, if you like. Sincerely, Scott. #75658 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 2:08 am Subject: Interpretations [Re: [dsg] Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness] upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Swee Boon) - In a message dated 8/29/07 5:35:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: > >The commentaries were not spoken by the Buddha. > > That's correct. By definition, the commentaries are not the words of > the Buddha himself, they are elucidations by others on the words of > the Buddha. > > But I think we all agree that the words of the Buddha need a degree > of 'interpretation' in order to make sense for us. For example, in > this thread you have been making certain connections between the Ogha- > tarana Sutta, DN 22 and the bhojjhangas, and you spoke I think about > dispelling the "mystery" of the Ogha-tarana Sutta. > > Well this is exactly the kind of thing the commentaries might > address. They do not declare 'new' doctrine, but they explain and > elucidate their sutta in the context of the Tipitaka as a whole. > > Sometimes, perhaps often, we may have difficulty accepting what the > commentaries have to say about the meaning of a passage. However, we > should not dismiss them just because their view does not coincide > with our own! > ======================= I agree with what you said here, Sarah. When there is a sutta that isn't perfectly clear to me, I'm eager to hear other understandings - those of commentators long passed on and whose interpretations were reported by Buddhaghosa, those of modern commentators, and the perspectives of fellow Buddhist wayfarers. I even am even open to *consider* the understandings of Mahayanists, and at times I can come across clues in non-Buddhist traditions! (Get your excommunication edicts ready, oh ye Keepers of the Faith! LOL!) The bottom line, however, is that on the basis of direct consideration of a sutta and consideration of such interpretations of others, I have to determine, myself, what my best "take" is, or, as is sometimes the case, to leave the sutta as "not yet clearly understood" by me. Actually, in almost every case, I believe there needs to be retained a degree of uncertainty as to the meaning of a sutta, and whatever understanding one comes to needs to be held lightly and tentatively, unless, of course, the sutta spells out and confirms in crystal clear, bell-ringing words exactly what one has directly come to know to be true with self-certifying surety. This last is, of course, a rare event. If it is not rare for someone, then s/he is either a sage or is quite deluded, far more often the latter! LOLOL! With metta, Howard #75659 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 2:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness upasaka_howard Hi, Jon (and Sarah & Swee Boon) - In a message dated 8/29/07 5:35:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: > Hi Swee Boon > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > > >Hi Jon, > ... > >>I don't think it's safe to ignore the commentaries just because > we > >>may be inclined to disagree with the reading they give. As far as > >>I can see they are consistent with the suttas and consistent among > >>themselves. > > > >The commentaries were not spoken by the Buddha. > > That's correct. By definition, the commentaries are not the words of > the Buddha himself, they are elucidations by others on the words of > the Buddha. > ======================== My apologies, Jon! I mistook your post for being written by your wife. It must have been the reasonableness that threw me off! LOLOL! Just kidding, Jon. ;-) Sorry for the mistake. With metta, Howard #75660 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 6:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge buddhatrue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > --- Tep Sastri wrote: > > T: I doubt it very much that the "characteristic of no-self" implies > > there is no person who suffers. > .... > S: see the Vism passage just discussed about 'no experiencers' which you > liked. Hi Sarah (and Tep), I just popped in, because I have no time to post regularly, and this post caught my eye. Sarah, you just keep going back again and again to this quote from the Vism. to prove that anatta means people (or entities) don't exist, but that isn't at all what anatta means. You can't provide any quotes from the Buddha stating that people don't exist. Maybe it would be productive to look at this subject from a different angle. Once, when a wanderer asked the Buddha if there is a self or not, the Buddha refused to answer. He explained, in part, to Ananda: "And if I — being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is no self — were to answer that there is no self, the bewildered Vacchagotta would become even more bewildered: 'Does the self I used to have now not exist?'" This shows that to the Buddha "Atta" or "Self" is something which people believe they possess, not something which they are. Realize, the wanderer asked "Is there a Self?" He didn't ask "Do I exist?" When the Buddha taught anatta he wasn't teaching that people don't exist, he was teaching that individual souls, unchangeable essences, Selves, don't exist. To equate anatta with "no beings" is completely against the Dhamma. It is against rebirth, kamma, dependent origination, etc. It is wrong view and it interferes with the cultivation of the Brahma Viharas (metta, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity). It also makes no sense at all since I exist and you exist- because if you didn't exist you couldn't read this post! ;-)). Really, Sarah, you should have much more support for this position that just one quote from the Vism. (taken out of context, BTW). Metta, James #75661 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 6:48 am Subject: Re: Control is Popular buddhatrue Hi Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear James: > > Thanks for the reply: > > James: "It is done at will. The Buddha used the comparison of opening > one's eyes when they are shut or shutting them when they are open: > both actions which are done at will." > > Scott: The phrase in question, again, is: > > "...Just as a man with good sight, having opened his eyes might shut > them or having shut his eyes might open them, so too concerning > anything at all, the agreeable that arose, the disagreeable that > arose, and the both agreeable and disagreeable that arose cease just > as quickly, just as rapidly, just as easily, and equanimity is > established..." > > Scott: In attempting to negotiate a simile, one has to, of course, > make use of an abstract, as opposed to a concrete, mode of reasoning. > > In this case, by remaining at the concrete level, the point has been > missed entirely. As shown above, it is the rapidity with which an eye > opens or shuts that is being used to demonstrate just how quickly > these things arise and cease. James: It isn't just "speed" that the Buddha referred to with the use of this metaphor, but also "easily"- demonstrating an intended action (which can be done "easily" when one has trained the mind properly to guard the sense doors). The Buddha wasn't sloppy in his use of metaphors and he probably wouldn't want to lead people astray (like, gosh, silly ole me! ;-)) > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > Metta, James #75662 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 7:44 am Subject: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge indriyabala Hi James and Sarah and Nina and Scott, - I am impressed by every single word you have said, James. This post of yours effectively captures all the major points I have made in the several discussions with Scott and Sarah and Nina in the past few weeks. Sarah and Scott, James' key points that I completely agree with are: -- Sarah, you just keep going back again and again to this quote from the Vism. to prove that anatta means people (or entities) don't exist, but that isn't at all what anatta means. You can't provide any quotes from the Buddha stating that people don't exist. -- "Atta" or "Self" is something which people believe they possess, not something which they are. Realize, the wanderer asked "Is there a Self?" He didn't ask "Do I exist?" -- It is against rebirth, kamma, dependent origination, etc. It is wrong view and it interferes with the cultivation of the Brahma Viharas (metta, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity). It also makes no sense at all since I exist and you exist- because if you didn't exist you couldn't read this post! ;-)). James, thank you so much for the clear summary of the flexible view that is correct and complete. Sarah's and Scott's and Nina's no-self perspective is inadequate, since it has failed to explain rebirth, kamma, dependent origination, metta bhavana, practice according to the Dhamma, iddhi, direct knowledges, supernormal powers(iddhividha), and so on. Tep === #75663 From: "nidive" Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 9:07 am Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nidive Hi Howard, > > Does it not concern you that such a switch implies that > > "perceptions & categories of complication" all arise out of the > > mind-door? > > > > I don't see MN 18 as saying that. > > > > When listening to music, of the 6 paragraphs of the sutta that I > > quoted, is it the paragraph concerning the ear that applies or is > > it the paragraph concerning the intellect that applies? Or both? > Howard: No, it does not bother me. All our higer level thinking and > conceptualizing ultimately works upon raw material that consists > not of paramattha dhammas but of conceptualized versions of > paramattha dhammas. > As for music, without thought processing, there is no experience of > music. Without thought there is no experience of a melody or > harmony or rhythm. And even at the most basic level, a sound that > is thought about is not the heard sound, but a mind-door > correspondent. I notice that you did not answer my question at the end of my post, but I am not going to pursue an answer from you. I must say your understanding of "mind-door" is quite different from the "mind-door" of MN 18. I also don't understand what would be meant by a switch from a "mind-door" to another "mind-door" in the case of the intellect & ideas. If I may have the last word: the assembling of sounds into musical notes & words of a conversation is an activity of the brain. Likewise, the assembling of shapes & colours into the image of a tree is an activity of the brain. Computer "hear" sounds by taking sample frames of sound waves through a microphone, for example, and converts them into digital data. It is possible to make computers "recognise" words by analysing these sample frames of sound waves. We call this artificial intelligence (speech recognition technology). It is also possible to make computers "recognise" a specific object in a field of vision, for example a tree. We even have human face recognition technology and eye iris recognition technology. Our brain is just like the computer, but with much more sophisticated algorithms for recognising music, conversations and trees. All these assembling of raw data happens without our conscious knowing or thinking. Is the tree that I am seeing now a concept? No. It is what I see after having been processed by the brain. Is the music that I am hearing now a concept? No. It is what I hear after having been processed by the brain. The Buddha never expounded on the neurological connections between the eyes, ears, nose, tongue and skin-body with respect to the brain. Why is that so? Because it has got nothing to do with the Dhamma. Swee Boon #75664 From: "nidive" Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 9:38 am Subject: Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness nidive Hi Jon, > But I think we all agree that the words of the Buddha need a degree > of 'interpretation' in order to make sense for us. Well, some make a 180 degree turn of 'interpretation' and changes the whole meaning of a sutta. For example, Kimsuka Sutta clearly says that insight & samatha comes in a pair in order to issue into nibbana, but you interpret it as insight with jhana as basis for enlightenment. Clearly, you have an aversed bias towards samatha when making such an 'interpretation'? You have turned a simple English sentence and a simple simile (a swift pair of messengers) into something of your own liking anyway. How's that for an 'interpretation'? > For example, in this thread you have been making certain > connections between the Ogha-tarana Sutta, DN 22 and the > bhojjhangas, and you spoke I think about dispelling the "mystery" > of the Ogha-tarana Sutta. > Well this is exactly the kind of thing the commentaries might > address. They do not declare 'new' doctrine, but they explain and > elucidate their sutta in the context of the Tipitaka as a whole. Well, it appears that those who wrote the commentaries have no idea of what the Buddha is talking about anyway. From post 20794 courtesy of Kom (& Ken H for digging it up): ----------------------------------------------------------------- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/20794 4) The commentaries explained the second answers in the following different ways [each comparing the different states] a) Because of kilesa, one is said to sink. Because of abhi-sankara [bad and good kamma], one is said to be swept away. b) Because of attachment and wrong view, one sinks. Because of the rest of kilesa and abhi-sankhara, one is swept away. c) Because of attachment, one sinks. Because of dithi, one is swept away. d) Because of the wrong view of eternalism, one sinks. Because of the wrong views of annihiliation, one is swept away. This is because bhava-dithi is attached to the self [???], but vibhava-dithi is attached to what is unknown [speculative?]. e) Because of attachment, one sinks. Because of the udhacca, one is swept away. f) Because of self-torture, one sinks. Because of over-indulgence, one is swept away. g) Because of all the akusala states, one sinks. Beause of all the mundane kusala states, one is swept away. ----------------------------------------------------------------- When the authors of the commentaries can't even give a concrete answer, is there any hope of relying on them? Do they actually know anything? If not, perhaps they should have shut up and not commented on the Ogha-tarana Sutta. At the very least, it shows respect for the Buddha. To say that one doesn't know when one doesn't know is a virtue too. To say that one is giving an opinion or belief when giving an opinion or belief is a virtue too. But to say that one is *explaining* in an authoritative manner what the Buddha said when in fact not knowing anything at all is just so wrong! > Sometimes, perhaps often, we may have difficulty accepting what the > commentaries have to say about the meaning of a passage. However, > we should not dismiss them just because their view does not > coincide with our own! Especially not when the authors apparently don't know anything at all, yet pretended they actually know. Swee Boon #75665 From: "nidive" Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 10:00 am Subject: Interpretations [Re: [dsg] Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness] nidive Hi Howard, > Actually, in almost every case, I believe there needs to be > retained a degree of uncertainty as to the meaning of a sutta, > and whatever understanding one comes to needs to be held > lightly and tentatively, unless, of course, the sutta spells out > and confirms in crystal clear, bell-ringing words exactly what one > has directly come to know to be true with self-certifying surety. I believe that suttas actually cross-reference each other. If there is an unclear meaning in a sutta, its meaning can most often be inferred by examining other suttas. Of course, this does not always work 100% of the time. But for me, I think it works pretty well for the Ogha-tarana Sutta. > This last is, of course, a rare event. If it is not rare for > someone, then s/he is either a sage or is quite deluded, > far more often the latter! LOLOL! Then Howard, regarding MN 18 on the switching of doors, is it the case that this is what you have "directly come to know to be true with self-certifying surety" despite the sutta not having explicitly stated such a switch as occurring? Swee Boon #75666 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 6:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 8/29/07 12:12:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > >>Does it not concern you that such a switch implies that > >>"perceptions &categories of complication" all arise out of the > >>mind-door? > >> > >>I don't see MN 18 as saying that. > >> > >>When listening to music, of the 6 paragraphs of the sutta that I > >>quoted, is it the paragraph concerning the ear that applies or is > >>it the paragraph concerning the intellect that applies? Or both? > > >Howard: No, it does not bother me. All our higer level thinking and > >conceptualizing ultimately works upon raw material that consists > >not of paramattha dhammas but of conceptualized versions of > >paramattha dhammas. > >As for music, without thought processing, there is no experience of > >music. Without thought there is no experience of a melody or > >harmony or rhythm. And even at the most basic level, a sound that > >is thought about is not the heard sound, but a mind-door > >correspondent. > > I notice that you did not answer my question at the end of my post, > but I am not going to pursue an answer from you. ---------------------------------------- Howard: I'm guessing you mean the following: "It would imply that there is only one door that we should ever care about, the mind-door, since it is from this door that perceptions & categories of complication would assail anyone." I don't know what constitutes "caring about". All our papanca is mental. All our craving and aversion is mental. And we cling more to concepts than to paramattha dhammas. But we need to be mindful of all phenomena. ---------------------------------------- > > I must say your understanding of "mind-door" is quite different from > the "mind-door" of MN 18. I also don't understand what would be meant > by a switch from a "mind-door" to another "mind-door" in the case of > the intellect &ideas. ------------------------------------ Howard: Not all mental activity is thinking. After a sound is heard, it (or, I think a conceptualized version of it) is apprehended throught the mind door also. But that is not yet thinking. Thinking about a sound is yet a further step removed. ------------------------------------ > > If I may have the last word: the assembling of sounds into musical > notes &words of a conversation is an activity of the brain. > Likewise, the assembling of shapes &colours into the image of a tree > is an activity of the brain. -------------------------------------- Howard: That may be so. I won't get into a materialist versus phenomenalist discussion with you except to say that I do not believe that consciousness is a biproduct of matter. ------------------------------------- > > Computer "hear" sounds by taking sample frames of sound waves through > a microphone, for example, and converts them into digital data. It is > possible to make computers "recognise" words by analysing these > sample frames of sound waves. We call this artificial intelligence > (speech recognition technology). --------------------------------------- Howard: LOLOL! Yes, I'm well aware of A.I. BTW, I'm glad you put 'recognize' in quotes! -------------------------------------- > > It is also possible to make computers "recognise" a specific object > in a field of vision, for example a tree. We even have human face > recognition technology and eye iris recognition technology. > > Our brain is just like the computer, but with much more sophisticated > algorithms for recognising music, conversations and trees. All these > assembling of raw data happens without our conscious knowing or > thinking. > > Is the tree that I am seeing now a concept? No. It is what I see > after having been processed by the brain. Is the music that I am > hearing now a concept? No. It is what I hear after having been > processed by the brain. -------------------------------------- Howard: I understand your position. As far as I'm concerned, a "seen tree" is what is projected upon a plethora of directly observed phenomena during a thinking/conceptualization process. ------------------------------------- > > The Buddha never expounded on the neurological connections between > the eyes, ears, nose, tongue and skin-body with respect to the brain. > Why is that so? Because it has got nothing to do with the Dhamma. > > Swee Boon > ======================= With metta, Howard #75667 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 11:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nilovg Dear Tep, You and James make good points, also others, including Lodewijk, are wondering and thinking about these things. Op 29-aug-2007, om 16:44 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > Sarah's and Scott's and Nina's no-self > perspective is inadequate, since it has failed to explain rebirth, > kamma, > dependent origination, metta bhavana, practice according to the > Dhamma, iddhi, direct knowledges, supernormal powers(iddhividha), > and so on. ------- I thought you found Sarah's quote helpful: about a tree that fruits, and there is no room for an experiencer. And then the D.O.: for a long time we are studying it. Did you follow the series? Kammaformation conditions vipaakacitta (sankhaara conditions vi~n~naa.na) , into all details explained. For example Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 166: ------- Text Vis.166: And here let the illustration of this consciousness be such things as an echo, a light, a seal impression, a looking-glass image, for the fact of its not coming here from the previous becoming and for the fact that it arises owing to causes that are included in past becomings. For just as an echo, a light, a seal impression, and a shadow have respectively sound, etc., as their cause and come into being without going elsewhere, so also this consciousness. ---------- N: The Tiika refers to the expression, ‘And here’ (let the illustration of this consciousness be such things as an echo) stating that sound is the cause of the echo. Sound is the condition, paccaya, for the echo which is the conditioned dhamma, paccayuppanna dhamma. The echo has not come here from the past, but its arising is due to a condition of the past (atiitahetusamuppaada). The Tiika states that the sound is the cause of the echo and the echo arises without going elsewhere. It does not last. The seal is the cause of the seal impression. As to the shadow, the Tiika explains that when there is a reflection into a mirror, the face is the cause of the reflection. The Tiika states that all things that arise because of conditions where absent before and after their arising they do not go elsewhere. It is the same with rebirth-consciousness. It was absent before and after it has arisen because of conditions it does not go elsewhere. The Tiika explains, just as the echo was absent before and does not arise without a condition, namely the sound, evenso it is with rebirth-consciousness. ***** Conclusion: There is no being who travels from the past life to the present life. Rebirth-consciousness is one moment of citta that is produced by past kamma. It succeeds the dying-consciousness very rapidly, and then it falls away immediately. It does not come from anywhere and it does not go anywhere. What happens at the moment of dying and rebirth is not different from this moment: one citta arises because of conditions, then it falls away and is immediately succeeded by the next citta. **** Tep, do you find this clear? Metta and practice: very relevant point you make here and it should be explained. I try this again in post to Han tomorrow, in the perfections corner. Satipatthana and the perfections are closely related. Perfections: those are practice in daily life. Understanding of nama and rupa is most relevant to our social life, supports the brahmaviharas. Nina. #75668 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 9:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Tep) - In a message dated 8/29/07 3:47:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Text Vis.166: And here let the illustration of this consciousness be > such things > as an echo, a light, a seal impression, a looking-glass image, for the > fact of its not coming here from the previous becoming and for the fact > that it arises owing to causes that are included in past becomings. For > just as an echo, a light, a seal impression, and a shadow have > respectively sound, etc., as their cause and come into being without > going elsewhere, so also this consciousness. > > ---------- > N: The Tiika refers to the expression, ‘And here’ (let the > illustration of this consciousness be such things as an echo) stating > that sound is the cause of the echo. Sound is the condition, paccaya, > for the echo which is the conditioned dhamma, paccayuppanna dhamma. > The echo has not come here from the past, but its arising is due to a > condition of the past (atiitahetusamuppaada). > The Tiika states that the sound is the cause of the echo and the echo > arises without going elsewhere. It does not last. > The seal is the cause of the seal impression. As to the shadow, the > Tiika explains that when there is a reflection into a mirror, the > face is the cause of the reflection. > The Tiika states that all things that arise because of conditions > where absent before and after their arising they do not go elsewhere. > It is the same with rebirth-consciousness. It was absent before and > after it has arisen because of conditions it does not go elsewhere. > The Tiika explains, just as the echo was absent before and does not > arise without a condition, namely the sound, evenso it is with > rebirth-consciousness. > > ***** > Conclusion: There is no being who travels from the past life to the > present life. > Rebirth-consciousness is one moment of citta that is produced by past > kamma. It succeeds the dying-consciousness very rapidly, and then it > falls away immediately. It does not come from anywhere and it does > not go anywhere. What happens at the moment of dying and rebirth is > not different from this moment: one citta arises because of > conditions, then it falls away and is immediately succeeded by the > next citta. > ========================== Nina, I *very* much like the foregoing! I especially like the echo & seal impression metaphors, and I like the emphasis on phenomena serving as conditions for future phenomena, but the original conditions not lasting and not "going anywhere". It is simply a matter of "this happening, that will happen" - mere this/that conditionality. I am not, as you know, enchanted by the momentaristic terminology that conceives of dhammas as unchanging over a tiny interval or as zero-duration, single-instant phenomena. I have more of a wave-picture in mind for dhammas, namely gradually arising, peaking, and subsiding, without well-delineated starting and ending points, and with one mindstate shading into the next. So, for example, a heat sensation or a hardness sensation or an emotion, any of these, is not instantaneous and is not unchanging, but grows, peaks, and diminishes, even varying in exact character. But with this disclaimer, I certainly do "sign on" to what you have written here, Nina. It would be lying for me to say "I don't buy it"! ;-)) With metta, Howard #75669 From: "colette" Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 10:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hi ksheri3 Dieter, How could you! "buddhism is all about suffering", in NO SUCH WAY IS IT ABOUT SUFFERING! It is about the observation of SUFFERING; the COGNITION OF SUFFERING; the full realization of suffering, and the most important part, the path leading to somewhere OTHER THAN suffering. True, a lot of people tend to avoid the thorny issue of suffering which leads them into a wilderness of emptiness. Take for instance my roomates boyfriend and father of her latest child; he cannot see that he suffers completelhy and instead of choosing to read and learn about it, as it is a well trodden path of freeing oneself from the chains of suffering, he chooses to smoke pot, hydro, and play video games at 32 yrs. of age. Today he took the keys from me as I left since he was in one of his moods where EVERYTHING IS HIS, it a spanish delusion of machismo from Mexico, but still he cannot find peace as long as HE CHOOSES TO SIT ON HIS FAT ARSE AND SPEND HIS MONEY ON POT. I gladly threw him the keys and walked away knowing that I'm gonna sleep in a mission for the homeless tonight. This is not suffering however since I know how to take care of myself, it's just a bother that's all, the suffering is knowing what's coming, karma, for him in the future and the child that I was lucky enough to see my roomate give birth too and to have lived with during it's first two yrs. of life. Now that's suffering. I hope Jim doesn't listen to this and think that suffering is all there is to buddhism. BTW, Dieter, when I was looking through my files the other day, I spoke of here yesterday, one of the plastic bags that holds the many divisions of work I have was CHAOSMATRIX or CHAOS MAGIK, do you happen to know a Fr. U.D. that gave a beautiful description of the Psychological Model of Magik? I think he and a few Russian alchemists I know, live in Germany now. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Dieter Möller wrote: > > Hi Jim , > > just another comment .. > > Buddhism is all about suffering, its origin , its end and the way how to end suffering .. > when you recognise, understand suffering, the Buddha Dhamma will be of great meaning to you .. and if not : don't worry, be happy .. ;-) > #75670 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 11:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Virtue & Demerit nilovg Dear Andrew, you took the trouble to formulate those questions. I tried to find the sutta but the annotation was not conform PTS, I could not trace it. Nina. Op 29-aug-2007, om 1:55 heeft Andrew het volgende geschreven: > "Are all virtues necessary? [Tika Nipata (Maha Vagga), Seelabbatham] #75671 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 6:59 am Subject: Re: Interpretations [Re: [dsg] Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness] upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 8/29/07 1:03:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > >Actually, in almost every case, I believe there needs to be > >retained a degree of uncertainty as to the meaning of a sutta, > >and whatever understanding one comes to needs to be held > >lightly and tentatively, unless, of course, the sutta spells out > >and confirms in crystal clear, bell-ringing words exactly what one > >has directly come to know to be true with self-certifying surety. > > I believe that suttas actually cross-reference each other. If there > is an unclear meaning in a sutta, its meaning can most often be > inferred by examining other suttas. Of course, this does not always > work 100% of the time. But for me, I think it works pretty well for > the Ogha-tarana Sutta. > > >This last is, of course, a rare event. If it is not rare for > >someone, then s/he is either a sage or is quite deluded, > >far more often the latter! LOLOL! > > Then Howard, regarding MN 18 on the switching of doors, is it the > case that this is what you have "directly come to know to be true > with self-certifying surety" despite the sutta not having explicitly > stated such a switch as occurring? ----------------------------------------- Howard: Simple answer: No. --------------------------------------- > > Swee Boon > ===================== With metta, Howard #75672 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 11:28 am Subject: Asoka, Ch 3, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, I appreciate it immensely that Khun Sujin always brings the listener back to the present moment, when she for example says : “We have intellectual understanding of nåma and rúpa, but what about this moment? There is the rúpa which is seen at this moment. There can be some understanding, even if it is very little. It is only visible object.” We read that nåma and rúpa are elements, dhåtus, and that they can be classified as eighteen elements: the five rúpas which are the sense- organs, the five sense-objects experienced through these sense- organs, the five sense-cognitions, mind-element (mano-dhåtu) [1], dhamma-dhåtu (cetasika, subtle rúpas and nibbåna), mind-consciousness element (mano-viññåna dhåtu, including all cittas except the sense- cognitions and mind-element). When we read this it is not too difficult to have theoretical understanding. But the Buddha taught the elements to help people to understand that they arise now, that they are anattå, that they have no owner and are beyond control. The whole of his teaching points to the development of satipatthåna, because what he teaches can be realized by paññå. We read in the “Dialogues of the Buddha” (III, no. 33, The Recital, Sangíti Sutta, Double Doctrines, 10) one sentence, full of meaning: “Proficiency in elements and in understanding them”. The Commentary to this sutta, the “Sumaògala Vilåsiní”, explains: “Proficiency in elements”. Eighteen elements, the element of eye, etc. ...the element of mind-consciousness. When it is said that there is with regard to these elements proficiency in the elements, understanding of them, it means that there is defining of the characteristics of these eighteen elements, paññå based on listening, on bearing in mind, paññå which comprehends and realizes (pativedha). The Påli term “pativeda” means the realization of the truth by paññå. There is a beginning of the realization of the truth when the stages of insight arise, but it is completed when enlightenment is attained: when the path-consciousness (magga-citta) arises which eradicates defilements and experiences nibbåna, and the fruition-consciousness (phala-citta) arises which is the result of the magga-citta. Pativeda is the result of the study of the Dhamma (pariyatti) and the practice of vipassanå (paìipatti). The practice has to be in conformity with the study of the Dhamma. Through the practice we begin to verify what we learnt. Pativeda is the realisation of the truth of what we learnt. ----------- 1. including adverting-consciousness and receiving-consciousness, arising wthin a sense-door process of cittas. ******** Nina. #75673 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 1:55 pm Subject: Re: Virtue & Demerit kenhowardau Hi Andrew, I look forward to seeing anyone's thoughts on this sutta. It seems to be specifically designed to make people think about the Dhamma. I suppose all suttas were designed that way, but some more specifically than others. --------------- <. . .> A: > PS I am reminded of Ken H's recent discussion re crossing the flood and his note (from the commentaries) that mundane kusala can "sweep us away". Not sure if this is relevant to the above. --------------- I suspect it is the same point. The doctrine of Dependent Origination includes mundane virtue as part of the second link. Praiseworthy though it is, mundane virtue does not put an end to the round of rebirths. In fact it perpetuates it. So I think (not sure) the Buddha and Ananda were alluding to the uniqueness of virtue that is accompanied by right understanding (of the eightfold path) - the only way out. Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > > Hello everyone > In my papers, I recently re-discovered Sister Uppalawanna's booklet > of translated excerpts from the Anguttara Nikaya (published by the > Buddhist Society of Queensland). > The following passage interests me but unfortunately Sister U hasn't > provided notes and I don't have the Pali to assist: > > "Are all virtues necessary? [Tika Nipata (Maha Vagga), Seelabbatham] #75674 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 3:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Virtue & Demerit lbidd2 Hi Andrew, Nina, and Ken, The answer to the first question is yes, kusala can and usually does condition akusala. If you give money to a terrorist obviously there will be the proliferation of akusala acts of body, speech, and mind. Even if you give a piece of chewing gum to a child that generosity will probably condition the arising of craving. So obviously some kusala is not necessary for the noble life. As for the second question about why a bhikkhu skilled in the 4 discriminations can't win an argument, I have no idea. Larry #75675 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 11:20 am Subject: Conditions, Ch 12, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, We should see the disadvantages of contact. In the above quoted sutta of the “Kindred Sayings”, after the explanation of the disadvantages of material food by the simile of “Child’s Flesh”, the disadvantages and dangers of the three kinds of mental nutriment are explained. We read about a simile of a cow which stands with a sore hide leaning against the wall. The creatures who live there bite her. The same happens when she leans against a tree and no matter where she stands she will be bitten. We read: Even so do I declare that the food which is contact should be regarded. When such food is well understood, the three feelings [1] are well understood. When the three feelings are well understood, I declare that there is nothing further which the ariyan disciple has to do. We find seeing and hearing desirable, but we get hurt by contact which contacts visible object or sound, it leads to dukkha. The mental nutriment which is volition, cetanå, is also a link in the Dependent Origination. Under this aspect it is cetanå which is kusala kamma, akusala kamma or “imperturbable” kamma (åneñja, arúpåvacara kusala), and these kammas produce rebirth. In the above quoted sutta we read about a simile of a glowing charcoal-pit to which someone is dragged. He wishes to be far from it because if he falls on that heap of charcoal he will have mortal pain and he will die. Evenso should we see the danger of cetanå which produces rebirth. We read: Even so, monks, I declare that the food which is manosañcetanå (will of mind) should be regarded. When that food is well understood, the three cravings [2] are well understood. When these are well understood, I declare that there is nothing further that the ariyan disciple has to do. ----------- 1. Pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling and indifferent feeling 2. Craving for sense pleasures, craving for becoming and craving for non-becoming. ********* Nina. #75676 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 3:21 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,183 Vism.XVII,184 Vism.XVII,185 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 183. The formation of demerit as rebirth-linking ripens in the sense-sphere becoming only, in the four kinds of generation, in the remaining three destinies, in the one station of consciousness described thus 'different in body and same in perception' (D.iii.253), and in the one corresponding abode of beings. Therefore it is a condition in the way already stated for seven kinds of resultant consciousness in one kind of becoming, in four kinds of generation, in three kinds of destiny, in one station of consciousness, and in one abode of beings, both in rebirth-linking and in the course of an existence ((50)-(56)). 184. The formation of the imperturbable as rebirth-linking ripens in the immaterial becoming, in the apparitional kind of generation only, in the divine destiny only, in the three stations of consciousness beginning with the base consisting of boundless space, and in the four abodes of beings beginning with the base consisting of boundless space ((62)-(65)). Therefore it is a condition in the way already stated for the four kinds of consciousness in one kind of becoming, in one kind of generation, in one kind of destiny, in three stations of consciousness, and in four abodes of beings, both in rebirth-linking and in the course of becoming.34 ------------------------- Note 34. A Sinhalese text adds the following paragraph: 'Also the bodily formation, when giving rebirth-linking, gives the whole of its results in the sense-sphere becoming alone in the four generations, in the five destinies, in the first two stations of consciousness, and in two abodes of beings. Therefore it is a condition in the way already stated for the twenty-three kinds of consciousness in one kind of becoming, four generations, five destinies, two stations of consciousness, and two abodes of being, both in rebirth-linking and in the course of an existence. The same method applies to the verbal formation. But the mental formation does not fail to ripen anywhere except in one abode of beings. Therefore it is a condition in the way already stated for the thirty-two kinds of resultant consciousness, as appropriate, in the three kinds of becoming, four generations, five destinies, seven stations of consciousness, and eight abodes of beings, both in rebirth-linking and in the course of an existence.There is no consciousness with formations as condition in the non-percipient abode of beings. Furthermore, in the case of non-percipient beings, the formation of merit is a condition, as kamma condition acting from a different time, for the kinds of materiality due to kamma performed'. 185. This is how: One should of these formations see For which and how they are conditions In birth and life and the three Kinds of becoming and the rest. This is the detailed explanation of the clause 'With formations as condition, consciousness'. ************************* 183. apu~n~naabhisa"nkhaaro pana yasmaa ekasmi.myeva kaamabhave catuusu yoniisu, avasesaasu tiisu gatiisu, naanattakaayaekattasa~n~niisa"nkhaataaya ekissaa vi~n~naa.na.t.thitiyaa, taadiseyeva ca ekasmi.m sattaavaase pa.tisandhivasena vipaccati, tasmaa esa ekasmi.m bhave, catuusu yoniisu, tiisu gatiisu, ekissaa vi~n~naa.na.t.thitiyaa, ekamhi ca sattaavaase sattanna.m vipaakavi~n~naa.naana.m vuttanayeneva paccayo pa.tisandhiya.m pavatte ca. 184. aane~njaabhisa"nkhaaro pana yasmaa ekasmi.myeva aruupabhave, ekissaa opapaatikayoniyaa, ekissaa devagatiyaa, aakaasaana~ncaayatanaadikaasu tiisu vi~n~naa.na.t.thitiisu, aakaasaana~ncaayatanaadikesu ca catuusu sattaavaasesu pa.tisandhivasena vipaccati, tasmaa esa ekasmi.m bhave, ekissaa yoniyaa, ekissaa gatiyaa, tiisu vi~n~naa.na.t.thitiisu, catuusu sattaavaasesu catunna.m vi~n~naa.naana.m vuttanayeneva paccayo hoti pa.tisandhiya.m pavatte caati. 185. eva.m, pa.tisandhipavattiina.m, vasenete bhavaadisu. vijaanitabbaa sa"nkhaaraa, yathaa yesa~nca paccayaati.. aya.m ``sa"nkhaarapaccayaa vi~n~naa.na´´nti padasmi.m vitthaarakathaa. #75677 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 3:15 pm Subject: Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness indriyabala Dear Nina (Sarah, James, Scott, ..), - I am thankful for the two emails you wrote me today (#75655, and #75667) -- they show that you are kind and sincerely want to help me understand the Buddha's Teachings "the right way", according to your interpretations of satipatthana and the doctrine of not-self. However, I am more interested in a Dhamma discussion than learning a different way to interpret the Dhamma. Dhamma discussion should mutually benefit the discussers through an exchange of knowledge; in that sense it is not the same as the one-way Dhamma teaching. # 75655 ======= N: Did you get the attachment I sent you all right and did it help? Without the Co. we could well misunderstand this sutta and think of steps to be done, or of a command: do this or that. T: Yes, I got it and read it. It is a document of 17 pages and 13 comments ! I can't help wondering why a simple sutta study needs the 13 commentaries. Below is a sample of the commentaries. No 1: Co: The kusala citta arising with the ten bases of wholesomeness is not higher citta, adhicitta. The citta with the eight attainments that is based on vipassana is higher than that, it is the higher citta. ............. Commentary: A "different object": the word nimitta is used, meaning cause. .............. no 2. The Co explains, when unwholesome thinking is accompanied by attachment, the different object (nimitta) he should pay attention to is foulness, asubha. And when there is attachment to things, such as robes, he should reflect on the impermanence of things. When thinking with aversion arises towards living beings he should develop metta, loving kindness. When thinking with aversion arises towards things he should pay attention to elements. When thinking with delusion arises the bhikkhu should depend on five dhammas. etc. etc. ... ........... no 3. When the Bhikkhu has thoughts of delusion he should depend on five dhammas: 1. He should be together with a teacher, 2. he should study the Dhamma, 3. he should ask questions on the Dhamma, 4. he should listen to the Dhamma at a suitable time, 5. he should inquire into cause and effect. As to the first point, the Co. states that when he is together with a teacher he respects, the teacher can punish him with a task, such as making him dip up water to fill even a hundred pots. .......... T: I'd rather stop here . I was convinced that I did not need to read it any further. The sutta idea is indeed very straightforward. For example, let's consider only the first two of the five methods. #1. If "unskillful thoughts connected with desire, hate, and delusion arise in a bhikkhu", then he should turn the mind to a skillful thought. It is analogous to a carpenter's "getting rid of a coarse peg with a fine one". #2. If the switching of his attention to an opposite 'kusala vitakka' does not work, then the bhikkhu "should ponder on the disadvantages of the unskillful thoughts" -- like seeing a "carcass of a snake, dog, or human" that is hung round his neck. Being aware of drawbacks and harms of evil thoughts should be enough for anyone to get rid of them right away. So you may agree with me that this simple and very effective sutta does not require a wise and knowledgeable commentator. It is a discourse for application, not research and publication. .................. > > T: Thank you for your time and effort, Nina. I will understand if you > want to drop the discussion now, because you don't want to answer > that question about precedence (because it does not agree with your > view). However, if you wish to continue, then I will be glad to give > my reply to the (remaining) second half of your message #75604. -------- N: Your questions touch on more points, not only on this sutta: namely: are the Buddha's words a command or advice? Do we have to take them as: do this or that? How are the four applications of mindfulness to be seen? How is anatta to be applied all the time in daily life? There are many points. When someone else thinks differently I will not try to convince him. But when he thinks that discussion is helpful, or he wants more clarifications from me, I gladly do so. It entirely depends on your interest. Whatever you like to do is all right for me. T: Then let me do just that -- from now when I want some clarifications from you , then I will ask for your kind help. Yours truly, Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > Op 29-aug-2007, om 2:36 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > > > T: I do not see how the 5 methods in MN 20 are related to > > satipatthana. Of course I agree that we can think about how > > satipatthana can be applied as an ALTERNATIVE approach to eliminate > > akusala vitaka. But that is not my concern. My purpose now is to look > > at MN 20 all by itself, without bringing in the satipatthana or other > > methods, such as asubha sanna and matta bhavana, that are not the > > focus of MN 20. > -------- > N: I do not think of of satipatthana as an alternative. It can arise > time and again in between all the thinking, speech, actions, if there > is right understanding. And the monks at that time could hear the > Dhamma from the Buddha personally. What else would they do? They > knew: satipatthana is our first and foremost task. They would not be > neglectful. #75678 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 4:24 pm Subject: Re: Control is Popular scottduncan2 Dear James, Thanks for the reply: James: "It isn't just 'speed' that the Buddha referred to with the use of this metaphor, but also 'easily'- demonstrating an intended action (which can be done "easily" when one has trained the mind properly to guard the sense doors)." The text: "...Just as a man with good sight, having opened his eyes might shut them or having shut his eyes might open them, so too concerning anything at all, the agreeable that arose, the disagreeable that arose, and the both agreeable and disagreeable that arose cease just as quickly, just as rapidly, just as easily, and equanimity is established..." The Paa.li: "...Evameva kho aananda, yassa kassaci eva.m siigha.m eva.m tuva.ta.m eva.m appakasirena uppanna.m manaapa.m uppanna.m amanaapa.m uppanna.m manaapaamanaapa.m nirujjhati, upekkhaa sa.n.thaati..." Scott: I see that the Paa.li word translated as 'easily' is the compound 'appakasirena'. Now don't take this to the bank (we can wait for correction since I'm likely to be wrong) but 'appa' is (PTS PED): "Appa (adj.)...small, little, insignificant, often in the sense of "very little = (next to) nothing" (so in most cpds.)" And 'kasirena' is from 'kasira': "Kasira (adj.)...miserable, painful, troubled, wretched...adv. kasiraa (abl.) with difficulty..." The compound (from the text regarding 'appa') is a negation: " -- kasira in instr. [appa]kasirena with little or no difficulty" Scott: So far so good, yet there is nothing in the meaning of the word which would allow the leap to the assertion that this 'with little or no difficulty' refers in any way to 'intended action', and there is nothing extant in the Paa.li text itself which indicates that 'intentional' is meant. If this can be shown otherwise, then the assertion moves beyond conjecture. As it stands, the view expressed that intention is somehow being demonstrated by the simile is at least as much conjecture as some consider the view of no-control to be. For example, one can intentionally open and close the eyes, but the involuntary blink reflex is just as (if not more - sorry, no stop-watch) rapid and instantaneous - it occurs as well, while being involuntary, with 'little or no difficulty' - in fact with less than when one 'wills' one's eye to blink. Sincerely, Scott. #75679 From: "m. nease" Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 5:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge m_nease Hi Jon, ----- Original Message ----- From: jonoabb To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 2:34 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge "...but exactly what is it that is heard through the ear. Is it music/conversation, or is it audible data?" 'Data'--very nice, or even 'quanta'. Much better than my attempted 'scintillae' (though it had a certain charm, I thought). Cheers, mike #75680 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 5:49 pm Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge indriyabala Dear Nina (James, Sarah, Han and other friends), - As I had mentioned in a message which I posted about an hour ago, I appreciated your sincerity to help me understand the anatta doctrine "the right way"; that's why you wrote the two messages today. I hope I understood your intention correctly. You asked a few questions if I understand the anatta doctrine as expounded in the Vism -- a kind of questions that test whether or not one is qualified as a true Buddhist. {:-) Nina (#75667) : (Qualification Question 1) I thought you found Sarah's quote helpful: about a tree that fruits, and there is no room for an experiencer. And then the D.O.: for a long time we are studying it. Did you follow the series? Kammaformation conditions vipaakacitta (sankhaara conditions vi~n~naa.na) , into all details explained. For example Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 166: N: Text Vis.166: And here let the illustration of this consciousness be such things as an echo, a light, a seal impression, a looking- glass image, for the fact of its not coming here from the previous becoming and for the fact that it arises owing to causes that are included in past becomings. For just as an echo, a light, a seal impression, and a shadow have respectively sound, etc., as their cause and come into being without going elsewhere, so also this consciousness. ... ... N: Conclusion: There is no being who travels from the past life to the present life. Rebirth-consciousness is one moment of citta that is produced by past kamma. It succeeds the dying-consciousness very rapidly, and then it falls away immediately. It does not come from anywhere and it does not go anywhere. What happens at the moment of dying and rebirth is not different from this moment: one citta arises because of conditions, then it falls away and is immediately succeeded by the next citta. **** N: (Qualification Question 2) Tep, do you find this clear? ............... T: Below is my " qualification exam essay" that answers your questions. I hope your misunderstanding is removed after reading it. But it doesn't matter if you still label Tep as non-Buddhist or not. That's not my concern. I think I am knowledgeable about the Vism, since I have the compltete volumes of both Thai translation and the English translation, and have read through them a few times, so far. ( The Thai version is amazingly close to the English translation; this shows that the Thai and the English translators had compatible skills in the Pali language.) I believe I have a clear understanding of atta and anatta, since I had learned the principles from the suttas long before starting to read the Vism about 7 years ago. My deeper understanding, however, came this year after seven years of contemplation that started in the year 2000. Thus, I claim to understand that the Khandhas (or ayatanas, dhatus, rupa & nama) are neither attas(ego identities) that are permanent and travel from one bhava to the next("eternalism view"), nor are they terminated after death("annihilationism view"). Yet, the fetter that this body & mind is 'I' is still dormant because of the perception continuity of the past states (although they already passed away with no residuals) to the present moment. So, I believe that 'I', a person who is called Tep, exists now but he is different from the past (each younger and better-looking person who existed in each fleeting moment-- that was real only in each time cross section). Of course, Tep tomorrow will be different from Tep tody, and yet the two are not separate identities. This perspective does not contradict with the Dependent Origination and the law of kamma, i.e. some vipakas of a kamma in the past are passed on to the present moment and/or future moments. Why? Because the continuity of the past and present moments explains the "flow" of kammas (See the Milinda Panha). I also know that any moment I can let go of the view that 'Thais is mine', 'That's who I am', 'This is my self' in the khandhas, there will be no clinging (upadana) as the condition for a new bhava (rebirth) to arise again. Here, 'self' is not a soul or a permanent identity, but rather a mind-state or belief, or view (attaanudi.t.thi) that is conditioned by tanha and ditthi in the khandhas. I also know that the 'I am' fetter (conceit) is a delusion. However, the impermanent existence of Tep in any given fleeting moment (past, future, or prsent) is not an illusion. The following view, "Thus whenever an experienced, learned, and wise man examines the six sense- organs, eye, ear, nose, tongue, body or mind-organ, then all these things appear to him as delusive, empty and deceitful..." [SN 35.197] is the right view of an ariyan; this view does not imply that the ariyan himself (defined in that moment) did not exist. Therefore, I can rightfully say that the not-self perspective of mine as described above is certainly not in disagreement with Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 166. Further, I also understand the following sutta quote very clearly, using the same not-self perspective as described above. "I am" is a delusion. "This I am" is a delusion. "Corporeal shall I be" is a delusion. "Uncorporeal shall I be" is a delusion. "Endowed with perception shall I be" is a delusion. "Without perception shall I be" is a delusion. "Neither with nor without perception shall I be" is a delusion. Delusion is a sickness, an ulcer, a thorn. — SN 35.207 [The Three Basic Facts of Existence III. Egolessness (Anatta) Collected essays] Nina, do you find my explanation above clear? Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Tep, > You and James make good points, also others, including Lodewijk, are > wondering and thinking about these things. ... ... > > Metta and practice: very relevant point you make here and it should > be explained. > > I try this again in post to Han tomorrow, in the perfections corner. > Satipatthana and the perfections are closely related. Perfections: > those are practice in daily life. Understanding of nama and rupa is > most relevant to our social life, supports the brahmaviharas. > > Nina. > #75681 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 8:32 pm Subject: Re: Vism.XVII,183 Vism.XVII,184 Vism.XVII,185 nichiconn Path of Purity, p.669: Because the preparation for demerit yields its result by way of rebirth in one world of sense, four matrices, the remaining three courses, one duration of consciousness called different in body same in perception, and such a sentient abode, therefore it is the cause, as said above, at rebirth and in procedure of seven classes of resultant consciousness in one world, four matrices, three courses, one station of consciousness and one sentient abode. Since the preparation for stationariness yields its result by way of rebirth in one world of the formless, one matrix, the apparitional, one course of the devas, three conscious durations beginning with the sphere of the infinity of space, four sentient abodes beginning with the same, therefore, as said above, it is the cause, at rebirth and in procedure, of four classes of consciousness in one world, one matrix, one course, three conscious durations, four sentient abodes. Thus: By virtue of procedure and rebirth In life and so on, these activities Are to be known as causes such of those. This is the substance of the discourse on the clause "Conditioned by activities consciousness comes to pass." #75682 From: "colette" Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 12:57 pm Subject: Satipatthani? ksheri3 Group, This is a GREAT EXAMPLE OF MY IGNORANCE: Is this satipatthana that EVERYBODY IS SOOOOOOOO CONSUMED WITH nothing more than a part of the sit-com "Gilligan's Island"? Where is the progress in maintaining this extreme focus ofn a single subject that I doubt people could care about after all this time and effort put in to trying to move the herd of cattle to a certain position as they go to slaughter. <...> toodles, colette #75683 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 11:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Virtue & Demerit nilovg Hi Larry, Kusala can condition akusala by way of natural strong dependence- condition. But this refers only to the cittas of the 'individual' who has performed kusala and for whom there will be akusala later on. It does not pertain to the person to whom something was given. He has nothing to do with the kusala cittas of the giver nor of his akusala cittas. This helps us to see cause and effect. Nina. Op 30-aug-2007, om 0:36 heeft LBIDD@... het volgende geschreven: > The answer to the first question is yes, kusala can and usually does > condition akusala. If you give money to a terrorist obviously there > will > be the proliferation of akusala acts of body, speech, and mind. #75684 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 29, 2007 11:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness nilovg Dear Tep, thanks for your kind words. This is all right. Nina. Op 30-aug-2007, om 0:15 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > Then let me do just that -- from now when I want some clarifications > from you , then I will ask for your kind help. #75685 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 12:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge sarahprocter... Hi Scott (Tep, Han & all), --- Scott Duncan wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > Regarding: > > Sarah: "...Perhaps we can incorporate them all together when anyone > has the time..." > > Scott: I can work on this tonight and tomorrow morning, if you like. ... S: That would be great. Many thanks in advance. I appreciate all the work Tep, Han and you went to typing out - worth putting together. Perhaps there will be further discussion on it then too. Btw, many belated thanks for providing for all the work you went to in the Samma Ditthi Sutta corner, providing the Pali as well. (If anyone ever needs to access it, it's in U.P, 'Samma Ditthi sutta'. Action-packed full with good material. Metta, ======= #75686 From: "Andrew" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 12:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Virtue & Demerit corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Larry, > Kusala can condition akusala by way of natural strong dependence- > condition. But this refers only to the cittas of the 'individual' who > has performed kusala and for whom there will be akusala later on. It > does not pertain to the person to whom something was given. He has > nothing to do with the kusala cittas of the giver nor of his akusala > cittas. This helps us to see cause and effect. Hello Nina, Larry and Ken H Nina, thank you for looking for the text. Unfortunately, my text is not properly annotated and I cannot find the sutta. I will keep trying and let you know if I get a proper annotation. Larry, the way the issue was phrased i.e. whether all virtues are necessary for the holy life to bear fruit, leads me to think that the connection is between "observing virtue" and "the bearing of fruit" in one mindstream. So, like Nina, I think it is examining one stream of citta. Simple statements like "kusala conditions more kusala" - whilst technically true - are obviously not the complete picture. Conventionally, this sutta could be given a range of interpretations e.g. if, by practising the virtue of celibacy, lustful thoughts increase, celibacy should be abandoned for the holy life to bear fruit. :~(( Does that sound like the Buddha to you? That is why I posed the question to those folk who treat the Buddha's words as conventional advice about intentional doing how they would deal with this sutta. At present, not having access to alternative translations and the commentaries, this sutta only makes sense to me as a description of what happens (as opposed to a prescription about when to stop and start "observing virtues"). A work in progress. Thanks again for your help. Best wishes Andrew #75687 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 12:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- upasaka@... wrote: > My apologies, Jon! I mistook your post for being written by your > wife. > It must have been the reasonableness that threw me off! LOLOL! > Just kidding, Jon. ;-) Sorry for the mistake. ... S: Oh, seen too late - ignore the last one! Will try to write something more reasonable in the family tradition later, LOLOL! S. #75688 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 12:34 am Subject: Re: Interpretations [Re: [dsg] Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness] sarahprocter... Hi Howard (Jon & Swee Boon), --- upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Sarah (and Swee Boon) - > > In a message dated 8/29/07 5:35:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > jonabbott@... writes: > > > >The commentaries were not spoken by the Buddha. > > > > That's correct. By definition, the commentaries are not the words of > > the Buddha himself, they are elucidations by others on the words of > > the Buddha. <...> > I agree with what you said here, Sarah. > When there is a sutta that isn't perfectly clear to me, I'm eager > to > hear other understandings - those of commentators long passed on and > whose > interpretations were reported by Buddhaghosa, those of modern > commentators, and > the perspectives of fellow Buddhist wayfarers. <...> ... S: I think you meant your entire post to be addressed to Jon (& Swee Boon), not me for a change! Jon's in Fiji and I'm in Hong Kong, so no team-work possible on posts either these days!! Metta, Sarah ======= #75689 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 1:18 am Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge jonoabb Hi Swee Boon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi Jon, > > > It is very relevant. Satipatthana is awareness of a presently > > arising dhamma. > > I don't accept this definition of satipatthana, as I have said in a > recent post to Sarah. Then we may be talking at cross-purposes. What is your understanding of what satipatthana is? > > Audible data that has been heard may be perceived as music or words > > forming part of a conversation, but "music" and "words" is a > > product of thinking about (i.e., processing) the audible data. > > How is the processing done? Describe with an example. Take listening to speech. As I understand the position reflected in the teachings, at the time of (mere) sound being experienced by hearing consciousness, there is no 'voice', no 'speaker', no 'word'. These are all things that are 'recognised' a split second later after the audible object just heard has been 'thought about'. > > The world is not at all the way it appears to be ;-)). > > Is this a claim that you have insighted a rupa that lasts for a > billionth of a second? Not at all! Just a way of explaining, no doubt imperfectly, what I have gleaned from the texts. Jon #75690 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 1:27 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness jonoabb Hi Howard --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Jon (and Sarah & Swee Boon) - > ... > ======================== > My apologies, Jon! I mistook your post for being written by your wife. > It must have been the reasonableness that threw me off! LOLOL! No more reasonable than usual, I'd have thought. Perhaps it was thinking the post was written by someone else that allowed it to be seen as reasonable!! > Just kidding, Jon. ;-) Likewise ;-)) > Sorry for the mistake. No problem. Jon #75691 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 1:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Virtue & Demerit sarahprocter... Hi Andrew, Nina, Larry & all, --- Andrew wrote: > Nina, thank you for looking for the text. Unfortunately, my text is > not properly annotated and I cannot find the sutta. I will keep trying > and let you know if I get a proper annotation. ... Yes, there was a mistake in the ref. It's in Bk of 3a, Ch on Ananda, 78 (in PTS, it's titled 'Service', p.204 in our copy, Nina). This is the transl from the Metta site (someone else may add the Pali): (excuse the squiggles): >8 Sãlabbatasuttaü- The bond in virtues. 79. The same origin ... re ... approached the Blessed One, worshipped and sat on a side. Then the Blessed One said to venerable ânanda: ânanda, is the holy life bound with all its virtues attended to, bring fruitful results? Venerable sir, it is not so, in a certain way. If so ânanda, explain yourself. Venerable sir, when practising the virtues in the holy life, if demeritorious thoughts increase and meritorious thoughts decrease practising such virtues are not fruitful. Venerable sir, when practising the virtues in the holy life, if demeritorious thoughts decrease and meritorious thoughts increase practising such virtues are fruitful. Saying it, venerable ânanda waited for the approval of the Teacher. Then venerable ânanda knowing I am approved got up from his seat worshipped the Blessed One and circumambulating the Blessed One went away. Soon after venerable ânanda had gone away, the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus: Bhikkhus, ânanda is a trainer. A comparison for his wisdom is rare.< ***** While I'm at it, I think this is the other sutta (Mettanet transl): Bk 4s, ch 14 Puggalavaggo http://mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara-Nikaya/Anguttara2/4-catukk\ anipata/014-puggalavaggo-e.html >10. Vàdisuttaü Ý Arguments 014.10. Bhikkhus, these four are arguments. What four? Bhikkhus, there is an argument which concludes according to the meaning not the letters. There is an argument which concludes according to the letters not the meaning. There is an argument which concludes according to the meaning and the letters. There is an argument which concludes neither according to the meaning nor the letters. Bhikkhus, these four are arguments. Bhikkhus, it is not possible that an argument could be concluded according to meanings and letters endowed with reasons, conditions, causal relations and intended meaning.< **** Metta, Sarah ====== #75692 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 2:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nilovg Dear Tep, Op 30-aug-2007, om 2:49 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > Below is my " qualification exam essay" that answers your > questions. I hope your misunderstanding is removed after reading it. > But it doesn't matter if you still label Tep as non-Buddhist or not. > That's not my concern. ------- N: I do not think of you in that way. No exam. I know about your extensive knowledge of the Tipitaka. Han also betrayed that you and he are making a deepgoing study of the anapanasati sutta which you once partly published here. I need some time to read your post and will react or add a few things later on when time permits. Thank you very much for all your efforts. Nina. #75693 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 2:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (06) nilovg Dear Han, Op 29-aug-2007, om 5:52 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > We should know the > right purpose of listening: the development of > pa~n~naa that can eradicate defilements. In this way > the perfections can begin to develop while we listen. -------- N: When we listen with sati sampaja~n~na, we consider what we hear and we begin to understand that whatever appears is dhamma, a conditioned reality. It is this kind of understanding that leads to a lessening of clinging to the idea of self. When we have the right purpose the perfections begin to develop. We used to apply ourselves to daana with an idea of self who gives, or we had expectations to receive gratefulness from the other person or a happy rebirth as result. Or we used to give with partiality, giving only to people we liked. But when understanding of realities grows kusala citta can arise without there being expectations to gain something for oneself. Dana and metta will be purer, they can become perfections when one sees them as means of having less clinging to self. We shall have more concern for others instead of thinking of our own welfare. This means that the perfection of renunciation also develops. As to the perfection of siila, this is the performing of kusala through body and speech. Also while we are listening and considering the Dhamma there is siila and this can become a perfection. We read in the chapter on siila: 'We may consider the perfections that we are beginning to develop. We are interested in listening to the Dhamma and learning about the practice in accordance with the Dhamma. We need the perfection of energy, viriya, in order to be able to listen. If there is no energy or right effort, we do not come to listen to the Dhamma, but we rather listen to another subject that gives us pleasure and entertainment. When we listen to the Dhamma we also need the perfection of patience, khanti, because sometimes we have to listen to what does not interest us so much. ' We may not quite understand what we hear and then we should listen and carefully consider again and again what we hear. We know that we have to travel a long, long way to reach the other shore, and therefore patience is needed to investigate seeing, visible object and all realities that appear over and over again, without becoming tired or bored. Our clinging to self or persons who exist is so deeply rooted. When listening to the dhamma pa~n~naa grows. We read in the chapter on siila: By listening we can be inspired to study and practise the dhamma with sincerity, and this is the perfection of truthfulness. As to determination, we just read in the intro: As to the perfection of equanimity, this is evenmindedness with regard to the worldly conditions, such as gain and loss, praise and blame. As understanding grows we become convinced that whatever appears through one of the six doorways is dhamma, conditioned reality, there will be more evenmindedness towards the contrarieties of life and to contrarious conduct of people. Listening to the Dhamma and the development of right understanding can have a far-reaching effect on our life, including our attitude towards others. Nina. #75694 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 3:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nilovg Hi Howard, the wavy part is to me only partly buyable. Take the first javanacitta, conditioning the second one, yes, then there are different intensities of them. As to ruupa: this is weak at its arising moment and cannot condition nama by way of object or base, it can do so after its arising. As to citta: this is strong at its arising moment. I like to follow the Abhidhamma and Co here. That is for precision. Nina. Op 29-aug-2007, om 22:58 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I have more of a wave-picture in mind for dhammas, > namely gradually arising, peaking, and subsiding, without well- > delineated > starting and ending points, and with one mindstate shading into the > next. So, for > example, a heat sensation or a hardness sensation or an emotion, > any of these, > is not instantaneous and is not unchanging, but grows, peaks, and > diminishes, > even varying in exact character. #75695 From: han tun Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 4:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (06) hantun1 Dear Nina, Thank you very much for your very useful elaboration on the important aspects of Perfections. To me, three things stand out in your post. (1) We should know the right purpose of listening: the development of pa~n~naa that can eradicate defilements. In this way the perfections can begin to develop while we listen. Your current post elaborates comprehensively on this important aspect of the “right purpose “of listening to the Dhamma in the development of perfections, and I am grateful to you for that. (2) In the development of perfections, we should have more concern for others instead of thinking of our own welfare. A Burmese scholar, U Shwe Aung, in his book on the Buddha, also emphasized on this fact that only with altruism the perfections can become perfections. (3) In the development of perfections, it is important to have less clinging to “self.” But at times, it is difficult for me not to cling to self, because, as you have written, our clinging to self or persons who exist is so deeply rooted. For example, let me quote passages from Anattaalakkhana sutta. (a) The Buddha said: “Bhikkhus, form is nonself. For if, bhikkhus, form were self, this form would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible to have it of form: ‘Let my form be thus; let my form not be thus.’ But because form is nonself, form leads to affliction, and it is not possible to have it of form: ‘Let my form be thus; let my form not be thus.’” I have no difficulty in accepting this argument, because it demonstrates the nature of anattaa as “no control” over the five aggregates. (b) Next, the Buddha asked “Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self’?” I also have no difficulty to say “No, venerable sir” to this question, because this question demonstrates the characteristic of anattaa on the basis of the other two characteristics, anicca and dukkha, taken conjointly. (c) Next, the Buddha said: “therefore, bhikkhus, any kind of form whatsoever, -----, all form should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’” Here also, I have no difficulty to accept “na meso attaa ti”, this is not my atta, if the atta means the kind of examples of atta given in the twenty personality belief (sakkaaya ditthi or atta ditthi), because I do not have such wrong views in the first place. However, if anattaa means “no-being”, “no-Han”, “no tree”, “no-computer”, etc., then it is difficult for me to accept. It is not the inadequacy in the explanations given by the learned members of DSG, but the fault lies with me. My understanding on this particular issue may be like unpolished rice. The husk has been removed, but the rice is not polished yet and it is still brown. It is not the fault of the milling machine, but the rice itself may not wish to be polished! Anyway, thank you very much for your kind explanations. Respectfully, Han --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Han, > Op 29-aug-2007, om 5:52 heeft han tun het volgende > geschreven: > > > We should know the > > right purpose of listening: the development of > > pa~n~naa that can eradicate defilements. In this > way > > the perfections can begin to develop while we > listen. > -------- #75696 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 4:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: audio: what is satipatthana. sarahprocter... Dear Nina & all Yes, a very good quote. Thx for sharing. --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Sujin: It is actually so natural, it is like any reality that is > appearing. We can learn to see the difference between the moments of > sati and the moments it does not arise. > When sati arises it arises naturally. There is no thinking of > concepts, it attends to the characteristic of a reality very > naturally, because the object is not different from the objects that > usually appear through the sense-doors or the mind-door. They are > ordinary touching, seeing, hearing or thinking. > If we think that we shall stand up or do this or that, that is > thinking of the next moment, going past the reality that is appearing > now. The right sati is attention to the reality that has arisen and > is now appearing, we should never go further than that. > One understands what satipatthana is when right understanding begins > to understand a characteristic which is now appearing naturally and > this is the only way not to be enslaved by lobha. One does not > realize how much one is enslaved. ... S: So true....enslaved all the time by lobha! Metta, Sarah ========== #75697 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 5:00 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (65) nichiconn dear friends, 12. So.lasanipaato 1. Pu.n.naatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa part 8 Verse: 241. "Sagga.m nuuna gamissanti, sabbe ma.n.duukakacchapaa; naagaa ca susumaaraa ca, ye ca~n~ne udake caraa. 241. Now [if this is true], all frogs and turtles will go to heaven, and alligators and crocodiles and the other water dwellers. Cy: Tattha naagaati vijjhasaa. Susumaaraati kumbhiilaa. Ye ca~n~ne udake caraati ye ca~n~nepi vaarigocaraa macchamakaranandiyaavattaadayo ca, tepi sagga.m nuuna gamissanti devaloka.m upapajjissanti ma~n~ne, udakaabhisecanaa paapakammato mutti hoti ceti attho. 241. There, alligators (naagaa) means: alligators (vijjhasaa)*. Crocodiles (susumaara) means: crocodiles (kumbhiilaa). And the other water dwellers means: and the other beings living in the water, fish, sea monsters, conches spiralling to the right, etc. They will go to heaven, I think they will be reborn in a deva world, if there is release from evil action in ablution in water. That is the meaning. *Not in PED. KRN prefers the reading in Ce: nakka ti jhasaa ("crocodile means: alligator"). See EV II, p.107, for a discussion of these words). Verse: 242. "Orabbhikaa suukarikaa, macchikaa migabandhakaa; coraa ca vajjhaghaataa ca, ye ca~n~ne paapakammino; dakaabhisecanaa tepi, paapakammaa pamuccare. 242. Sheep butchers, pork butchers, fishermen, animal trappers, thieves and executioners, and other evil doers, even they will be released from their evil action by ablution in water. Cy: Orabbhikaati urabbhaghaatakaa. Suukarikaati suukaraghaatakaa. Macchikaati keva.t.taa. Migabandhakaati maagavikaa. Vajjhaghaataati vajjhaghaatakamme niyuttaa. 242. Sheep butchers means: those who kill sheep. Pork butchers means: those who kill pigs. Fishermen (macchikaa) means: fishermen (keva.t.taa). Animal trappers means: hunters. Executioners means: engaged in the work of an exectutioner. Verse: 243. "Sace imaa nadiyo te, paapa.m pubbe kata.m vahu.m; pu~n~nampi maa vaheyyu.m te, tena tva.m paribaahiro. 243. If these streams carried away the evil you had previously done, they would carry away your merit too. Thereby you would be devoid of both. Cy: Pu~n~nampi maa vaheyyunti imaa aciravati-aadayo nadiyo yathaa tayaa pubbe kata.m paapa.m tattha udakaabhisecanena sace vahu.m niihareyyu.m, tathaa tayaa kata.m pu~n~nampi imaa nadiyo vaheyyu.m pavaaheyyu.m. Tena tva.m paribaahiro assa tathaa sati tena pu~n~nakammena tva.m paribaahiro virahitova bhaveyyaati na ceta.m yuttanti adhippaayo. Yathaa vaa udakena udakorohakassa pu~n~napavaahana.m na hoti, eva.m paapapavaahanampi na hoti eva. Kasmaa? Nhaanassa paapahetuuna.m appa.tipakkhabhaavato. Yo ya.m vinaaseti, so tassa pa.tipakkho. Yathaa aaloko andhakaarassa, vijjaa ca avijjaaya, na eva.m nhaana.m paapassa. Tasmaa ni.t.thamettha gantabba.m "na udakaabhisecanaa paapato parimuttii"ti. 243. They would carry away your merit too means: just as if these rivers such as the Aciravatii carry away, would take away, through ablution in water there the evil done before you, so too, the merit done by you these streams would carry away, would cause to be carried away. Thereby you would be devoid of, without meritorious actions. This is not proper; that is the meaning. Just as there is no merit carried off by the water for the [ritual] bather, in the same way no evil is carried off. Why? Because there is no opposition between bathing and the causes of evil. Whatever destroys another thinkg, it is the opposite of it, just as light [is opposed] to darkness, knowledge to ignorance, but bathing is not [opposed] to evil. Therefore, we must come to the conclusion here that going to perfect release from evil is not through ablution in water.* *See EV II, p.108, for a discussion of this passage. Cy: Tenaaha bhagavaa- "Na udakena sucii hoti, bahvettha nhaayatii jano; yamhi sacca~nca dhammo ca, so sucii so ca braahma.no"ti. (Udaa. 9; netti. 104). As the Blessed One said: A person does not become pure through water, or many would bathe there. Whoever possesses truth and the Doctrine, he is pure, he is a brahman. [Ud 6] ===tbc, connie. #75698 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 5:01 am Subject: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge indriyabala Dear Nina, - Thank you for the good intention to continue the discussion. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > Op 30-aug-2007, om 2:49 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > > > Below is my " qualification exam essay" that answers your > > questions. I hope your misunderstanding is removed after reading it. > > But it doesn't matter if you still label Tep as non-Buddhist or not. > > That's not my concern. > ------- > N: I do not think of you in that way. No exam. I know about your > extensive knowledge of the Tipitaka. Han also betrayed that you >and he are making a deepgoing study of the anapanasati sutta which >you once partly published here. > I need some time to read your post and will react or add a few things > later on when time permits. Thank you very much for all your efforts. > Nina. > T: It has been a pleasure for me to communicate with you, Nina. Please take your time to answer that post. Thank you for your interest in the Patisambhidamagga "deepgoing study" that I have with my admirable friend Han. As you know, the Treatise III of this book is about anapanasati. Tep ==== #75699 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 5:08 am Subject: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) scottduncan2 Dear Interested Parties: MN152: "And how, Ananda, is one a noble one with developed faculities? If he should wish: 'May I abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive,' he abides perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive. If he should wish: 'May I abide perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive,' he abides perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive ...'unrepulsive in the repulsive and unrepulsive......'.....'repulsive in the unrepulsive and repulsive...' May I, avoiding both the repulsive and unrepulsive, abide in equanimity, mindful and fully aware,' he abides in equanimity towards that, mindful and fully aware." "...Katha~ncaananda, ariyo hoti bhaavitindriyo. Idhaananda, bhikkhuno cakkhunaa ruupa.m disvaa uppajjati manaapa.m. Uppajjati amanaapa.m. Uppajjati manaapaamanaapa.m. So sace aaka"nkhati: 'pa.tikkuule appa.tikkuulasa~n~nii vihareyya'nti. Appa.tikkuulasa~n~nii tattha viharati. Sace aaka"nkhati: appa.tikkule pa.tikkulasa~n~nii vihareyya'nti. Pa.tikkuulasa~n~nii tattha viharati. Sace aaka"nkhati: 'pa.tikkuule ca appa.tikkuule ca appa.tikkuulasa~n~nii vihareyya'nti. Appa.tikkaalasa~n~nii tattha viharati. Sace aaka"nkhati: appa.tikkuule ca pa.tikkuule ca pa.tikkuulasa~n~nii vihareyya'nti. Pa.tikkuulasa~n~nii tattha viharati. Sace aaka"nkhati: 'pa.tikkuula.m ca appa.tikkuula.m ca taduubhaya.m abhinivajjetvaa upekkhako vihareyya.m sato sampajaano'ti. Upekkhako tattha viharati sato sampajaano. Puna ca para.m aananda, bhikkhuno sotena sadda.m sutvaa uppajjati manaapa.m... Puna ca para.m aananda, bhikkhuno ghaanena gandha.m ghaayitvaa uppajjati manaapa.m. Uppajjati amanaapa.m. Uppajjati manaapaamanaapa.m... Puna ca para.m aananda, bhikkhuno jivhaaya rasa.m saayitvaa uppajjati manaapa.m. Uppajjati amanaapa.m. Uppajjati manaapaamanaapa.m.... Puna ca para.m aananda, bhikkhuno kaayena pho.t.thabba.m phusitvaa uppajjati manaapa.m. Uppajjati amanaapa.m. Uppajjati manaapaamanaapa.m... Puna ca para.m aananda, bhikkhuno manasaa dhamma.m vi~n~naaya uppajjati manaapa.m. Uppajjati amanaapa.m uppajjati manaapaamanaapa.m. Eva.m kho aananda, ariyo hoti bhaavitindriyo." Sincerely, Scott. #75700 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 5:23 am Subject: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) scottduncan2 Dear All, Note: "The P.tisambhidaamagga calls this practice "the noble supernormal power" (ariya iddhi) and explains it thus (ii.212): To abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive, one pervades a repulsive being with loving-kindness, or one attends to a repulsive object (either animate or inanimate) as a mere assemblage of impersonal elements. To abide perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive, one pervades a (sensually) attractive person with the idea of the foulness of the body, or one attends to an attractive object (either animate or inanimate) as impermanent. The third and fourth methods involve the application of the first and second contemplations to both repulsive and unrepulsive objects, without discrimination. The fifth method involves the avoidance of joy and sorrow in response to the six sense objects, thus enabling one to abide in equanimity, mindful and fully aware. T: The original words of the Patism. are as follows: "Although this fivefold contemplation is ascribed to the arahant as a power perfectly under his control, elsewhere the Buddha teaches it to bhikkhus still in training as a way to overcome the three unwholesome roots. See AN 5:144/iii 169-70; and for a thoughtful commentary on that sutta, see Nyanaponika Thera, 'The Roots of Good and Evil, pp 73-78." 27. What is Noble Ones' success? Here if the Bhikkhu should wish (1) 'May I abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive', he abides perceiving the unrepulsive there. If he should wish (2) 'May I abide perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive', he abides perceiving the repulsive there. If he should wish (3) 'May I abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive and the unrepulsive', he abides perceiving the unrepulsive there. If he should wish (4) 'May I abide perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive and the repulsive', he abides perceiving the repulsive there. If he should wish (5) 'Avoiding both [aspects] in the repulsive and the unrepulsive, may I abide in equanimity towards that, mindful and fully aware', he abides in equanimity towards that, mindful and fully aware. (1) How does he abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive? In the case of a disagreeable object he is intent upon it with loving- kindness, or he connects it with principles. That is how he abides perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive. (2) How does he abide perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive? In the case of an agreeable object he is intent upon it as foul, or he connects it with impermanence. That is how he abides perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive. (3) How does he abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive and the unrepulsive? In the case of a disagreeable and agreeable object he is intent upon it with loving-kindness, or he connects it with principles. That is how he abides perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive and the unrepulsive. (4) How does he abide perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive and the repulsive? In the case of an agreeable and disagreeable object he is intent upon it as foul, or he connects it with impermanence. That is how he abides perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive and the repulsive. (5) How does he, avoiding both [aspects] in the repulsive and the unrepulsive, abide in equanimity towards that, mindful and fully aware? [213] Here a bhikkhu, on seeing a visible object with the eye, is neither glad nor sorry; he abides in equanimity and fully aware. On hearing a sound with the ear, ... On smelling an odour with the nose, ... On tasting a flavour with the tongue, ... On touching a tangible object with the body, ... On cognizing an idea with the mind, he is neither glad nor sorry; he abides in equanimity, mindful and fully aware. That is how he, avoiding both [aspects] in the repulsive and the unrepulsive, abides in equanimity towards that, mindful and fully aware. This is the Noble Ones' success." H: Here is the Patisambhidaamagga text in Pali for Ariya iddhi. The numberings were made by me to be clear. I do not have English translation. "Katamaa ariyaa iddhi? (1) Idha bhikkhu sace aakankhati �pa.tikuule appa.tikuula sa~n~nii vihareyya�nti, appa.tikuula sa~n~nii tattha viharati. (2) Sace aakankhati �appa.tikuule pa.tikuula sa~n~nii vihareyya�nti, pa.tikuula sa~n~nii tattha viharati. (3) Sace aakankhati �pa.tikuule ca appa.tikuule ca appa.tikuula sa~n~nii vihareyya�nti appa.tikuula sa~n~nii tattha viharati. (4) Sace aakankhati �appa.tikuule ca pa.tikuule ca pa.tikuula sa~n~nii vihareyya�nti, pa.tikuula sa~n~nii tattha viharati. (5) Sace aakankhati �pa.tikuule ca appa.tikuule ca tadubhayam abhinivajjetvaa upekkhako vihareyyam sato sampajaano�ti upekkhako tattha viharati sato sampajaano. (1) Katham pa.tikuule appa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati? Ini.t.thasmim vatthusmim mettaaya vaa pharati, dhaatuto vaa upasamharati, evam pa.tikuule appa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati. (2) Katham appa.tikuule pa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati? I.t.thasmim vatthusmim asubhaaya vaa pharati, aniccato vaa upasamharati, evam appa.tikuule pa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati. (3) Katham pa.tikuule ca appa.tikuule ca appa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati? Ani.t.thasmim ca i.t.thasmim ca vatthusmim mettaaya vaa pharati, dhaatuto vaa upasamharati, evam pa.tikuule appa.tikuule ca appa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati. (4) Katham appa.tikuule ca pa.tikuule ca pa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati? I.t.thasmim ca ani.t.thasmim ca vatthusmim asubhaaya vaa pharati, aniccato vaa upasamharati, evam appa.tikuule ca pa.tikuule ca pa.tikuula sa~n~nii viharati. (5) Katham pa.tikuule ca appa.tikuule ca tadubhayam abhinivajjetvaa upekkhako viharati sato sampajaano? Idha bhikkhu cakkhunaa ruupam disvaa neva sumano hoti na dummano, upekkhako viharati sato sampajaano. Sotena saddam sutvaa � pe � Ghaanena gandham ghaayitvaa � pe � Jivhaaya rasam saayitvaa � pe � Kaayena pho.t.thabbam phusitvaa � pe - Manasaa dhammam vi~n~naaya neva sumano hoti na dummano, upekkhako viharati sato sampajano. Evam pa.tikuule ca appa.tikuule ca tadubhayam abhinivajjetvaa upekkhako viharati sato sampajaano, ayam ariyaa iddhi." Sincerely, Scott. #75701 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 5:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge sarahprocter... Hi James (& Tep), --- buddhatrue wrote: > > --- Tep Sastri wrote: > > > T: I doubt it very much that the "characteristic of no-self" implies > > > there is no person who suffers. > > .... > > S: see the Vism passage just discussed [Ch. XVII > >171] about 'no experiencers' which you liked. .... >J: I just popped in, because I have no time to post regularly, and this > post caught my eye. Sarah, you just keep going back again and again > to this quote from the Vism. to prove that anatta means people (or > entities) don't exist, but that isn't at all what anatta means. ... S: Thanks for popping in. I appreciate that. I know the beginning of a school year is always a very busy time. Now, I thought you liked the Vism. too. I think the meaning of anatta (i.e not atta) is broader than that, but certainly only the paramattha dhammas (cittas, cetasikas, rupas and nibbana) actually exist, as discussed in another thread. ... >J: You can't provide any quotes from the Buddha stating that people don't > exist. ... S: I could provide many where he indicates what the 'All' is. No 'people' included. .... >J: Maybe it would be productive to look at this subject from a > different angle. Once, when a wanderer asked the Buddha if there is a > self or not, the Buddha refused to answer. He explained, in part, to > Ananda: > > "And if I — being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is no > self — were to answer that there is no self, the bewildered > Vacchagotta would become even more bewildered: 'Does the self I used > to have now not exist?'" > > This shows that to the Buddha "Atta" or "Self" is something which > people believe they possess, not something which they are. Realize, > the wanderer asked "Is there a Self?" He didn't ask "Do I exist?" > When the Buddha taught anatta he wasn't teaching that people don't > exist, he was teaching that individual souls, unchangeable essences, > Selves, don't exist. .... S: Now you're talking about personality belief, sakkaya ditthi. There are 20 kinds, 4 types for each of the khandhas. The first is the belief that self is identical with the khandhas, the second that it is contained in them, the third that is is independent of them and the fourth that it is the owner of them. Vacchagotta strongly held onto the last of these. .... >J: To equate anatta with "no beings" is completely against the Dhamma. .... S: It all depends how we read the Dhamma. Even when it is talking about people and beings, I take this to be conventional usage and that in fact only the khandhas arise and pass away at this moment. For example, take SN, Khandhasamyutta, 22:1 The Burden (Bodhi transl): "And what, bhikkhus, is the burden? It should be said: the five aggregates subject to clinging...." "And what, bhikkhus, is the carrier of the burden? It shoud be said: the person, this venerable one of such a name and clan. This is called the carrier of the burden." ... S: Oh, so the Buddha clearly says in this sutta that there is a person who carries the khandhas, the burden around, right? Conventionally, yes. In reality, no. Note this entire section is about the khandhas, showing that there only ever are the khandhas arising and falling away. This is an extract from B.Bodhi's note and a summary of the commentary on it: "The puggalavaada or "personalist" schools of Buddhism appealed to this passage as proof for the existence of the person (puggala) as a real entity, neither identical with the five aggregates nor different from them. It is the puggala, they claimed, that persists through change, undergoes rebirth, and eventually attains Nibbaana. This tenet was bluntly rejected by the other Buddhist schools, who saw in it a camourflaged version of the aatman, the self of the non-Buddhist systems.....The mainstream Buddhist schools held that the person was a mere convention (vohaara) or concept (pa~n~natti) derivative upon (upaadaaya) the five aggregates, not a substantial reality in its own right. For the Theravaada response, see the first part of Kvu, a lengthy refutation of the 'personalist' thesis." [S: I've quoted from the first part of this before - see under "Kathavatthu' in U.P or ask me to re-post] "Spk [S: the commentary to the sutta]: Thus, by the expression 'the carrier of the burden,' he shows the person to be a mere convention. For the person is called the carrier of the burden because it 'picks up' the burden of the aggregates at the moment of rebirth, maintains the burden by bathing, feeding, seating, and laying them down during the course of life, and then discards them at the moment of death, only to take up another burden of aggregates at the moment of rebirth." .... >J: It is against rebirth, kamma, dependent origination, etc. It is wrong > view and it interferes with the cultivation of the Brahma Viharas > (metta, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity). .... S: On the contrary, it is the idea of atta or atman or person that interferes with an understanding of rebirth, kamma, d.o. etc., because there is no comprehension of conditioned elements or khandhas. The less clinging to self and beings, the greater the cultivation of the Brahma Viharas too. The Buddha and his great disciples had not the slightest wrong idea of 'self', 'Self' or beings and yet they had the greatest accumulations for the brahma viharas. One still thinks of other people - but without any misconception. ... >J: It also makes > no sense at all since I exist and you exist- because if you didn't > exist you couldn't read this post! ;-)). ... S: No, 'I' can't read this post, except in a conventional sense. In reality, just cittas and cetasikas performing their tasks ;-)) ... >Really, Sarah, you should > have much more support for this position that just one quote from the > Vism. (taken out of context, BTW). ... S: And I haven't finished with it yet! Tep liked it. How about you, James? Did you agree or disagree with it? Is there really 'an experiencer' at this moment? If so, how is this 'experiencer' experienced? Through which door-way? Metta, Sarah ======== #75702 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:24 am Subject: Conditions, Ch 12, no 6. nilovg Dear friends, When viññåna (consciousness) is considered under the aspect of the Dependent Origination, it is vipåkacitta which arises at rebirth and also in the course of life. As a link of the Dependent Origination it is conditioned by sankhåra, kamma-formations. Because of kamma there will be the vipåka which is the patisandhi-citta and also vipåka arising throughout our life. We read in the above quoted sutta about the simile of a robber who is punished by the King; the King lets him be smitten with hundred spears in the morning, hundred at noon and hundred in the evening. The nutriment which is consciousness should be regarded as sorrowful as the pain suffered by that robber. We read: Even so, monks, do I declare that the food called consciousness should be regarded. When consciousness, monks, is well understood, nåma and rúpa [1] are well understood. When nåma and rúpa are well understood, I declare that there is nothing further that the ariyan disciple has to do. When we consider the three kinds of mental nutriment under the aspect of the Dependent Origination it reminds us of their dangers, of the fact that they lead to dukkha. At each moment citta experiences an object, but so long as we cling to the experiencing of objects we cannot see the disadvantages of the nutriments. We may not understand, for example, the danger of seeing. Seeing merely experiences visible object and it does not know whether the object is pleasant or unpleasant; at that moment there is no like or dislike. After the seeing, however, there are javana-cittas, and when we are not intent on what is wholesome the javana-cittas are akusala cittas. Most of the time they are akusala cittas. As soon as we have seen food lobha-múla-cittas tend to arise. The attachment may not be accompanied by pleasant feeing but by indifferent feeling and then we may not know that there is attachment. We do not all the time perform deeds through the body or through speech, but there are countless moments of thinking and these are mostly akusala. On account of the objects which are experienced through the senses defilements arise and they are accumulated from life to life. When we understand the danger of defilements we can be reminded to be aware of the realities which appear, also of defilements. Otherwise akusala can never be eradicated. ----------- 1. In the Dependent Origination consciousness is a link which conditions nåma and rúpa. ******* Nina. #75703 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:24 am Subject: Asoka, Ch 3, no 6. nilovg Dear friends, When we were in the Jeta Grove Khun Sujin stressed the difference between theoretical knowledge and the understanding acquired through satipaììhåna. She explained this with reference to the knowledge of kamma and vipåka. In the scriptures we read about kamma and vipåka, for example in the “Gradual Sayings” (Book of the Tens, Ch V, § 8, Conditions). In this sutta we read that the monk should contemplate again and again ten conditions. One of these is the knowledge that kamma is one’s own, kammassakata ñåna [1]. We read: I myself am responsible for my deed, I am the heir to my deed, the womb of my deed, the kinsman of my deed, I am he to whom my deed comes home. Whatever deed I shall do, be it good or bad, of that shall I be the heir... We may think about kamma and vipåka, but we cannot really grasp the deep meaning of the Buddha’s teaching if we do not have right understanding of nåma and rúpa, acquired through satipaììhåna. We may still have doubt about the truth of kamma and vipåka. When the first stage of insight arises paññå realizes the true nature of nåma and rúpa without thinking or naming realities. When seeing is the object of vipassanå ñåna, it is realized as the element which experiences, no self who experiences. It is conditioned, it is vipåka conditioned by kamma. Seeing is also conditioned by eyesense which is a rúpa produced by kamma [2], and by visible object. When there are no conditions dhammas cannot arise. Seeing can be realized as it is by paññå and then there is no need to think about it. Paññå immediately knows its nature as different from kusala citta or akusala citta. At this moment we have to think about realities and we think with an idea of self. We cannot clearly distinguish different cittas such as vipåkacitta and akusala citta. We cannot imagine how paññå can directly understand the truth when we have not reached that stage yet. At the moments of vipassanå ñåna there is no self and no world full of people and things. Paññå realizes that seeing arises when there are conditions, that nobody can cause the arising of seeing. It realizes that there is no self who receives the result of kamma. Paññå can realize that whatever appears is only an element, no self. Khun Sujin explained that at each stage of vipassanå ñåna there is kammassakata ñåna, understanding of kamma and vipåka. At the second stage of vipassanå ñåna there is the direct understanding of the conditions for nåma and rúpa, but even at the first stage there is kammassakata ñåna when paññå realizes nåma as nåma and rúpa as rúpa, as non-self. At each subsequent stage of insight the understanding of the true nature of nåma and rúpa becomes more rpofound. --------- 1. Saka means one’s own. Kammassakata means: kamma which is one’s own. 2. Rúpas can be conditioned by four factors: by kamma, citta, temperature and nutrition. Rúpas such as the sense-organs are conditioned by kamma. ******* Nina. Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge indriyabala Hi Sarah and James, - I'd like to point out a contradiction in Sarah's statements of no self. >S: The Buddha and his great disciples had not the slightest wrong idea of 'self', 'Self' or beings and yet they had the greatest accumulations for the brahma viharas. One still thinks of other people - but without any misconception. T: The last sentence, "One still thinks of other people - but without any misconception" implies that there are people -- i.e. they are real. But in the very same message, after quoting The Burden (Bodhi transl), you wrote : S: Oh, so the Buddha clearly says in this sutta that there is a person who carries the khandhas, the burden around, right? Conventionally, yes. In reality, no. ................................. T: By saying there is no person in reality, you essentially contradict yourself. The only way you can avoid the contradiction is to accept that the conventional world of beings is also real -- not only the paramattha dhammas are real. Am I fair to have said all that? Of course, you will deny. Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi James (& Tep), > .... > For example, take SN, Khandhasamyutta, 22:1 The Burden (Bodhi transl): > > "And what, bhikkhus, is the burden? It should be said: the five aggregates subject to clinging...." > > "And what, bhikkhus, is the carrier of the burden? It shoud be said: the > person, this venerable one of such a name and clan. This is called the carrier of the burden." > ... > S: Oh, so the Buddha clearly says in this sutta that there is a person who carries the khandhas, the burden around, right? > > Conventionally, yes. In reality, no. Note this entire section is about the > khandhas, showing that there only ever are the khandhas arising and > falling away. > #75705 From: han tun Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 7:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) hantun1 Dear Scott, Tep, Sarah and others, Thank you very much Scott for compiling the contributions by Sarah, Tep, you and me. When I compare these passages, I found that paragraph 11-16 of MN 152 is more or less the same as the preamble paragraph for Ariya iddhi in Patisambhidamagga. But what is more in Patisambhidamagga is more detailed description of each of these fivefold contemplation; for example in the first case it is mentioned as below. (1) How does he abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive? In the case of a disagreeable object he is intent upon it with loving-kindness, or he connects it with principles. That is how he abides perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive. Here it is to contemplate a repulsive being with loving-kindness, or to attend to a repulsive object (either animate or inanimate) as a mere assemblage of impersonal elements. I like this idea very much. But what is more in MN152 is in paragraph 4 [although it is not ascribed specifically to arahants] which is as follows. 4. “Now, Aananda, how is there the supreme development of the faculties in the Noble One’s Discipline? Here, Aananda, when a bhikkhu sees a form with the eye, there arises in him what is agreeable, there arises what is disagreeable, there arises what is both agreeable and disagreeable. He understands thus: ‘There has arisen in me what is agreeable, there has arisen what is disagreeable, there has arisen what is both agreeable and disagreeable. But that is conditioned, gross, dependently arisen; this is peaceful, this is sublime, that is, equanimity.’ The agreeable that arose, the disagreeable that arose, and both agreeable and disagreeable that arose cease in him and equanimity is established.” Also in paragraph 10, for a disciple in higher training, he is ashamed, humiliated and disgusted by the arising in him of these agreeable and disagreeable, and both agreeable and disagreeable. Therefore, I think that we should study the entire MN 152, together with the Patisambhidamagga, to be more profitable. Respectfully, Han #75706 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (06) nilovg Dear Han, thank you very much for your post and Lodewijk said that he was most impressed by it. Op 30-aug-2007, om 13:24 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > In the development of perfections, we should have > more concern for others instead of thinking of our own > welfare. > A Burmese scholar, U Shwe Aung, in his book on the > Buddha, also emphasized on this fact that only with > altruism the perfections can become perfections. -------- N: Very good, I hope you will quote more from this book. -------- > > H: (3) In the development of perfections, it is important > to have less clinging to “self.” But at times, it is > difficult for me not to cling to self, because, as you > have written, our clinging to self or persons who > exist is so deeply rooted. > For example, let me quote passages from > Anattaalakkhana sutta. > > (a) The Buddha said: “Bhikkhus, form is nonself.(snipped)... > > I have no difficulty in accepting this argument, > because it demonstrates the nature of anattaa as “no > control” over the five aggregates. > > (b) Next, the Buddha asked “Is what is impermanent, > suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded > thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self’?” > > I also have no difficulty to say “No, venerable sir” > to this question, because this question demonstrates > the characteristic of anattaa on the basis of the > other two characteristics, anicca and dukkha, taken > conjointly. > > (c) Next, the Buddha said: “therefore, bhikkhus, any > kind of form whatsoever, -----, all form should be > seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This > is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’” > > Here also, I have no difficulty to accept “na meso > attaa ti”, this is not my atta, if the atta means the > kind of examples of atta given in the twenty > personality belief (sakkaaya ditthi or atta ditthi), > because I do not have such wrong views in the first > place. -------- N: I think there is latent personality belief and so long as this is not eradicated it can condition all kinds of wrong view. At this moment we are seeing, but we can ask ourselves: is there some sense of I who sees? We are so used to this from childhood on. -------- > > H: However, if anattaa means “no-being”, “no-Han”, “no > tree”, “no-computer”, etc., then it is difficult for > me to accept. ------- N : Here is a mixture of conventional terms and absolute truth, and this leads to all kinds of misunderstandings. No-being is used in the texts: ni-satta, nijiiva, that is good. But as to Han, tree, computer, here we are in the conventional world. We have to use these terms to make ourselves clear. But we can learn that when touching a tree hardness appears, when smelling it, odour appears. Then there are the six worlds appearing through the six doorways, one at a time. The world in the ariyan sense. Not a contradiction, but another point of view. Thus, when we say: no tree, it depends from what point of view we are speaking. ------ > H: It is not the inadequacy in the > explanations given by the learned members of DSG, but > the fault lies with me. My understanding on this > particular issue may be like unpolished rice. The husk > has been removed, but the rice is not polished yet and > it is still brown. It is not the fault of the milling > machine, but the rice itself may not wish to be > polished! -------- N: Only when the four noble Truths have been realized the meaning of anatta will be perfectly clear. Before that we cannot expect much. -------- Nina. #75707 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:19 am Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nichiconn dear Tep, (James, Sarah, ...) T: By saying there is no person in reality, you essentially contradict yourself. The only way you can avoid the contradiction is to accept that the conventional world of beings is also real -- not only the paramattha dhammas are real. Am I fair to have said all that? Of course, you will deny. C: "Really!" smiling. We go back to the question of how 'real' is defined... as in 'arisen' etc., which concepts (such as 'person' and 'lists') do not, to my understanding, do. peace, connie #75708 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:34 am Subject: Re: Perfections Corner (06) nichiconn Dear Perfectionist, > personality belief (sakkaaya ditthi or atta ditthi), Don't the translators use "personality" in the sense of "the (mental and) physical body of a 'being'" so that say, 'tree' would also have/be 'a personality'? Just thinking of how sometimes you come across "identity (view)" instead of "person(ality)", etc. thank you, connie #75709 From: "nidive" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:35 am Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nidive Hi Howard, > Howard: I'm guessing you mean the following: > > "It would imply that there is only one door that we should ever > care about, the mind-door, since it is from this door that > perceptions & categories of complication would assail anyone." No, I mean this: > > When listening to music, of the 6 paragraphs of the sutta that > > I quoted, is it the paragraph concerning the ear that applies or > > is it the paragraph concerning the intellect that applies? > > Or both? I guess your answer would be "both", but I do not know how to fit your view with such an answer. > I don't know what constitutes "caring about". All our papanca is > mental. All our craving and aversion is mental. Because it may give the impression that one is beyond sensuality or it may give the impression that there is no such defilement known as sensuality. After all, concepts are not "strings of sensuality". It is a mind-door phenomenon. > Howard: That may be so. I won't get into a materialist versus > phenomenalist discussion with you except to say that I do not > believe that consciousness is a biproduct of matter. In a way, consciousness is a biproduct of matter and matter is a biproduct of consciousness. It is called dependent co-arising for good reason. I think the Buddha best summed this up in DN 15: ------------------------------------------------------------------ http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.15.0.than.html "'From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form.' Thus it has been said. And this is the way to understand how from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form. If consciousness were not to descend into the mother's womb, would name- and-form take shape in the womb?" "No, lord." "If, after descending into the womb, consciousness were to depart, would name-and-form be produced for this world?" "No, lord." "If the consciousness of the young boy or girl were to be cut off, would name-and-form ripen, grow, and reach maturity?" "No, lord." "Thus this is a cause, this is a reason, this is an origination, this is a requisite condition for name-and-form, i.e., consciousness." "'From name-and-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness.' Thus it has been said. And this is the way to understand how from name-and-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness. If consciousness were not to gain a foothold in name-and-form, would a coming-into-play of the origination of birth, aging, death, and stress in the future be discerned? "No, lord." "Thus this is a cause, this is a reason, this is an origination, this is a requisite condition for consciousness, i.e., name-and-form. "This is the extent to which there is birth, aging, death, passing away, and re-arising. This is the extent to which there are means of designation, expression, and delineation. This is the extent to which the sphere of discernment extends, the extent to which the cycle revolves for the manifesting (discernibility) of this world — i.e., name-and-form together with consciousness. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Swee Boon #75710 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 4:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Sarah & James) - In a message dated 8/30/07 10:32:07 AM Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: > Hi Sarah and James, - > > I'd like to point out a contradiction in Sarah's statements of no self. > > >S: The Buddha and his great disciples had not the slightest > wrong idea of 'self', 'Self' or beings and yet they had the greatest > accumulations for the brahma viharas. One still thinks of other people - > but without any misconception. > > T: The last sentence, "One still thinks of other people - > but without any misconception" implies that there are people -- i.e. they > are real. > ------------------------------------- Howard: Tep, one can think of unicorns without there being unicorns. As for people being real, this depends on what one means by 'real' and on what one means by 'people'. If by a "person" one only refers to a multitude of dhammas that are intricately and coherently interrelated via conditionality, most especially by kamma, there is no problem unless the convention that speaks of these dhammas as forming a unity is taken as more than mere convention. The person is "real" only in the sense that the underlying dhammas actually occur and are interrelated in a nontrivial way. The element of error enters in as soon as one takes seriously the speaking of the aggregate of dhammas involved as being or having an independent existence or self. --------------------------------------------------- But in the very same message, after quoting The Burden > > (Bodhi transl), you wrote : > > S: Oh, so the Buddha clearly says in this sutta that there is a person > who carries the khandhas, the burden around, right? Conventionally, > yes. In reality, no. > ................................. > > T: By saying there is no person in reality, you essentially contradict > yourself. The only way you can avoid the contradiction is to accept that > the conventional world of beings is also real -- not only the paramattha > dhammas are real. > > Am I fair to have said all that? Of course, you will deny. ------------------------------------------- Howard: I deny it as well. I see no contradiction unless one misattributes absolute truth to sentences that are merely conventionally true. Interpreting conventional truths as ultimate truths leads to such errors as saying persons are literal realities. Interpreting ultimate truths as conventional truths leads to such errors as saying in the conventional sense that nobody engages in practice. Conventional speech is figurative and abbreviational, whereas ultimate speech is literal. ------------------------------------------ > > Tep > === > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott > wrote: > > > >Hi James (& Tep), > > > .... > >For example, take SN, Khandhasamyutta, 22:1 The Burden (Bodhi > transl): > > > >"And what, bhikkhus, is the burden? It should be said: the five > aggregates subject to clinging...." > > > >"And what, bhikkhus, is the carrier of the burden? It shoud be said: the > >person, this venerable one of such a name and clan. This is called > the carrier of the burden." > >... > >S: Oh, so the Buddha clearly says in this sutta that there is a person > who carries the khandhas, the burden around, right? > > > >Conventionally, yes. In reality, no. Note this entire section is about the > >khandhas, showing that there only ever are the khandhas arising and > >falling away. > > > ======================= With metta, Howard #75711 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 5:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 8/30/07 11:40:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > >Howard: I'm guessing you mean the following: > > > >"It would imply that there is only one door that we should ever > >care about, the mind-door, since it is from this door that > >perceptions &categories of complication would assail anyone." > > No, I mean this: > > >>When listening to music, of the 6 paragraphs of the sutta that > >>I quoted, is it the paragraph concerning the ear that applies or > >>is it the paragraph concerning the intellect that applies? > >>Or both? > > I guess your answer would be "both", but I do not know how to fit > your view with such an answer. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, both. When a sound (that happens to be part of the music), an ear-door rupa, is heard as unpleasant, for example very loud or screechy, if one follows up with mental proliferation, it no longer is the sound per se that is reacted to but a mental substitute for it. Contact with the sound results in feeling it as unpleasant which then initiates a sankharic process of proliferation - a process of thought and emotion dealing with concepts. When the music per se is reacted to, one is already at that stage reacting to a concept. --------------------------------------------- > > >I don't know what constitutes "caring about". All our papanca is > >mental. All our craving and aversion is mental. > > Because it may give the impression that one is beyond sensuality or > it may give the impression that there is no such defilement known as > sensuality. After all, concepts are not "strings of sensuality". It > is a mind-door phenomenon. > > >Howard: That may be so. I won't get into a materialist versus > >phenomenalist discussion with you except to say that I do not > >believe that consciousness is a biproduct of matter. > > In a way, consciousness is a biproduct of matter and matter is a > biproduct of consciousness. It is called dependent co-arising for > good reason. I think the Buddha best summed this up in DN 15: > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.15.0.than.html > > "'From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form.' > Thus it has been said. And this is the way to understand how from > consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-and-form. If > consciousness were not to descend into the mother's womb, would name- > and-form take shape in the womb?" > > "No, lord." > > "If, after descending into the womb, consciousness were to depart, > would name-and-form be produced for this world?" > > "No, lord." > > "If the consciousness of the young boy or girl were to be cut off, > would name-and-form ripen, grow, and reach maturity?" > > "No, lord." > > "Thus this is a cause, this is a reason, this is an origination, this > is a requisite condition for name-and-form, i.e., consciousness." > > "'From name-and-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness.' > Thus it has been said. And this is the way to understand how from > name-and-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness. If > consciousness were not to gain a foothold in name-and-form, would a > coming-into-play of the origination of birth, aging, death, and > stress in the future be discerned? > > "No, lord." > > "Thus this is a cause, this is a reason, this is an origination, this > is a requisite condition for consciousness, i.e., name-and-form. > > "This is the extent to which there is birth, aging, death, passing > away, and re-arising. This is the extent to which there are means of > designation, expression, and delineation. This is the extent to which > the sphere of discernment extends, the extent to which the cycle > revolves for the manifesting (discernibility) of this world — i.e., > name-and-form together with consciousness. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------- Howard: I certainly accept the interdependence of vi~n~nana and namarupa. Namarupa provides the object for the vi~n~nana,and subject and object are mutually dependent, like two sheaves of reeds. ------------------------------------------- > > Swee Boon > > ====================== With metta, Howard #75712 From: "nidive" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 9:13 am Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nidive Hi Jon, > Then we may be talking at cross-purposes. what is your > understanding of what satipatthana is? I have no fixed definition of what satipatthana is. I try to follow what the Buddha taught in DN 22 as close as possible. It's a process of discovery, and there could only be a fixed definition perhaps on the day I attain arahant-ship. Or maybe it doesn't really matter by then since it would be almost (perhaps certainly) the same as that taught in DN 22. But as far as I can tell, satipatthana does not concern only the "present moment". Neither is it just a special moment of sati. > Take listening to speech. As I understand the position reflected > in the teachings, at the time of (mere) sound being experienced by > hearing consciousness, there is no 'voice', no 'speaker', no > 'word'. These are all things that are 'recognised' a split second > later after the audible object just heard has been 'thought about'. What do you mean by "thought about"? Thinking can be a very tiring process. Thinking about a billion "audible objects" can be a daunting task, if not impossible. Swee Boon #75713 From: Dieter Möller Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 9:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hi- how could you! moellerdieter Hi Colette (and Jim) , nice to meet you .. There are some misunderstandings , so let me explain 'how I could ' ;-) you wrote: ' How could you! "buddhism is all about suffering", in NO SUCH WAY IS IT ABOUT SUFFERING!' D: I said : 'Buddhism is all about suffering, its origin , its end and the way how to end suffering ..' these are not my words, but those of the Buddha , who emphasized that is all what is he teaching , i.e . the 4 Noble Truths, which present the fundament of Buddhism (including all schools) C: It is about the observation of SUFFERING; the COGNITION OF SUFFERING; the full realization of suffering, and the most important part, the path leading to somewhere OTHER THAN suffering.' D: who told you that, Colette ? is it , what you understood from DSG discussions ? The entrance of Buddhist understanding , the first Noble Truth , tells us about Dukkha, which is mostly translated by suffering , less popular unsatisfactoriness, misery , stress.. find any better word, which describes when you are unhappy due to negative feelings spreading from boredom to agony .. What you seem to jump to is Dukkha in brief: the 5 khanda attachment , which is reference to the background , the Law of Dependent Origination. The Abhidhamma - as far as I understand - is concerned with its details. Without determination to get rid of suffering, a path leading to the end of suffering isn't of any importance. Therefore the understanding is so prominent for a beginning right view, the first step of the Noble Path. You may have recognised that most people are accepting the ups and downs in life ,. more or less arranged with it , i.e. living with the motto : don't worry, be happy! Buddhism is for those, who don't accept it ..seeking a way out of it.. so the Path the Buddha described is the practise to end suffering , what happens then 'is not to be known but to be realised' ( as Howard put it recently). To talk about 'path leading to somewhere OTHER THAN suffering.' is misleading and so I see any discussion about nibbana. C: Take for instance my roomates boyfriend and ..snip D: Thanks for sharing the situation with your room mate , all what comes into my mind to comment is that the Buddha stressed so often the necessity to associate with good people..the better ones .) C: I hope Jim doesn't listen to this and think that suffering is all there is to buddhism. D: I don't know whether Jim is listening .. it is up to him and actually I find your remark not very nice.. C: BTW, Dieter, when I was looking through my files the other day, I spoke of here yesterday, one of the plastic bags that holds the many divisions of work I have was CHAOSMATRIX or CHAOS MAGIK, do you happen to know a Fr. U.D. that gave a beautiful description of the Psychological Model of Magik? I think he and a few Russian alchemists I know, live in Germany now. D: my curiosity of esoterics is not really significant , the Jhanas - as a side effect - may involve some of the magic you mention... the danger is attachment to it.. But let me recommend to you an essay from a very highly respected forest monk, Ajahn Cha , " Understanding Dukkha " , here you (and hopefully Jim too) find the link : http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha245.htm with Metta Dieter #75714 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 12:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nilovg Dear Sarah, Useful for many if you could repost that part of Kathavatthu. Thank you, Nina. Op 30-aug-2007, om 14:55 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > For the Theravaada > response, see the first part of Kvu, a lengthy refutation of the > 'personalist' thesis." [S: I've quoted from the first part of this > before > - see under "Kathavatthu' in U.P or ask me to re-post] #75715 From: han tun Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 3:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (06) hantun1 Dear Nina, I thank you very much for your very careful reply, and I thank Lodewijk for his appreciation of my post. Nina: Here is a mixture of conventional terms and absolute truth, and this leads to all kinds of misunderstandings. No-being is used in the texts: ni-satta, nijiiva, that is good. But as to Han, tree, computer, here we are in the conventional world. We have to use these terms to make ourselves clear. But we can learn that when touching a tree hardness appears, when smelling it, odour appears. Then there are the six worlds appearing through the six doorways, one at a time. The world in the ariyan sense. Not a contradiction, but another point of view. Thus, when we say: no tree, it depends from what point of view we are speaking. --------------- Han: Yes, Nina, it is a mixture of conventional terms and the absolute truth, and it depends on from what point of view we are speaking. If someone is speaking too much of absolute truth I cannot follow. The two truths (paramattha sacca and sammuti sacca) should be considered in its own merit. In the case of “no-being” also, we have to be very careful. If “no-being” is what the Buddha teaches, I wonder why he would have taken all the trouble to expound the Puggalapannatti, the fourth of seven Abhidhamma books, which shows the designation of individuals, classified in ten chapters of the book, after the manner of enumeration employed in Anguttara Nikaya? But, as you said, only when the four noble Truths have been realized the meaning of anatta will be perfectly clear, and before that we cannot expect much! Once again, thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #75716 From: han tun Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 3:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (06) hantun1 Dear Connie, I am not a perfectionist by any means, but if you think I am, I will be honored :<) I do not rely entirely on the correctness of English translations. Therefore, I always put the Pali words in brackets so the reader can know what I am referring to. The Pali words can never be translated satisfactorily into any language, my own native language including. Does a tree have a personality? Personality, I do not know, but, as you said about the identity, the trees do have their own identities (biija-niyaama). If you plant mango seed you can get only mango tree. Is it not?:>) BTW, I cannot cover the entire book of “The Perfections.” I am hoping that you would also present some of the chapters from the book, like you kindly did before in the Daana Corner. with metta and respect, Han --- L G SAGE wrote: > Dear Perfectionist, > > > personality belief (sakkaaya ditthi or atta > ditthi), > > Don't the translators use "personality" in the sense > of "the (mental and) physical body of a 'being'" so > that say, 'tree' would also have/be 'a personality'? > Just thinking of how sometimes you come across > "identity (view)" instead of "person(ality)", etc. > > thank you, > connie > #75717 From: "nidive" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:06 pm Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nidive Hi Howard, > Howard: Yes, both. When a sound (that happens to be part of the > music), an ear-door rupa, is heard as unpleasant, for example very > loud or screechy, if one follows up with mental proliferation, it > no longer is the sound per se that is reacted to but a mental > substitute for it. Contact with the sound results in feeling it > as unpleasant which then initiates a sankharic process of > proliferation - a process of thought and emotion dealing with > concepts. When the music per se is reacted to, one is already at > that stage reacting to a concept. I suppose what you are saying is that a loud or screechy sound is "described" by the sutta paragraph concerning the ear, but music is "described" by the sutta paragraph concerning the intellect. But that would cause a problem for me because it would mean that craving for music is not craving for sensuality since music is a concept that appears through the intellect. ------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.063.than.html There are these five strings of sensuality. Which five? Forms cognizable via the eye â€" agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing; sounds cognizable via the ear... aromas cognizable via the nose... flavors cognizable via the tongue... tactile sensations cognizable via the body â€" agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing. But these are not sensuality. They are called strings of sensuality in the discipline of the noble ones. ... And what is the diversity in sensuality? Sensuality with regard to forms is one thing, sensuality with regard to sounds is another, sensuality with regard to aromas is another, sensuality with regard to flavors is another, sensuality with regard to tactile sensations is another. This is called the diversity in sensuality. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Swee Boon #75718 From: han tun Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 7:13 pm Subject: Perfections Corner (07) hantun1 Dear All, I have finished the presentation of the chapter on “Introduction” of the book “The Perfections leading to Enlightenment” by Sujin Boriharnwanaket and translated by Nina van Gorkom. Next, which chapter shall I start to present? All perfections are equally important. It is like a package deal. If you take up one, the rest should also come up together. But, since I cannot present all at the same time, I will have to select a chapter to be presented first. A Burmese scholar, U Shwe Aung wrote that khanti paaramii is like a mother, upekkhaa paaramii is like a father and nekkhamma paaramii is like a physician. He gave the source as Ledi Sayadaw’s Uttama-purisa-diipnii (Manual on Noble Man). I do not have Ledi Sayadaw’s book, so I cannot say what was the reason for this comparison. But I like the idea, and I will take up the father first. ------------------------------ Chapter 10: The Perfection of Equanimity The Commentary to the “Basket of Conduct” defines the perfection of equanimity, upekkhaa, as follows: “Equanimity has the characteristic of promoting the aspect of neutrality; its function is to see things impartially; its manifestation is the subsiding of attraction and repulsion; reflection upon the fact that all beings inherit the results of their own kamma is its proximate cause.” The perfection of equanimity is evenmindedness, it is non-disturbance by controversial conduct of people or by trying events. If we do not develop satipa.t.thaana, we are easily affected by attachment and aversion and the citta is not calm. We encounter external objects which cause sadness and distress. Our unhappy mood is conditioned by unpleasant objects which appear through eyes, ears, nose, tongue and bodysense. People who are free from sorrow are unaffected by attachment and aversion with regard to people and events and this means that they have developed the perfection of equanimity. When people see someone who kills a snake, they believe that they have loving-kindness and compassion for the snake that is being killed, but in reality they are disturbed by aversion towards the person who kills the snake. One should be aware and investigate the citta at that moment: what type of citta arises when one thinks of the person who kills a snake? We may not have loving-kindness, but then, we can have equanimity when we realize that everyone receives the results of his deeds. When kusala cittas arise we may have loving-kindness and also compassion; we feel sorry for the person who commits akusala kamma, because he will receive the result of akusala kamma. To be continued. Metta, Han #75719 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 7:40 pm Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge indriyabala Hi Sarah (and James, Howard), - I am interested in your quote and commentary below. S (quoting B.Bodhi's note): "The puggalavaada or "personalist" schools of Buddhism appealed to this passage as proof for the existence of the person (puggala) as a real entity, neither identical with the five aggregates nor different from them. It is the puggala, they claimed, that persists through change, undergoes rebirth, and eventually attains Nibbaana. This tenet was bluntly rejected by the other Buddhist schools, who saw in it a camourflaged version of the aatman, the self of the non-Buddhist systems.....The mainstream Buddhist schools held that the person was a mere convention (vohaara) or concept (pa~n~natti) derivative upon (upaadaaya) the five aggregates, not a substantial reality in its own right." T: I think there are several meanings of "self" (atta). The personalist view above is just one of them. For example, another meaning of "self" is of a permanent ego identity, or a soul. I believe you prefer the mainstream Buddhist view of self as a "person" , i.e. it is derived from the five aggregates. Am I correct? Are the five aggregates real? If they are, then why is their derivative not real (does not exist), or not a "substantial reality in its own right" ? .......... "Spk [S: the commentary to the sutta]: Thus, by the expression 'the carrier of the burden,' he shows the person to be a mere convention. For the person is called the carrier of the burden because it 'picks up' the burden of the aggregates at the moment of rebirth, maintains the burden by bathing, feeding, seating, and laying them down during the course of life, and then discards them at the moment of death, only to take up another burden of aggregates at the moment of rebirth." T: I only see that this commentary supports existence of a person, the "carrier" of the burden of the five aggregates, like you, me, and Howard. The carrier's life exists, since s/he is defined by birth at the beginning of a whole life that is nothing but dukkha. What do you think? I hope you are not going to reply that the commentary just used the "conventional speech", and then jump to the familiar conclusion that a person is a mere "convention", not real. That reply would put us back at the square zero again. {:-) Please see my other post about the Buddha's approved definitions of atta from DN 9. Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi James (& Tep), > > --- buddhatrue wrote: > --- Tep Sastri wrote: > T: I doubt it very much that the "characteristic of no-self" implies > > > > there is no person who suffers. #75720 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:11 pm Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge indriyabala Dear Connie (James, Howard and others), - Your one-line approach makes it easy to answer. But a quick answer that depends on little information might not be correct. ............... >T: By saying there is no person in reality, you essentially contradict yourself. The only way you can avoid the contradiction is to accept that the conventional world of beings is also real -- not only the paramattha dhammas are real. Am I fair to have said all that? Of course, you will deny. C: "Really!" smiling. We go back to the question of how 'real' is defined... as in 'arisen' etc., which concepts (such as 'person' and 'lists') do not, to my understanding, do. T: I am not a bookworm, so my definition is based on my "real" understanding. Kamma and vipakas of kamma are real. Bhavas are real. The coming together of various khandhas, ayatanas, and dhatus are real. The Buddha's dicoveries are real. Those are my one-yuan definitions of some 'real things'. And I am interested in your definition of "real" too. Why are only paramattha dhammas real? [That is probably a 2000-year-old question.] Tep === #75721 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (06) philofillet Hi Han (and all) > > H: (3) In the development of perfections, it is important > > to have less clinging to "self.?EBut at times, it is > > difficult for me not to cling to self, because, as you > > have written, our clinging to self or persons who > > exist is so deeply rooted. Just popping by to tell you, Han, that since you decided that this book is worth studying in detail, I returned to it, and have found thta it is indeed very rich and much more inspirational and invigorating than Acharn Sujin usually is (in my opinion.) As for clinging to self, I find it impossible to believe that there is anyone here who can begin (or continue from past lives) to develop the perfections without not only clinging to but being energized and encouraged by the idea of being a person who is developing the perfections. It means that we are not wasting our very rare human birth. Worrying about clinging to self shouldn't get in the way of that. As we develop the perfection of panna, that clinging will gradually be weakened, loosened. And in the end - the very end - eradicated. Too much worrying about clinging to self when we are so prone to gross defilements is a kind of madness that deprives us of the Buddha's many wonderful remedies and prescribed practices for beginning to do what has to be done to get established on the path. Still no time to post, but thanks for steering me back towards this book. It's very good, very invigorating. Hi to all. Talk to you again, sooner or later! :) Metta, Phil #75722 From: "colette" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 5:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Hi- how could you! ksheri3 good Day Dieter, We seem to have been getting knit-picky on both sides i.e. you seem to think I said something which I didn't and I the same way thinking of things you said and didn't. We both have a good perspective of the Paths and I was considering taking some of Jim's statement about his everyday life with family, kids, home, work, etc. all being blended together at a single moment in his life (like so many others in our hectic society of 9-5 living) because through this I was going to apply attachment as a RESULTANT behavior from our good frined LOBHA and/or delusional consciousness. the ATTACHMENT reinforces the False View and the more one gets entangled in the FALSE VIEW the more difficult it is to remove oneself from it. It kindof relates to a person's ability to escape RIP TIDES and UNDERTOWS. As for my living conditions it is not of my choice it is merely better than living in a flop house or drunkards hotel. while I have many disagreements with the way my roomates live, the way they treat me, the way they treat others, etc. I can only use/apply those complaints as a means of grounding the teaching into a perspective of reality in the here & now, not in the "when the buddha was living and said" type of reality which is, as Jethro Tull once said, LIVING IN THE PAST and not doing anything with the past other than accepting the conditons that created the future, then, which would be the present now. It does no good for the purification of the mind, nor does it any good to help an individual see LIBERATION. The PAST DHARMA is fine as the past dharma and is VERY USEFULL to apply to the PRESENT DHARMA but each individual has to do that for themselves otherwise there would be and is NO EXPERIENCE that could even begin to be translated into WISDOM. While some may say that NO EXPERIENCE is the definition of SHUNYATA or SUNYATA it is just their lack of experience that CAUSES them to see an equality between no experience, having everything done for you as if you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth, and somehow gaining wisdom from sitting on your fat arse. Not implying that that is what you do Deiter. In fact you have giving a wonderful post/reply to my ignorance and I have no desire to touch it right now although there are petty little things that I can argue with you about but that serves no purpose toward the advancement of enlightenment. Hopefully Jim can see that we can disagree and still remain colleagues. Afterall, we are in the same boat, I mean riding in the same spacecraft called the planet Earth, no? I saw a wonderful show last night, saw it twice, on THE TIBETAN BOOK OF THE DEAD, and it continued to advance my understanding of it, even to see that what we both are in at this very moment is a BARDO of life; and well, the bit on Prof. Timothy Leary, Prof. Metzger, et al, book THE PSYCHEDELIC EXPERIENCE applying the teachings of the Tibetam Book of the Dead as a psychedelic trip were nice but I've not read this book yet. It sounds interesting since it was written back in his days as a Harvard U. prof. have a good night. I look forward to further discussions with you in the future dharma. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Dieter Möller wrote: > > Hi Colette (and Jim) , > > nice to meet you .. > > There are some misunderstandings , so let me explain 'how I could ' ;-) > > > you wrote: > > ' How could you! "buddhism is all about suffering", in NO SUCH WAY IS IT ABOUT SUFFERING!' > > D: I said : 'Buddhism is all about suffering, its origin , its end and the way > how to end suffering ..' these are not my words, but those of the Buddha , <....> #75723 From: "Andrew" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Virtue & Demerit corvus121 Hi Sarah Thank you for this (you always seem to have the Dhamma at your fingertips!). I will study it and see where I get. Best wishes Andrew #75724 From: "colette" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:26 pm Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge ksheri3 Hi Swee Bon, I think that Howard is simply trying to say that a certain Music may have been the CAUSE of an unpleasant sound. In the states we have our mythological version of Johhny Apple Seed that went around the countryside planting apple seeds wherever so that apple trees could grow and reach fruition. The heard Music is nothing more than the planting of the bija (seed) in the alaya-vijnana. Now the seed is CONDITIONING the mind as it germinates. The mind is conditioned to react negatively to certain sounds similar to that music that caused the original unpleasantness. Ah, but the mind plays tricks on us and sometimes we may not hear the actual Music that created the sound that caused the unpleasantness instead we hear a similar sound as if another intstrument in the orchestra playing in harmony with the original cause. Now the mind reverts back to the original unpleasant, averse, sensation and creates an equality between the two experiences. I could be wrong however. Just a thought. I seem to having them lately since I'm loving this stuff on Vasubandhu! I failed to mention to Deiter that Bodhicitta seems to spring up in places of my last reply to him. Without Bodhicitta, well, then, the Path of Purification or and type of Ngongdro is rather a waste of time. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi Howard, <...> > I suppose what you are saying is that a loud or screechy sound is > "described" by the sutta paragraph concerning the ear, but music is > "described" by the sutta paragraph concerning the intellect. > > But that would cause a problem for me because it would mean that > craving for music is not craving for sensuality since music is a > concept that appears through the intellect. > <....> #75725 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 9:02 pm Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge indriyabala Hi Howard, - Thank you for sharing some interesting thoughts with me. H: Tep, one can think of unicorns without there being unicorns. As for people being real, this depends on what one means by 'real' and on what one means by 'people'. If by a "person" one only refers to a multitude of dhammas that are intricately and coherently interrelated via conditionality, most especially by kamma, there is no problem unless the convention that speaks of these dhammas as forming a unity is taken as more than mere convention. The person is "real" only in the sense that the underlying dhammas actually occur and are interrelated in a nontrivial way. The element of error enters in as soon as one takes seriously the speaking of the aggregate of dhammas involved as being or having an independent existence or self. T: Many times the world can be experienced simply by being observant, not because we know the right definition of everything. I have not seen a unicorn before and there is no provable story and evidence of a real unicorn, so it is not real to me. However, I may take other people's words that certain things exist -- like some far-away galaxies or even electrons that I am unable to see with my own eyes. The four ariya-saccas is real and can be "seen" by the Dhamma Eye. I am not an ariyan (yet), but I "know" the Four Noble Truths are real through experiencing the Truths myself. People who experience dukkha, know that dukkha is real; they don't have to go asking anyone for an intellectual definition of dukkha. In the conventional world, where we are now living, people and things they do are real. If you steal someone's mony, you can expect to be caught by a real police. And you may be put in a real jail. That's my real-life definition of "real". .......... H: The person is "real" only in the sense that the underlying dhammas actually occur and are interrelated in a nontrivial way. The element of error enters in as soon as one takes seriously the speaking of the aggregate of dhammas involved as being or having an independent existence or self. T: Do you mean the khandhas, for example, are underlying a real person? Elsewhere I learned (see a Sarah's recent message) about the "derivative" of the five aggregate being partially real. Other times, I was told that only the paramattha dhammas were real and there were no real persons (they are illusion), or even in-and-out breaths were not a reality. So I think the concept of realities should be carefully examined. ................... > T: By saying there is no person in reality, you essentially contradict yourself. The only way you can avoid the contradiction is to accept that the conventional world of beings is also real -- not only the paramattha dhammas are real. > > Am I fair to have said all that? Of course, you will deny. Howard: I deny it as well. I see no contradiction unless one misattributes absolute truth to sentences that are merely conventionally true. Interpreting conventional truths as ultimate truths leads to such errors as saying persons are literal realities. Interpreting ultimate truths as conventional truths leads to such errors as saying in the conventional sense that nobody engages in practice. Conventional speech is figurative and abbreviational, whereas ultimate speech is literal. T: Is "conventionally true" not true? Suppose when the conventional truths are clearly understood as real truths that co-exist with the ultimates truths (they are at different levels), will it help us to avoid literal-reality errors? Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Tep (and Sarah & James) - > > In a message dated 8/30/07 10:32:07 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > indriyabala@... writes: > > > Hi Sarah and James, - > > > > I'd like to point out a contradiction in Sarah's statements of no self. #75726 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 9:04 pm Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge scottduncan2 Dear Tep, If I may (being 'other'), regarding: T: "...I am not a bookworm, so my definition is based on my "real" understanding..." Scott: Three questions: 1)Would you be referring to pa~n~naa here, when you reference your 'real' understanding? 2)Or are you referring to something that was thought up by and belongs to a person with the name of Tep? 3)Why the claim on this understanding as 'yours'? These are serious questions. I'm not trying to argue with you. Sincerely, Scott. #75727 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 9:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Virtue & Demerit lbidd2 Hi Andrew and all, "Then the Blessed One said to venerable ânanda: ânanda, is the holy life bound with all its virtues attended to, bring fruitful results? Venerable sir, it is not so, in a certain way. If so ânanda, explain yourself. Venerable sir, when practising the virtues in the holy life, if demeritorious thoughts increase and meritorious thoughts decrease practising such virtues are not fruitful." L: This seems like a slightly different question from "are all virtues necessary". In the above I would change "is the holy life" to "does the holy life". Then it seems that the meaning is the holy life is not for everyone. If, in following the discipline demeritorious thoughts increase, then following the discipline is not fruitful. Larry #75728 From: "colette" Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 9:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (06) ksheri3 Hi Phil, As if you didn't ask me to "contend" with a few points here. maybe I don't have the deep understanding of Philosophy and Logic to be able to define "the self" as well as others but I know that I don't cling to self at all when in meditation. Certainly when I'm out of meditation or astral projection I am CONSTANTLY REMINDING MYSELF THAT I HAVE GOT TO BE ONE OF THE LUCKIEST PEOPLE TO EVER HAVE HAD THE LUCK TO LIVE AND TO BE OFFERED THE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTAKE OF SUCH WONDERS. Don't fool yourself though, I am always saying to others that although what I cannot help but practice is such a burden and such a curse since it literally takes any free will that I have away from me. AS I continually remind people, back in 2004 when I found that people actually do study the stuff I love to study and practice, test, discover, I become addicted to this stuff: when I find a technique that works and that I can work it's like a drug, EVERYTHING IS SUBORDINATE to working the magik. I can easily see why friends like Bill Heidrick, a retired Thelema officer but a well written scholar on such obscure philosophies like Thelema and Aleister Crowley, anyway, he told me, as A.Crowley said, a practioner has to have a life other than this THE GREAT WORK, and I certainly agree. As for being deprived of the remedies because of defilements I can clearly say that defilements are the least of a practioners worries. Defilements seem just soooooo petty and trivial at this point in my practice. I admit that new practioners have no clue as to the depths of the terminology "DEFILEMENTS" but as for myself I'm almost at the point where the term "defilements" is a defilement because they are just almost too obvious to even take seriously. Doesn't this almost prove that I'm way over the line and have to continue with my study since my defilements are almost blatantly stupid to consider defilements as trivial? I am certainly wayyyyyyy out there and into it that it's ludicrous to consider I could actually return to a normal everyday 9-5 lifestyle without serious complications: my attitude, my laughter, my humor, my focus, all will bother others to the utmost. For instance I worked at a UPS loading dock on the night shift. I WORKED I labored, not because of the money, it was a wonderful experience to "make the system" work. I could sit there and load trucks for hours, laughing and having a good time with my coworkers. A lot of them were theological students at nearby universities and colleges, others on my dock would come and listen to me make the most hillarious jokes when the dock foreman made it possible for me to be loading in the same truck as one of the students. They loved listening to my humor, my rationale, my reason, etc. as I showed the errors of the christian ways to the theological students by simply using hermetics or Golden Dawn or kabbalah, etc. And it's the same way with this stuff! I lose myself if I had or have a self to be lossed into some very deep meditative states. I've told countless people on Western theological sites that I get lossed when I'm in these deep meditative states because the work or action is so repeatative, ritual, I don't need to think. Here we can ask for Tep to recall that him and I spoke of the Theta state of consciousness (trance state) where a person can drive home from work and not remember anything of the drive home because they had done it thousands of times before and it required no mental activity so the person could almost "go to sleep" while driving home. In 1982 a baptist mission in Santa Monica shipped me to the high desert but they found my tarot cards and shipped me back to Santa Monica. I went to public aid for assistance and was told that I had to go to the barrio, E.L.A. office on Beverly Blvd. to receive any help from them (Santa Monica being a White christian suburban model or duplicate prison camp of the middle-class and not willing to assist any person that deviates from their dogma of the blind leading the blind): I HAD TO WALK TO E.L.A. FROM Pacific Coast Hwy. Santa Monica. I also had to walk out of Arizona from Phoenix, took me 7 days to get to Gallup N.M. where I caught a frieght train in 1982 to New Orleans where I stayed for a year and a half. Walking is soooooo easy and mundane, it requires no cognitive thought to control the bodies functions which is how I get lost so easily since I instictively go into a meditative state and start playing around with different consciousnesses, different philosophies, different.... I could do this forever but it's not a fulfilling life. I become lonely, sometimes depressed because I have no relations with others other than standing in line for food at soup kitchens and telling the idiots that have no problems with that kind of lifestyle that that lifestyle is not the purpose of living, things like that. Pardon me for getting on my own soap box and ranting and raving but I can't see how you could think that the self is such an important part of the process. I've also told people in WEstern theological traditions that when I get deep into I lose ability to find a difference between Vice & Virtue, they become the exact same thing, which means that I am in their hands, my sisters and bros hands since I cannot lose control of the meditation or meditative process aka the path. It takes a lot of effort and concentration to remain on the path while doing other things with the physical body. Thus it takes some pretty mundane shit to do with the physical body while I remain on the path, mundane like walking or standing in line observing and equating what I see into the suttas and such. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi Han (and all) ><...> > Just popping by to tell you, Han, that since you decided that this > book is worth studying in detail, I returned to it, and have found > thta it is indeed very rich and much more inspirational and > invigorating than Acharn Sujin usually is (in my opinion.) > > As for clinging to self, I find it impossible to believe that > there is anyone here who can begin (or continue from past lives) to > develop the perfections without not only clinging to but being > energized and encouraged by the idea of being a person who is > developing the perfections. It means that we are not wasting our > very rare human birth. Worrying about clinging to self shouldn't get > in the way of that. <....> #75729 From: han tun Date: Thu Aug 30, 2007 10:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (06) hantun1 Dear Phil, I am extremely happy to see your post again, and I hope you will have time to contribute your views and ideas from time to time. Your views are always refreshing and stimulating. Yes, I agree with your views on clinging to self. As we develop the perfection of pa~n~naa together with other perfections, particularly the equanimity, that clinging to self can gradually be overcome. Respectfully, Han #75730 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 12:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) sarahprocter... Dear Scott, Han & Tep, Thanks for all the good work - for the typing, the compilation and the helpful additional comments, Han. --- Scott Duncan wrote: > Note: "The P.tisambhidaamagga calls this practice "the noble > supernormal power" (ariya iddhi) ... S: Dependent on the abhi~n~nas (i.e on highest jhanas, I'm sure) and insight. Nyantiloka: "This training of mind is frequently mentioned in the suttas (eg M 152, A.V 144), but only once the name of ariyaa-iddhi is applied to it (D 28). See further Pts., iddhi-kathaa, Vis X11." S: See Vis X11, 36-38. At the end: "Thus it is called 'noble ones' success' because it is only produced in noble ones who have reached mind mastery." I like the emphasis on satipathana and equanimity at the end, which you stressed, Han. .... > "Although this fivefold contemplation is ascribed to the arahant as a > power perfectly under his control, elsewhere the Buddha teaches it to > bhikkhus still in training as a way to overcome the three unwholesome > roots. See AN 5:144/iii 169-70; and for a thoughtful commentary on > that sutta, see Nyanaponika Thera, 'The Roots of Good and Evil, pp > 73-78." .... S: I was going to take a look at this, but can't find our copy for now. Maybe later. Metta, Sarah ==== #75731 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 12:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge sarahprocter... Dear Nina, James, Tep, Han & all, Thanks for your encouragement, Nina. --- sarah abbott wrote: S: >(B.Bodhi): "....The mainstream Buddhist schools held that the person was a mere convention (vohaara) or concept (pa~n~natti) derivative upon (upaadaaya) the five aggregates, not a substantial reality in its own right. For them Theravaada response, see the first part of Kvu, a lengthy refutation of the 'personalist' thesis." < .... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/30417 >S: Kathaavatthu transl as 'Points of Controversy' by Shwe Zan Aung & Mrs Rhys Davids (PTS) Kathaavatthuppakara.na-A.t.thakathaa as 'The Debates Commentary' by Bimala Churn Law (PTS) ================ 1. From Kathavatthu above - summary of commentary: ..... “1. Of the Existence of a Personal Entity. Controverted Point. That the ‘person’ is known in the sense of a real and ultimate fact. (S:paramattha dhamma). From the commentary- The Theravadin questions a Puggalavadin (one who believes in the existence of a personal entity, soul, or perduring immortal essence in man) concerning his position. Who among the eighteen schools of thought were Puggalavadins? In the Saasana the Vajjiputtakas and Sammitiyas, and many other teachers besides, not belonging to the Saasana. ‘Person’(puggala) means soul, being, vital principle. ‘Is known’: is approached and got at by the understanding, is cognized. ‘Real’: not taken as an effect of magic or mirage, actual. ‘Ultimate’(paramattho): highest sense, not taken from tradition, or hearsay. ‘Known’ as one of the fifty-seven ultimates of our conscious experience (i.e 5 aggregates, 12 sense organs and objects, 18 elements, 22 controlling powers). ***** 2.From Kathaavatthu above, Book 1, 1 The Eight Refutations. The First Refutation, 1) The fivefold Affirmative Presentation. “Theravadin - Is ‘the person’ known in the sense of a real and ultimate fact? Puggalavadin - Yes Th - Is the person known ‘in the same way’ as a real and ultimate fact is known? P - Nay, that cannot truly be said. Th - Acknowledge your refutation: i) If the person be known in the sense of a real and ultimate fact, then indeed, good sir, you should also say, the person is known in the same way as [any other] real and ultimate fact[is known]. ii) that which you say here is wrong, namely, 1) that we ought to say,‘the person is known in the sense of a real and ultimate fact,’ but 2) we ought not to say, the person is known in the same way as [any other] real and ultimate fact [is known]. iii) If the latter statement 2) cannot be admitted, then indeed the former statement 1) should not be admitted. iv) In affirming the former statement 1), while v) denying the latter 2), you are wrong. ***** 3.From the Kathavatthu above,Bk 1, 111, Derivatives: “Theravadin - Is the concept of soul (puggala) derived from the corporeal qualities (rupas)? Puggalavadin - Yes. T: But has a soul also any or all of these qualities? P: Nay, that cannot truly be said.... T: Or is the concept of soul derived from feeling, from perception, from mental coefficients, from consciousness? P: Yes (to each aggregate in succession). T: Is any mental aggregate impermanent, conditioned? Does it happen through a cause? Is it liable to perish, to pass away, to become passionless, to cease, to change? P: Yes. T: But has soul also any of these qualities? P: Nay, that cannot truly be said.....” ..... [S:The same argument applies to table, chair, tree and so on....] To link this to the SN1, Devatasamyutta thread, we read in SN1:76 (6) Does Not Decay: “What decays, what does not decay? .................. “The physical form (rupa) of mortals decays (jaarati), Their name and clan does not decay.”< ***** Metta Sarah >S: "Spk [S: the commentary to the sutta]: Thus, by the expression 'the > carrier of the burden,' he shows the person to be a mere convention.... #75732 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 1:24 am Subject: satipatthana as island of refuge (atta and anatta) nilovg Dear Tep, Now I am reading your interesting post. Meanwhile there were other post by you and others. I am finding it more and more difficult to react to these notty questions about what is real, are conventional realities real, how real are they. Allow me to just choose some aspects of your post to avoid length. ---------- T: Thus, I claim to understand that the Khandhas (or ayatanas, dhatus, rupa & nama) are neither attas(ego identities) that are permanent and travel from one bhava to the next("eternalism view"), nor are they terminated after death("annihilationism view"). ....... So, I believe that 'I', a person who is called Tep, exists now but he is different from the past (each younger and better-looking person who existed in each fleeting moment-- that was real only in each time cross section). Of course, Tep tomorrow will be different from Tep tody, and yet the two are not separate identities. ------- N: This is a conventional way of explaining impermanence which is certainly useful. Tep of the past, of today and of tomorrow are citta, cetasika and rupa, or five khandhas. There is a connection between past, present and future, different 'people' have different accumulation --------- T: I also know that any moment I can let go of the view that 'That is is mine', 'That's who I am', 'This is my self' in the khandhas, there will be no clinging (upadana) as the condition for a new bhava (rebirth) to arise again. Here, 'self' is not a soul or a permanent identity, but rather a mind-state or belief, or view (attaanudi.t.thi) that is conditioned by tanha and ditthi in the khandhas. --------- N: 'That is is mine', 'That's who I am', 'This is my self' , these three are explained as representing lobha (without ditthi), conceit and wrong view. We can cling to 'myself' in different ways. ------- I also know that the 'I am' fetter (conceit) is a delusion. However, the impermanent existence of Tep in any given fleeting moment (past, future, or prsent) is not an illusion. The following view, "Thus whenever an experienced, learned, and wise man examines the six sense- organs, eye, ear, nose, tongue, body or mind-organ, then all these things appear to him as delusive, empty and deceitful..." [SN 35.197] is the right view of an ariyan; this view does not imply that the ariyan himself (defined in that moment) did not exist. Therefore, I can rightfully say that the not-self perspective of mine as described above is certainly not in disagreement with Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 166. -------- N: When a wise man examines... This is a conventional expression. When these are in one sentence with concepts and paramattha dhammas confusion may arise. We can give names to different people so long as we do not forget that they are five khandhas that arise and fall away. Naming them is useful, because the stream of cittas of this individual is different from the stream of cittas of that individual. Moreover, in the Co. concepts are called shadows of realities. They tell us something about realities. We read in the Kathavatthu that the Buddha 'spoke two kinds of truths, namely, the popular and that of the highest meaning...' 'The highest meaning has been declared by the Teacher, without transgressing the concept. so, another wise man should not, in explaining the highest meaning, overrun a concept.' When we are discussing using many words the subject gets more and more difficult. When we begin to understand that one reality appears at a time through one doorway things become less complex. After reading posts I had to go to the kitchen, getting on with my cooking. I opened the refrigirator without thinking much, but cold appeared through the bodysense in a splitsecond and then I had to think of closing the door, back in the conventional world again. Just afterwards I thought of this as an example of the two kinds of truths. Of course I have to live in the conventional world, but in between there is opportunity to learn about the world in the ariyan sense if we do not try, do not wish for it. It can just happen by conditions in a split second, and then we see: no conflict. I know very little about the six worlds in the ariyan sense but beginning to consider realities when they appear through one of the six doors is the way to understand more. Then we need not think too much about it: this is a concept, this is a paramattha dhamma. The thinking may become so tiresome. The solution is right at hand, at the present moment. --------- T: Further, I also understand the following sutta quote very clearly, using the same not-self perspective as described above. "I am" is a delusion. ..... (snipped) ------ N: Thank you for the sutta. We study all the texts, but to apply them and really understand anatta is a different matter. Thank you for the effort writing this extensive mail with quotes. Nina. #75733 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 12:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (06) nilovg Hi Phil, so glad to see you back. Even a short post is appreciated. I am glad you find the book worth while studying. Yes, we may cling to developing the perfections but if we have correct understanding of them the very perfections will lead to less clinging. Han will not post all chapters. Any suggestions what to choose? In the beginning I posted them all, but for now, I do not know. A choice of some passages to make it shorter? Nina. Op 31-aug-2007, om 5:27 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > Still no time to post, but thanks for steering me back towards > this book. It's very good, very invigorating. #75734 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 1:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Virtue & Demerit sarahprocter... Hi Andrew & all, Bk of 3s, Ch on Ananda, 78 This is the transl from the Mettanet site... 8 Siilabbatasutta.m- The bond in virtues. 79. The same origin ... re ... approached the Blessed One, worshipped and sat on a side. Then the Blessed One said to venerable aananda: aananda, is the holy life bound with all its virtues attended to, bring fruitful results? Venerable sir, it is not so, in a certain way. If so aananda, explain yourself. Venerable sir, when practising the virtues in the holy life, if demeritorious thoughts increase and meritorious thoughts decrease practising such virtues are not fruitful. Venerable sir, when practising the virtues in the holy life, if demeritorious thoughts decrease and meritorious thoughts increase practising such virtues are fruitful. .... S (new): I think the problem is in the translations. I'll give my comments in a moment, but just to refresh, this is from the one you quoted which I also think is off-track: Sister Uppalawanna' s booklet: "Are all virtues necessary? Venerable Ananda approached the Blessed One ... re ... sat on a side, then the Blessed One said 'Ananda, are all virtues necessary for the holy life to bear fruit?' Venerable Ananda said 'Not all venerable Sir.' Then the Blessed One said 'Explain it, Ananda.' 'Venerable Sir, when observing a certain virtue if demeritorious things increase and meritorious things decrease, the observance of that virtue if not fruitful. And if demeritorious things decrease and meritorious things increase, the observance of that virtue is fruitful, for the holy life to bear fruit.' .... The third translation in front of me is the PTS one under 'Service': " '....Will every sort of moral practice, way of living, sancity of life and excellence of service have a like fruit hereafter?' 'I would not say, lord, that it is inevitably so.' 'Well, then , do you go into particulars.' 'For instance, lord, that moral practice, way of living, sanctity of life and excellence of service which increase unprofitable states and decrease profitable states in him who observes them, - such moral practices and so forth are without fruit....." ... S: Now the key Pali terms are, I believe, 'siilabbata.m jiivita.m brahmacariya.m upa.t.thaanasaara.m'. If instead of 'practising the virtues...'/'all the virtues...'/'moral practice... ', we were to substitute the meanings which seem correct and more obvious to me(Buddhadatta's dictionary), we get: siilabbata - ceremonial observances jiivita - life brahmacariya - chaste life (holy life) upa.t.thaana - waiting on, looking after, service Could we say something more like 'will every sort of observance in a holy lifetstyle bring good fruit? Pali experts can do better of course, but my point is that it is 'siilabbata' rather than just siila that is used in the text. Remember that it is the same siilabbata which is used in 'siilabbata paraamaasa' (attachment to rites and rituals), a kind of wrong view and practice eradicated by the sotapanna. Hope this helps. I'll look forward to any corrections. Perhaps a better translation of the title, Siilabbata Sutta, would be: "Ceremonial Observances" or something more everyday-ish. Metta, Sarah ======= #75735 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 2:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (06) sarahprocter... Dear Han, Nina, Phil, Connie & all, --- han tun wrote: > BTW, I cannot cover the entire book of “The > Perfections.” I am hoping that you would also present > some of the chapters from the book, like you kindly > did before in the Daana Corner. ... S: It's a good idea to ask others to help so it becomes a team effort. I know you have many health concerns at the moment and only wish that your work and reflection on the Perfections helps ease your burden! Btw, you do know that the book is on-line, so no need to type out, though of course you have to add your intro and so on which still takes time. Nina will let you know where the most up-to-date copy is if she hasn't told you already. Probably on Zolag. I think it's most helpful when it's a short extract to reflect on each time as you give. I liked the part about the snake. When we see someone killing a snake (or mosquito, for that matter), we think we have metta and karuna for the snake/insect, but the truth is that usually we're just disturbed by the other person. What kind of citta is there at that moment? I'm often reminded of this question when I'm disturbed by my Tai chi teacher swatting at the mosquitos, someone dropping rubbish, an assistant's surly manner and so on. It always comes back to this very citta now!! Thanks again for your endeavour and also for your encouragement to Phil. Phil, chip in with odd comments anytime and we'll try not to engage you in protracted discussions:-) I hope you're well settled back in Japan. Let us know when James is visiting you! Metta, Sarah ======== #75736 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 3:00 am Subject: Conditions, Ch 13, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 13 Faculty-Condition (Indriya-Paccaya) The Påli word “indriya” means strength, governing or controlling principle. Indriyas are “leaders” for the associated dhammas, but they are leaders each in their own field. In the case of indriya- paccaya, faculty-condition, the conditioning dhamma (paccaya dhamma) has leadership, great control, over the conditioned dhammas (paccayupanna dhammas). Some indriyas are rúpa and some are nåma. We read in the “Visuddhimagga” (XVI, 1) that there are twentytwo indriyas. They are: The five senses which are the faculties of eye, ear, nose, tongue and bodysense mind faculty femininity faculty masculinity faculty life faculty (one is rúpa and one is nåma) bodily pleasure faculty pain faculty pleasant feeling faculty unpleasant feeling faculty equanimity (indifferent feeling) faculty faith faculty energy faculty mindfulness faculty concentration faculty understanding faculty “I-shall-come-to-know-the-unknown” faculty (an-aññåtañ- ñassåmí’t’indriya) higher knowledge faculty (aññindriya) faculty of him who knows (aññåtåvindriya) Of these twentytwo faculties, twenty are faculty-condition and two, namely the femininity faculty and the masculinity faculty, are not faculty-condition as we will see. The five sense-bases control the functions of the sense-cognitions (seeing, hearing, etc.), they condition these cittas by way of faculty-condition. They arise previously to the sense-cognitions and are still present while they control them, thus, they are base- prenascent faculties. Without the eye faculty there cannot be seeing, it conditions seeing-consciousness and its accompanying cetasikas by way of faculty-condition. The rúpa (pasåda-rúpa) which is eyesense is the eye faculty; it is leader in its own field, in seeing. It cannot be leader in the field of hearing. ******* Nina. #75737 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 2:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (06) nilovg Dear Han, Yes, on zolag. But this site changes names sometimes. The last is: http://www.zolag.co.uk/ under downloads. Nina. Op 31-aug-2007, om 11:11 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Nina will let you know where the most up-to-date copy is if she hasn't > told you already. Probably on Zolag. #75738 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 2:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (06) nilovg Dear Han, Op 31-aug-2007, om 0:15 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > If someone is speaking too > much of absolute truth I cannot follow. The two truths > (paramattha sacca and sammuti sacca) should be > considered in its own merit. -------- N: But the approach to the paramattha sacca need not be complicated: just attending to the characteristic of what appears now. Then we do not need to reason so much. What do you think? -------- > > H: In the case of “no-being” also, we have to be very > careful. If “no-being” is what the Buddha teaches, > I wonder why he would have taken all the trouble to > expound the Puggalapannatti, the fourth of seven > Abhidhamma books, which shows the designation of > individuals, classified in ten chapters of the book, > after the manner of enumeration employed in Anguttara > Nikaya? ------- N: Human Types by One, 27: Here: possessor is a concept, the six superknowledges are paramattha dhammas. This whole work actually deals with paramattha dhammas, citta and cetasikas. It is explained by way of: a person who... but it points to paramattha dhammas. Is this not about citta and cetasikas? ------- I like your quote: khanti paaramii is like a mother, upekkhaa paaramii is like a father and nekkhamma paaramii is like a physician. It invites to considering. Nina. #75739 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 2:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Virtue & Demerit nilovg Dear Andrew and Sarah, very good and in conformity with the Co. See below. Op 31-aug-2007, om 10:58 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Now the key Pali terms are, I believe, 'siilabbata.m jiivita.m > brahmacariya.m upa.t.thaanasaara.m'. > > If instead of 'practising the virtues...'/'all the virtues...'/'moral > practice... ', we were to substitute the meanings which seem > correct and > more obvious to me(Buddhadatta's dictionary), we get: > > siilabbata - ceremonial observances > jiivita - life > brahmacariya - chaste life (holy life) > upa.t.thaana - waiting on, looking after, service > --------- N: The Co refers to heretics outside Buddhism, kammavadins and kiriyavadins (I could not trace, but must be sectarians) who have their own ideas about monkhood. These do not have good results of their practice. Nina. #75740 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 3:00 am Subject: Asoka, Ch 3, no 7. nilovg Dear friends, At this moment of seeing there can be the development of understanding of the element which experiences. There are the right conditions for the arising of seeing which experiences what appears through the eyes. It is real, it is dhamma. After that we may think about the colour which appears and we live again in the world of people and things. When paññå has been developed in vipassanå it will understand that there is no world, no thing, no doer of deeds and nobody who receives the results of deeds. We read in the “Sumangala Vilåsíní”, in the Commentary to the Sangíti Sutta where it deals with higher síla, adhisíla, higher citta, adhicitta (citta stands for concentration) and higher paññå, adhipaññå, that the paññå which is kammassakata ñåna is “vipassanå adhipaññå”, higher paññå of vipassanå. This shows us again that the deep understanding of kamma and vipåka is developed through satipatthåna. Knowledge of kamma and vipåka relates directly to daily life, it is no theory. In the “Greater Discourse on the Simile of the Elephant’s Footprint” (of the “Middle Length Sayings” I, no. 28) Såriputta explains the four noble Truths, the five khandhas and the four great Elements of Earth, Water, Fire and Wind. Earth stands for solidity, Water for cohesion, Fire for temperature and Wind for motion. Solidity can be experienced through the bodysense as hardness or softness, temperature as heat or cold, motion as motion or pressure. Cohesion cannot be experienced through the bodysense, it can only be known through the mind-door. Time and again rúpas impinge on the bodysense but we are forgetful and we do not realize them as elements which are impermanent and not self. Såriputta explains that if a monk is vexed he should have right understanding of realities. We read that Såriputta said to the monks: “Your reverences, if others abuse, revile, annoy, vex this monk, he comprehends: ‘This painful feeling that has arisen in me is born of ear-contact, it has a cause, not no cause. What is the cause? Ear- contact is the cause.’ He sees that ear-contact is impermanent, he sees that feeling... perception... the habitual tendencies are impermanent, he sees that consciousness is impermanent. His mind rejoices, is pleased, composed and is set on the objects of the element....” ******** Nina. #75741 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 3:54 am Subject: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) scottduncan2 Dear Han, Regarding: H: "Thank you very much Scott for compiling the contributions by Sarah, Tep, you and me." Scott: Your welcome. I notice I failed to incorporate your correction to the spelling. Sorry about that. H: "...Therefore, I think that we should study the entire MN 152, together with the Patisambhidamagga, to be more profitable." Scott: Sounds good. How would you like to go about it? Please let me know how I can join in. Sincerely, Scott. #75742 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 3:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (06) sarahprocter... Dear Han & all, --- sarah abbott wrote: > I liked the part about the snake. When we see someone killing a snake > (or > mosquito, for that matter), we think we have metta and karuna for the > snake/insect, but the truth is that usually we're just disturbed by the > other person. What kind of citta is there at that moment? .... S: Funny thing, I added the part about the insect because I thought this is more common. After sending the posts, I went for a walk on the hill about our flat. I was listening to a dhamma c.d., when I suddenly came across a snake on the path in front of me (first time for at least a year)! Even though I'd just read the reminders you posted, first thoughts were of alarm and fear. After I stopped and looked more carefully, I saw it had very recently been killed. Immediately, thoughts of annoyance - 'who would have done that?', pity - 'poor snake' and conceit - 'I wouldn't have done that'....In other words, lots of akusala as usual. Still, these states have to be known - just more conditioned dhammas. In between many moments of seeing and visible object, with lots of sanna marking the various objects. All anatta. Good to know such accumulations for what they are! Through listening/reading, careful considering and reflecting, right understanding can develop and know all kinds of dhammas when they appear. This is the way that the perfections will also grow. We never know what will happen next! Metta, Sarah ====== #75743 From: han tun Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (06) hantun1 Dear Sarah, Nina, Phil, Connie & all, Thank you very much for letting me know that the book is available on line. Nina also gave me the web-site address. I immediately tried and had successfully downloaded the book. So it makes me very much easier now to present the book. I can now present more than one chapter. Perhaps, Connie and I can divide between the two of us who will present which chapters. I had already started on the Equanimity. Sarah: I think it's most helpful when it's a short extract to reflect on each time as you give. Han: If it is too short it will not make sense. I will present as short as possible without disrupting the chain of thought between the two presentations. Respectfully, Han #75744 From: han tun Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (06) hantun1 Dear Nina, Thank you very much. I managed to download the book from the following link. http://www.zolag.co.uk/perfectionsf.rtf Respectfully, Han #75745 From: han tun Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (06) hantun1 Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for sharing your experience with us. It is amazing how you can apply the Teachings to daily life. I think I will have to follow your example. Please contribute your very useful ideas as we go along studying the Perfections. Respectfully, Han > S: Funny thing, I added the part about the insect > because I thought this > is more common. #75746 From: han tun Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) hantun1 Dear Scott and Tep, Tep had studied this sutta before at SD. I think I will request Tep. Tep, would you like to start the discussion on MN 152 and related Patisambhidamagga extracts and other suttas? Respectfully, Han #75748 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 1:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 8/30/07 9:08:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > >Howard: Yes, both. When a sound (that happens to be part of the > >music), an ear-door rupa, is heard as unpleasant, for example very > >loud or screechy, if one follows up with mental proliferation, it > >no longer is the sound per se that is reacted to but a mental > >substitute for it. Contact with the sound results in feeling it > >as unpleasant which then initiates a sankharic process of > >proliferation - a process of thought and emotion dealing with > >concepts. When the music per se is reacted to, one is already at > >that stage reacting to a concept. > > I suppose what you are saying is that a loud or screechy sound is > "described" by the sutta paragraph concerning the ear, but music is > "described" by the sutta paragraph concerning the intellect. ----------------------------------------- Howard: What I'm saying is that when we are engaged in thinking we are dealing with concepts, and it is mind door involved regardless of the original basis/bases. ---------------------------------------- > > But that would cause a problem for me because it would mean that > craving for music is not craving for sensuality since music is a > concept that appears through the intellect. ---------------------------------------- Howard: As I see it, "craving for music" is, directly, craving for the pleasant bodily sensations caused by and mentally associated with the music, the latter being a mind-door experience based on ear-door sensations. BTW, I'm not attempting to persuade you to see it this way - I'm just explaining how I view it. --------------------------------------- > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.063.than.html > > There are these five strings of sensuality. Which five? Forms > cognizable via the eye â€" agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, > fostering desire, enticing; sounds cognizable via the ear... aromas > cognizable via the nose... flavors cognizable via the tongue... > tactile sensations cognizable via the body â€" agreeable, pleasing, > charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing. But these are not > sensuality. They are called strings of sensuality in the discipline > of the noble ones. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, these are the bases. Our reactions, however, are mental - most particularly, conceptual. Thinking and proliferation are mental events. --------------------------------------------- > > ... > > And what is the diversity in sensuality? Sensuality with regard to > forms is one thing, sensuality with regard to sounds is another, > sensuality with regard to aromas is another, sensuality with regard > to flavors is another, sensuality with regard to tactile sensations > is another. This is called the diversity in sensuality. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Swee Boon > > ========================== With metta, Howard #75749 From: han tun Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (06) hantun1 Dear Nina, > > Han: If someone is speaking too much of absolute truth I cannot follow. The two truths (paramattha sacca and sammuti sacca) should be considered in its own merit. > Nina: But the approach to the paramattha sacca need not be complicated: just attending to the characteristic of what appears now. Then we do not need to reason so much. What do you think? ---------- Han: The approach to the paramattha sacca is not complicated. The Abhidhammattha Sangaha helps me to do that. And “what appears now” is also not complicated. I understand and appreciate that. What is complicated for me is this singular particular case of “no-Han” “no-Nina” idea. But I think we have discussed on this enough! ========== > Nina: Human Types by One, 27: Here: possessor is a concept, the six superknowledges are paramattha dhammas. This whole work actually deals with paramattha dhammas, citta and cetasikas. It is explained by way of: a person who... but it points to paramattha dhammas. Is this not about citta and cetasikas? ---------- Han: When you explain in this way, I must say that you are right. Thank you very much for this clarification. Respectfully, Han #75750 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:52 am Subject: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) scottduncan2 Dear Han and Tep, Sounds good. I'll await the format. H: "Tep had studied this sutta before at SD. I think I will request Tep..." Sincerely, Scott. #75751 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 2:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Sarah & James) - In a message dated 8/30/07 10:41:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: > Hi Sarah (and James, Howard), - > > I am interested in your quote and commentary below. > > S (quoting B.Bodhi's note): > "The puggalavaada or "personalist" schools of Buddhism appealed to > this passage as proof for the existence of the person (puggala) as a > real entity, neither identical with the five aggregates nor different > from them. It is the puggala, they claimed, that persists through > change, undergoes rebirth, and eventually attains Nibbaana. This > tenet was bluntly rejected by the other Buddhist schools, who saw in > it a camourflaged version of the aatman, the self of the non-Buddhist > systems.....The mainstream Buddhist schools held that the person was > a mere convention (vohaara) or concept (pa~n~natti) derivative upon > (upaadaaya) the five aggregates, not a substantial reality in its own > right." > > T: I think there are several meanings of "self" (atta). The > personalist view above is just one of them. For example, another > meaning of "self" is of a permanent ego identity, or a soul. I > believe you prefer the mainstream Buddhist view of self as > a "person" , i.e. it is derived from the five aggregates. Am I > correct? > > Are the five aggregates real? If they are, then why is their > derivative not real (does not exist), or not a "substantial reality > in its own right" ? ----------------------------------------------- Howard: A conventional analogy, Tep: The shimmering heat waves rising from the hot desert sand are "real", but is the pool of refreshing water that seems to be there and is derived from the shimmering air also "real". Another conventional analogy: The coiled rope lying in the path on a moonlit night is "real". Is the snake that it appears to be also "real"? What more is there "to person" than the actual khandhic elements? Is there anything else, except for conceptualization? Tep. I can assure you that it is possible to have the experience of there being nothing but the khandhic dhammas, with nothing additional that is "the person". ---------------------------------------------- > .......... > > "Spk [S: the commentary to the sutta]: Thus, by the expression 'the > carrier of the burden,' he shows the person to be a mere convention. > For the person is called the carrier of the burden because it 'picks > up' the burden of the aggregates at the moment of rebirth, maintains > the burden by bathing, feeding, seating, and laying them down during > the course of life, and then discards them at the moment of death, > only to take up another burden of aggregates at the moment of > rebirth." > > T: I only see that this commentary supports existence of a person, > the "carrier" of the burden of the five aggregates, like you, me, and > Howard. The carrier's life exists, since s/he is defined by birth at > the beginning of a whole life that is nothing but dukkha. > > What do you think? I hope you are not going to reply that the > commentary just used the "conventional speech", and then jump to the > familiar conclusion that a person is a mere "convention", not real. > That reply would put us back at the square zero again. {:-) > > Please see my other post about the Buddha's approved definitions of > atta from DN 9. > > Tep > === > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott > wrote: > > > >Hi James (& Tep), > > > >--- buddhatrue wrote: > >--- Tep Sastri wrote: > >T: I doubt it very much that the "characteristic of no-self" implies > >>>>there is no person who suffers. > > ========================= With metta, Howard #75752 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:02 am Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge indriyabala Dear Scott ,- > Scott: Three questions: > > 1)Would you be referring to pa~n~naa here, when you reference your > 'real' understanding? > > 2)Or are you referring to something that was thought up by and belongs > to a person with the name of Tep? > > 3)Why the claim on this understanding as 'yours'? > > These are serious questions. I'm not trying to argue with you. > T: You know that Connie is the "Queen of Word Play". For example, see how she played with "Belle" and "bell" in her previous message. There were more in the past messages, though -- just to make me confused ! So this time I played back with the word "real". Well, just to confuse her a little bit. However, I thank you for the three good questions you have conceived. Seriously I think they may not lead us anywhere, unless we know the purpose/objective of the discussion that I am assuming you want to have. So, let me specify an objective for the answers first : To explore the meanings of atta (or self) and views pertaining to atta. Do you agree with this objective? If not, then please suggest a change you deem appropriate. Once we have an agreed upon objective, I will answer the three questions. Tep ==== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > If I may (being 'other'), regarding: > > T: "...I am not a bookworm, so my definition is based on my "real" > understanding..." > > #75753 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 2:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 8/31/07 12:03:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: > Hi Howard, - > > Thank you for sharing some interesting thoughts with me. > > H: Tep, one can think of unicorns without there being unicorns. As > for people being real, this depends on what one means by 'real' and > on what one means by 'people'. If by a "person" one only refers to a > multitude of dhammas that are intricately and coherently interrelated > via conditionality, most especially by kamma, there is no problem > unless the convention that speaks of these dhammas as forming a unity > is taken as more than mere convention. The person is "real" only in > the sense that the underlying dhammas actually occur and are > interrelated in a nontrivial way. The element of error enters in as > soon as one takes seriously the speaking of the aggregate of dhammas > involved as being or having an independent existence or self. > > > T: Many times the world can be experienced simply by being observant, > not because we know the right definition of everything. I have not > seen a unicorn before and there is no provable story and evidence of > a real unicorn, so it is not real to me. However, I may take other > people's words that certain things exist -- like some far-away > galaxies or even electrons that I am unable to see with my own eyes. > The four ariya-saccas is real and can be "seen" by the Dhamma Eye. I > am not an ariyan (yet), but I "know" the Four Noble Truths are real > through experiencing the Truths myself. People who experience dukkha, > know that dukkha is real; they don't have to go asking anyone for an > intellectual definition of dukkha. > > In the conventional world, where we are now living, people and things > they do are real. If you steal someone's mony, you can expect to be > caught by a real police. And you may be put in a real jail. That's > my real-life definition of "real". ------------------------------------------- Howard: It sounds like you are saying that what seems real is what is real. I don't think so. ---------------------------------------- > .......... > > H: The person is "real" only in the sense that the underlying dhammas > actually occur and are interrelated in a nontrivial way. The element > of error enters in as soon as one takes seriously the speaking of the > aggregate of dhammas involved as being or having an independent > existence or self. > > T: Do you mean the khandhas, for example, are underlying a real > person? > ----------------------------------------- Howard: No, I do not. In fact, I don't consider even the paramattha dhammas to be separate, self-existent realities. I consider it mere convention at best to view them as such or as sheer delusion at worst. --------------------------------------- Elsewhere I learned (see a Sarah's recent message) about > > the "derivative" of the five aggregate being partially real. Other > times, I was told that only the paramattha dhammas were real and > there were no real persons (they are illusion), or even in-and-out > breaths were not a reality. So I think the concept of realities > should be carefully examined. ---------------------------------------- Howard: I also consider breaths to be only conventional realities. They, like persons, are nothing in and of themselves. What is actually there when we "note a breath" is a host of interrelated rupas - warmth/coolness, motion, touch sensations, some hardness/softness, some dampness, and so on - and a thinking process that unifies these interrelated phenomena. Because these phenomena occur independently of thinking and because they occur interdependently, they serve as a proper basis for the convention of "a breath". They are the reason for the breath concept being well grounded, and not utterly imagined such as dream lovers. ------------------------------------------- > ................... > > >T: By saying there is no person in reality, you essentially > contradict yourself. The only way you can avoid the contradiction is > to accept that the conventional world of beings is also real -- not > only the paramattha dhammas are real. > > > >Am I fair to have said all that? Of course, you will deny. > > > Howard: > I deny it as well. I see no contradiction unless one misattributes > absolute truth to sentences that are merely conventionally true. > Interpreting conventional truths as ultimate truths leads to such > errors as saying persons are literal realities. Interpreting ultimate > truths as conventional truths leads to such errors as saying in the > conventional sense that nobody engages in practice. Conventional > speech is figurative and abbreviational, whereas ultimate > speech is literal. > > T: Is "conventionally true" not true? Suppose when the conventional > truths are clearly understood as real truths that co-exist with the > ultimates truths (they are at different levels), will it help us to > avoid literal-reality errors? ------------------------------------------- Howard: There is conventional speech that is true and conventional speech that is false. But all conventional speech, properly understood, is figurative and abbreviational. Taken in that way, it can be true. Mis-taken as literal makes it all false. ---------------------------------------- > > Tep > === > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > >Hi, Tep (and Sarah &James) - > > > >In a message dated 8/30/07 10:32:07 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > >indriyabala@... writes: > > > >>Hi Sarah and James, - > >> > >>I'd like to point out a contradiction in Sarah's statements of > no self. > ========================== With metta, Howard #75754 From: "nidive" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:13 am Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nidive Hi Howard, > Thinking and proliferation are mental events. At the very least, we can agree on this. :-) Swee Boon #75755 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:18 am Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge scottduncan2 Dear Tep, Thanks for the reply: T: "You know that Connie is the 'Queen of Word Play'..." Scott: Totally acknowledged. Her Majesty reigns supreme. God Save The Queen. ("She's not a human being," Johnny Rotten). T: "...To explore the meanings of atta (or self) and views pertaining to atta. Do you agree with this objective? If not, then please suggest a change you deem appropriate. Once we have an agreed upon objective, I will answer the three questions." Scott: This sounds good. I can pursue something I've been meaning to in this context, i.e., trying to collect the various terms for 'self' and look at the similarities, differences, contexts, and so on. Let me know if this might be a good start... Sincerely, Scott. #75756 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:50 am Subject: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) indriyabala Hi Han and Scott, - I was aware of the planning for writing up a document of some sort, but I did not follow it very closely. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Scott and Tep, > > Tep had studied this sutta before at SD. > I think I will request Tep. > Tep, would you like to start the discussion on MN 152 > and related Patisambhidamagga extracts and other > suttas? > I am interested, Han. Two questions : What will the outcome be used for? Is the format at SariputtaDhamma sufficient? Tep ==== #75757 From: "nidive" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 8:25 am Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nidive Hi Tep, > T: Do you mean the khandhas, for example, are underlying a real > person? Elsewhere I learned (see a Sarah's recent message) about > the "derivative" of the five aggregate being partially real. Other > times, I was told that only the paramattha dhammas were real and > there were no real persons (they are illusion), or even in-and-out > breaths were not a reality. So I think the concept of realities > should be carefully examined. Not only do I think the concept of realities should be carefully examined, I also think the concept of "'concepts' vs 'realities'" should be carefully examined as well. It could very well turn out to be the biggest red herring of the Dhamma in our days. Could the separation of experienced phenomena into 'concepts' and 'realities' be just a mundane & useless mental exercise carried out according to a conceptualized set of conceptualized criteria? I don't know, but as far as I know, the Buddha hadn't expounded on "'concepts' vs 'realities'" in the suttas. Swee Boon #75758 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:20 am Subject: Visuddhimagga 183-185 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga 183-185 Intro: In section 183 the results of the formation of demerit, akusala kamma, have been dealt with, taking into account the kinds of generation such as egg-born etc., the destinies and other aspects. In section 184 different aspects concerning the results of the formation of the imperturbable, aruupaavacara kusala kamma, have been dealt with. ----------- Text Vis.183: The formation of demerit as rebirth-linking ripens in the sense-sphere becoming only, ------- N: Akusala kamma can produce rebirth-consciousness, and it does so only in the unhappy planes of existence which are part of the sense sphere. -------- Text Vis.: in the four kinds of generation, in the remaining three destinies, ------- N: The remaining three destinies referred to here are the unhappy planes of existence which are: the hell planes, the plane of the petas, and the animal world. Those who are born there may be egg- born, womb-born, putrescence- (moisture-) born, and of apparitional generation. -------- Text Vis.: in the one station of consciousness described thus 'different in body and same in perception' (D.iii.253), and in the one corresponding abode of beings. ------- N: In the section on the result of the formation of merit this referred to the result of the first ruupa-jhaana In this section the result of the formation of demerit is dealt with. We read in the Commentary to the ‘Greater Discourse on Causation’ (D II) that the beings born in the unhappy planes are of varying sizes and appearances. The corresponding abode of beings is the same as the second station of consciousness just mentioned. --------- Text Vis.:Therefore it is a condition in the way already stated for seven kinds of resultant consciousness in one kind of becoming, in four kinds of generation, in three kinds of destiny, in one station of consciousness, and in one abode of beings, both in rebirth-linking and in the course of an existence ((50)-(56)). ------- N: Here is a summary of the seven kinds of akusala vipaakacittas arising as rebirth-consciousness and in the course of life. These are five sense-cognitions that are akusala vipaakacittas, receiving- consciousness that is akusala vipaakacitta and investigating- consciousness that is akusala vipaakacitta. The latter functions also as rebirth-consciousness in an unhappy plane ------------- Text Vis. 184: The formation of the imperturbable as rebirth-linking ripens in the immaterial becoming, in the apparitional kind of generation only, in the divine destiny only, in the three stations of consciousness beginning with the base consisting of boundless space, and in the four abodes of beings beginning with the base consisting of boundless space. ((62)-(65)). --------- N: The fifth, sixth and seventh stations of consciousness are respectively birth in the aruupa-brahma planes as the result of the aruupa jhanas that have as subject: space is infinite, consciousness is infinite and ‘there is nothing’. The Co to the Great Discourse on Causation explains that the result of the fourth aruupa-jhaana, the base of neither perception nor non- perception is not included among the stations of consciousness since it is so subtle; it has attained the subtlety of residual formations. But it is included among the abodes of beings. -------- Text Vis.: Therefore it is a condition in the way already stated for the four kinds of consciousness in one kind of becoming, in one kind of generation, in one kind of destiny, in three stations of consciousness, and in four abodes of beings, both in rebirth-linking and in the course of becoming. ------------------------- Note 34. A Sinhalese text adds the following paragraph: 'Also the bodily formation, when giving rebirth-linking, gives the whole of its results in the sense-sphere becoming alone in the four generations, in the five destinies, in the first two stations of consciousness, and in two abodes of beings. Therefore it is a condition in the way already stated for the twenty-three kinds of consciousness in one kind of becoming, four generations, five destinies, two stations of consciousness, and two abodes of being, both in rebirth-linking and in the course of an existence. The same method applies to the verbal formation. ------- N: This text summarizes the vipaakacittas produced by kusala kamma of the sense sphere and akusala kamma through the body and through speech as twentythree: eight mahaa-vipaakacittas (with sobhana hetus), eight ahetuka kusala vipaakacittas and seven akusala vipaakacittas. -------- Text note 34: But the mental formation does not fail to ripen anywhere except in one abode of beings. Therefore it is a condition in the way already stated for the thirty-two kinds of resultant consciousness, as appropriate, in the three kinds of becoming, four generations, five destinies, seven stations of consciousness, and eight abodes of beings, both in rebirth-linking and in the course of an existence. ------ N: Akusala kamma through the mind, such as wrong views about kamma and vipaaka, or kusala kamma such as mental development, ruupa-jhaana or aruupa-jhaana, produces result in all planes of existence, except in the plane of the asa~n~nasattas, those without perception. In addition to the vipaakacittas of the sense-sphere just mentioned, there are the results of the five stages of ruupa-jhaana and the four stages of aruupa-jhaana. Altogether thirtytwo vipaakacittas are reckoned. ---------- Text of note 34 taken from the Tiika: There is no consciousness with formations as condition in the non-percipient abode of beings. Furthermore, in the case of non-percipient beings, the formation of merit is a condition, as kamma condition acting from a different time, for the kinds of materiality due to kamma performed'. ------ N: The formation of merit includes, as we have seen, also ruupa- jhaana. Those who develop ruupa-jhaana and see the disadvantage of naama can be reborn in the plane of the non-percipient beings. ---------- The following verse is an epilogue: Text Vis. 185: This is how: One should of these formations see For which and how they are conditions In birth and life and the three Kinds of becoming and the rest. This is the detailed explanation of the clause 'With formations as condition, consciousness'. ------- Conclusion: We have performed both akusala kamma and kusala kamma through body, speech and mind, but we do not know which type of kamma will produce rebirth-consciousness of a next life in which plane of existence, nor do we know what kind of result it will produce in the course of life. Neither do we know what kinds of rebirth in unhappy planes there were in the past. In this life we experience the results of kusala kamma and of akusala kamma. Kamma operating from a different time and natural decisive support condition are the conditions for kamma to produce result. We can learn that vipaakacitta such as seeing arises when there are conditions, that nobody can cause the arising of seeing. From all the details explained in the previous sections about kamma and vipaaka we can learn that there is no self who performs kamma, no self who receives its result. ****** Nina. #75759 From: han tun Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 3:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) hantun1 Dear Tep and Scott, It all started like this: I wrote to Nina that in my life I always look at the brighter and more positive side of things. For example, I have benign prostate hyperplasia; I think I am lucky I do not have prostate cancer. I also quoted MN 145 Punnovaada sutta and said that I like Ven Punna’s attitude. When the Buddha asked him what he would think if people of Sunaaparanta abused and threatened him, he answered that he would think people of Sunaaparanta were truly kind because they did not give him a blow with the fist, and so on. Nina replied that they also like this sutta, and she gave me another sutta reference (originated by Scott) when an object is repulsive one can see it as unrepulsive, in the case of beings, by applying metta to him, and in the case of inanimate objects by seeing them as elements. Or one can see them all as impermanent. This sutta turned out to be MN 152. However, I remembered that in SN 36.5 Datthabba Sutta the Buddha said that, pleasant feelings should be known as painful (sukha vedanaa dukkhato datthabbaa), painful feelings should be known as a thorn (dukkha vedanaa sallato datthabbaa), and neither-painful-nor-pleasant feelings should be known as impermanent (adukkha-masukha vedanaa aniccato datthabbaa).” Therefore I asked how I can reconcile “when an object is repulsive one can see it as unrepulsive (MN 152)” with “pleasant feelings should be known as painful (SN 36.5)”? Sarah also referred to Patisambhidamagga where similar contemplation (like in MN 152) was mentioned with regard to Ariyaa Iddhi, for which you had provided the English translation. ------------------------------ So our study can be (1) to answer my question of how to reconcile MN 152 with Patisambhidamagga on one hand and SN 36.5 on the other, or (2) forget my question and to study MN 152 with related suttas including Patisambhidamagga, or (3) to study MN 152 and Patisambhidamagga and at the same time try to answer my question if possible. The format can be anything that you deem appropriate. Respectfully, Han --- Tep Sastri wrote: > > Hi Han and Scott, - > > I was aware of the planning for writing up a > document of some sort, but I > did not follow it very closely. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun > > wrote: > > > > Dear Scott and Tep, > > > > Tep had studied this sutta before at SD. > > I think I will request Tep. > > Tep, would you like to start the discussion on MN > 152 > > and related Patisambhidamagga extracts and other > > suttas? > > > > I am interested, Han. > Two questions : What will the outcome be used for? > Is the format at > SariputtaDhamma sufficient? > > > Tep > ==== > > #75760 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 4:21 pm Subject: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) indriyabala Dear han and Scott, - >Han: > > So our study can be (1) to answer my question of how > to reconcile MN 152 with Patisambhidamagga on one hand > and SN 36.5 on the other, or (2) forget my question > and to study MN 152 with related suttas including > Patisambhidamagga, or (3) to study MN 152 and > Patisambhidamagga and at the same time try to answer > my question if possible. The format can be anything > that you deem appropriate. T: I vote for (3). Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Tep and Scott, > > It all started like this: > > I wrote to Nina that in my life I always look at the > brighter and more positive side of things. For #75761 From: han tun Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 4:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) hantun1 Dear Scott (Tep), I agree with Tep. What is your opinion, please? Thank you. Han #75762 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:09 pm Subject: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) scottduncan2 Dear Han, Regarding: H: "I agree with Tep. What is your opinion, please? [...(3) to study MN 152 and Patisambhidamagga and at the same time try to answer my question if possible. The format can be anything that you deem appropriate.] T: "I vote for (3)." Scott: I'm in, men. Lead on. This will be fun studying with the old pros. Sincerely, Scott. #75763 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:13 pm Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge indriyabala Hi Swee, - I am very much interested in pursuing the idea that you have stated often here and at the SD Group. You've said that the Buddha did not teach "concepts" (pannatti?) in the Sutta-pitaka. I am not so sure. I only know from reading the suttas that many monks graduated with the Arahantship degree without the knowledge about concepts and that concepts are inferior to ultimate realities. >Swee: > Not only do I think the concept of realities should be carefully > examined, I also think the concept of "'concepts' vs 'realities'" > should be carefully examined as well. It could very well turn out to be the biggest red herring of the Dhamma in our days. > > Could the separation of experienced phenomena into 'concepts' and > 'realities' be just a mundane & useless mental exercise carried out > according to a conceptualized set of conceptualized criteria? > > I don't know, but as far as I know, the Buddha hadn't expounded on > "'concepts' vs 'realities'" in the suttas. > Tep: IMHO Buddhist practitioners need concepts to come up with "right thought", then they abandon it in order to attain a higher state (read the quote from MN 78 below). .............. (I) "And as I remained thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, thinking imbued with renunciation arose. I discerned that 'Thinking imbued with renunciation has arisen in me; and that leads neither to my own affliction, nor to the affliction of others, nor to the affliction of both. It fosters discernment, promotes lack of vexation, & leads to Unbinding. If I were to think & ponder in line with that even for a night... even for a day... even for a day & night, I do not envision any danger that would come from it, except that thinking & pondering a long time would tire the body. When the body is tired, the mind is disturbed; and a disturbed mind is far from concentration.' So I steadied my mind right within, settled, unified, & concentrated it. Why is that? So that my mind would not be disturbed." Majjhima Nikaya 19 Dvedhavitakka Sutta: Two Sorts of Thinking http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn019.html#habit (II) "Being resolved on renunciation (freedom from sensuality), on non-ill will, on harmlessness. These are called skillful resolves. What is the cause of skillful resolves? Their cause, too, has been stated, and they are said to be perception-caused. Which perception? — for perception has many modes & permutations. Any renunciation- perception, non-ill will-perception or harmlessness-perception: That is the cause of skillful resolves. Now where do skillful resolves cease without trace? Their cessation, too, has been stated: There is the case where a monk, with the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. This is where skillful resolves cease without trace. [MN 78] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.078.than.html Tep === #75764 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:16 pm Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge (atta and anatta) scottduncan2 Dear Nina, I thought this was humourous: N: "...I am finding it more and more difficult to react to these notty questions about what is real, are conventional realities real, how real are they...." Scott: Sounds as if you think the whole thing is both 'knotty' and 'naughty'. Sincerely, Scott. #75765 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:23 pm Subject: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) indriyabala Dear Scott and Han (Attn: Sarah), - Thank you for your gentlemen agreement that we adopt the third choice. What do you think should be the best title for this new discussion thread? Once you give me a title, I will post the first message soon. BTW Being called an "old pro" is a disadvantage, because it implies a perfect skill that I do not have. Tep === #75766 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:37 pm Subject: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) scottduncan2 Dear Tep, T: "What do you think should be the best title for this new discussion thread?" Scott: What about 'Knowing Vedanaa'. T: "BTW Being called an "old pro" is a disadvantage, because it implies a perfect skill that I do not have." Scott: Oh, is that all. I thought you'd be more upset by the 'old' part of the phrase which implies... Sincerely, Scott. #75767 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:39 pm Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge (atta and anatta) indriyabala Dear Scott and Nina (Attn: Sarah, Han, Howard, and Dieter), - Thank you Scott for the funny remark that reminded me that I had not yet given Nina a reply to that "knotty" but-not-naughty message. Also, I need to reply to Sarah's two messages which she posted a few days ago. Oh, this long message should give my good friend Howard a one-shot answer to some of his questions in the earlier posts as well. (Maybe I am too optimistic?) In a moment I will write a long post that takes care of the unfinished business with both Nina and Sarah. This post is very important, I believe, because it will advance our discussion state to the "next level". {:>)) Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Nina, > > I thought this was humourous: > > N: "...I am finding it more and more difficult to react to these notty > questions about what is real, are conventional realities real, how > real are they...." > > Scott: Sounds as if you think the whole thing is both 'knotty' and > 'naughty'. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > #75768 From: "nidive" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:37 pm Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nidive Hi Tep, > I am very much interested in pursuing the idea that you have stated > often here and at the SD Group. You've said that the Buddha did not > teach "concepts" (pannatti?) in the Sutta-pitaka. I am not so sure. > I only know from reading the suttas that many monks graduated with > the Arahantship degree without the knowledge about concepts and > that concepts are inferior to ultimate realities. The Buddha taught sights, sounds, aromas, tastes, tactile sensations and mind ideas. Skillful resolves is a mind idea. You may call it a concept, but then according to Abhidhamma, a concept is not real (does not exist in reality). If concepts don't exist, what then is skillful resolves? Swee Boon #75769 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 5:46 pm Subject: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) indriyabala Dear Scott and Han, - Thank you very much for both the entertainment and the reply to my request. > T: "What do you think should be the best title for this new discussion thread?" > > Scott: What about 'Knowing Vedanaa'. > T: That is fine. Does Han have another thought? > T: "BTW Being called an "old pro" is a disadvantage, because it > implies a perfect skill that I do not have." > > Scott: Oh, is that all. I thought you'd be more upset by the 'old' > part of the phrase which implies... > T: It implies an old person, but not the kind of self that means 'soul or ego identity. [:-|) Tep === #75770 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 6:04 pm Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge indriyabala > > Tep: I only know from reading the suttas that many monks graduated with the Arahantship degree without the knowledge about concepts and that concepts are inferior to ultimate realities. > >Swee: The Buddha taught sights, sounds, aromas, tastes, tactile sensations and mind ideas. > > Skillful resolves is a mind idea. > > You may call it a concept, but then according to Abhidhamma, a > concept is not real (does not exist in reality). > ........... T: It might sound like I disagreed with you, but actually I did not. Taking breathing as an example of a "concept". The Buddha and the Arahant disciples never referred to the breaths as such. Yet they effectively and successfully used anapanasati to achieve great benefits. That's why I wrote "many monks graduated with the Arahantship degree without the knowledge about concepts". T: If conepts are not real, do not exist; then it is funny that those monks used illusions to attain arahantship. >Swee: > If concepts don't exist, what then is skillful resolves? > Good question ! You should have asked Nina, Sarah, Scott, Howard, KenH and the whole Abhidhamma gang of DSG. Tep === #75771 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 6:21 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge indriyabala Hi Howard, - >Howard (#75753): It sounds like you are saying that what seems real is what is real. I don't think so. ... In fact, I don't consider even the paramattha dhammas to be separate, self-existent realities. I consider it mere convention at best to view them as such or as sheer delusion at worst. ... There is conventional speech that is true and conventional speech that is false. But all conventional speech, properly understood, is figurative and abbreviational. Taken in that way, it can be true. Mis- taken as literal makes it all false. T: These views spring from attaanudi.t.thi and attavaadupaadaana. They disappear (cease) after self views are abadoned, I think. Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Tep - > > In a message dated 8/31/07 12:03:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > indriyabala@... writes: > > > Hi Howard, - > > > > Thank you for sharing some interesting thoughts with me. > > #75772 From: han tun Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 6:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) hantun1 Dear Tep and Scott, 'Knowing Vedanaa' will be fine. Han --- Tep Sastri wrote: > T: That is fine. Does Han have another thought? #75773 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 2:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 8/31/07 8:41:46 PM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > The Buddha taught sights, sounds, aromas, tastes, tactile sensations > and mind ideas. > > Skillful resolves is a mind idea. > > You may call it a concept, but then according to Abhidhamma, a > concept is not real (does not exist in reality). > > If concepts don't exist, what then is skillful resolves? > ========================= It is wholesome thinking. (And thinking is real enough.) With metta, Howard #75774 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 8:11 pm Subject: Some Findings About Self and Self Views indriyabala Hi Nina, Sarah, Howard, Scott, Swee, Han, James ..., - Below are samples from the four emails that I have not yet replied. These emails have the same underlying theme: self and self-views. After reading them, I found myself asking why I and my good friends continue to find disagreeable issues about "self" for so many years. Even when we seemed to agree (sometimes), soon we would disagree again. Atta is supposed to be the opposite to anatta, is it not? And the Anatta Doctrine is of such great importance. So, if we disagree (or Tep stubbornly disagrees with you, and he has been wrong) on atta, how can we possibly agree on anatta? Perhaps, our understandings on self and self views have been fundamentally different from the beginning, and as a consequence our discussion has never reached a conclusion. So I thought it might be a good idea for me to review the literature about atta and present my findings with comments (based on my perspective) to you all here to read. Then you can tell me whether or not our views (and understandings) are compatible; and if they are not, what can be done about it. Knowing similarity or difference between our understandings on the ideas of self is useful-- our discussion in the future should bring more benefit. We may even be able to obtain a better understanding on "self", "no self", and "not self" by virtues of the findings. ............................... Sarah (#75651): >..I read an interesting article about Mother Theresa's letters. Apparently, behind the smile, she was wracked with doubts and angst, questioning whether there really was a God and thereby a soul or Christ. She said in one letter that her smile was a mask for these thoughts that no one knew of. ... >However, when there is awareness, there's no idea of 'ageing process' or 'deteriorating body' - mere dhammas arising and falling away. No me, no age, no body! Sarah (#75653): > > T: I doubt it very much that the "characteristic of no-self" implies there is no person who suffers. .... >S: see the Vism passage just discussed about 'no experiencers' which you liked. > 171. Now it was also asked, 'Whose is the fruit, since there is no > experiencer?' Herein: > > 'Experiencer' is a convention > For mere arising of the fruit; > They say 'It fruits' as convention, > When on a tree appears its fruit. > .......... > >Tep: The following is a right view of those who know and see things the way they truly are : "Is it fitting to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'?". [SN 22.59] IMHO we have to be careful in interpreting what "self" (atta) really means. See DN 15, Maha- nidana Sutta, for the several meanings of 'atta' that are complementary to SN 22.59 (Anatta-lakkhana Sutta). .... >S: Would you care to elaborate and quote from these suttas? It might be useful. ------------------------------------------------ >Nina (#75732): 'That is is mine', 'That's who I am', 'This is my self' , these three are explained as representing lobha (without ditthi), conceit and wrong view. We can cling to 'myself' in different ways. ... >When these are in one sentence with concepts and paramattha dhammas confusion may arise. ... >We can give names to different people so long as we do not forget that they are five khandhas that arise and fall away. ... >We study all the texts, but to apply them and really understand anatta is a different matter. ----------------------------------------------- > >T (asking Howard): Are the five aggregates real? If they are, then why is their derivative not real (does not exist), or not a "substantial reality in its own right" ? >Howard (#75751) : A conventional analogy, Tep: The shimmering heat waves rising from the hot desert sand are "real", but is the pool of refreshing water that seems to be there and is derived from the shimmering air also "real". Another conventional analogy: The coiled rope lying in the path on a moonlit night is "real". Is the snake that it appears to be also "real"? What more is there "to person" than the actual khandhic elements? Is there anything else, except for conceptualization? Tep. I can assure you that it is possible to have the experience of there being nothing but the khandhic dhammas, with nothing additional that is "the person". ---------------------------------------------- T: I will also elaborate and give sutta quotes to support the proposed study. Just let me know if you are interested. Tep === #75775 From: han tun Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:39 pm Subject: Perfections Corner (08) hantun1 Dear All, This is the continuation of Chapter 10: The Perfection of Equanimity, taken from the book “The Perfections leading to Enlightenment” by Sujin Boriharnwanaket and translated by Nina van Gorkom. Questions, comments, or different opinions are welcome. ------------------------------ When equanimity arises, we are not disturbed and we do not utter unsuitable speech to someone who commits akusala kamma. Loving-kindness and equanimity arise with kusala citta. We should not take akusala for kusala. We should not believe that akusala dhamma is good and that we should utter strong language to the person who commits akusala kamma. The citta which is disturbed is akusala citta. If we develop paññå we can know the characteristic of the citta that is stable, unaffected by attachment and aversion. Then we can further develop the perfection of equanimity. ------------------------------ To be continued. Metta, Han P.S. Sarah, please let me know if it is too short. #75776 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge (atta and anatta) nilovg Dear Scott, What was in my mind: when we are thinking the reality is thinking. Too much thinking does not bring us very far. Understanding of the present moment solves dilemmas. Then we can know the difference between ultimate reality and concept. Nina. Op 1-sep-2007, om 2:16 heeft Scott Duncan het volgende geschreven: > I thought this was humourous: > > N: "...I am finding it more and more difficult to react to these notty > questions about what is real, are conventional realities real, how > real are they...." > > Scott: Sounds as if you think the whole thing is both 'knotty' and > 'naughty'. #75777 From: "Andrew" Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 12:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Virtue & Demerit corvus121 Dear Sarah and Nina Thank you for consulting your texts for me. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: >> S: Now the key Pali terms are, I believe, 'siilabbata.m jiivita.m > brahmacariya.m upa.t.thaanasaara.m'. > > If instead of 'practising the virtues...'/'all the virtues...'/'moral > practice... ', we were to substitute the meanings which seem correct and > more obvious to me(Buddhadatta's dictionary), we get: > > siilabbata - ceremonial observances > jiivita - life > brahmacariya - chaste life (holy life) > upa.t.thaana - waiting on, looking after, service > > Could we say something more like 'will every sort of observance in a holy > lifetstyle bring good fruit? > > Pali experts can do better of course, but my point is that it is > 'siilabbata' rather than just siila that is used in the text. Remember > that it is the same siilabbata which is used in 'siilabbata paraamaasa' > (attachment to rites and rituals), a kind of wrong view and practice > eradicated by the sotapanna. Andrew: A vivid example of the unlikelihood of being able to read a translated sutta and correctly discern its meaning without further reference or study. One can go "off the rails" very badly! The Sangha who composed, memorised and recorded the commentaries clearly knew this and have left a wonderful treasure. Thanks again and best wishes Andrew PS "Bula, bula" to Jon in Fiji! #75778 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 1:32 am Subject: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge jonoabb Hi Mike --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "m. nease" wrote: > > "...but exactly what is it that is heard through the ear. Is it > music/conversation, or is it audible data?" > > 'Data'--very nice, or even 'quanta'. Thanks, Mike. Yes, 'data' seems quite a good term here. > Much better than my attempted > 'scintillae' (though it had a certain charm, I thought). Indeed it did. I had noticed 'scintillae' had wondered where it came from; now I know! Jon #75779 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 1:54 am Subject: Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness jonoabb Hi Swee Boon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi Jon, > > > But I think we all agree that the words of the Buddha need a degree > > of 'interpretation' in order to make sense for us. > > Well, some make a 180 degree turn of 'interpretation' and changes the > whole meaning of a sutta. > > For example, Kimsuka Sutta clearly says that insight & samatha comes > in a pair in order to issue into nibbana, but you interpret it as > insight with jhana as basis for enlightenment. Well that's because I don't know any other way in which jhana and insight 'combine' at the time of enlightenment. I had no idea this would be perceived as a 180 degree turn. Perhaps you could share your own understanding of what is being referred to. You never know, I might agree ;-)) > Clearly, you have an aversed bias towards samatha when making such an > 'interpretation'? You have turned a simple English sentence and a > simple simile (a swift pair of messengers) into something of your own > liking anyway. How's that for an 'interpretation'? Again, I'll need you to explain. I don't understand why the idea of "insight with jhana as basis" should be indicative of a bias against samatha. Please say a little more about how you see this. > > For example, in this thread you have been making certain > > connections between the Ogha-tarana Sutta, DN 22 and the > > bhojjhangas, and you spoke I think about dispelling the "mystery" > > of the Ogha-tarana Sutta. > > Well this is exactly the kind of thing the commentaries might > > address. They do not declare 'new' doctrine, but they explain and > > elucidate their sutta in the context of the Tipitaka as a whole. > > Well, it appears that those who wrote the commentaries have no idea > of what the Buddha is talking about anyway. > > From post 20794 courtesy of Kom (& Ken H for digging it up): > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/20794 > > 4) The commentaries explained the second answers in the > following different ways [each comparing the different > states] > a) Because of kilesa, one is said to sink. Because of > abhi-sankara [bad and good kamma], one is said to be swept > away. > b) Because of attachment and wrong view, one sinks. Because > of the rest of kilesa and abhi-sankhara, one is swept away. > c) Because of attachment, one sinks. Because of dithi, one > is swept away. > d) Because of the wrong view of eternalism, one sinks. > Because of the wrong views of annihiliation, one is swept > away. This is because bhava-dithi is attached to the self > [???], but vibhava-dithi is attached to what is unknown > [speculative?]. > e) Because of attachment, one sinks. Because of the > udhacca, one is swept away. > f) Because of self-torture, one sinks. Because of > over-indulgence, one is swept away. > g) Because of all the akusala states, one sinks. Beause of > all the mundane kusala states, one is swept away. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > When the authors of the commentaries can't even give a concrete > answer, is there any hope of relying on them? Do they actually know > anything? If not, perhaps they should have shut up and not commented > on the Ogha-tarana Sutta. At the very least, it shows respect for the > Buddha. To say that one doesn't know when one doesn't know is a > virtue too. To say that one is giving an opinion or belief when > giving an opinion or belief is a virtue too. But to say that one is > *explaining* in an authoritative manner what the Buddha said when in > fact not knowing anything at all is just so wrong! !! !! Well you obviously have a bias against the commentaries ;-)) Apart from that, though, what exactly don't you agree with in the 7 different ways of 'sinking' and 'being swept away'. With reasons, please ;-)) > > Sometimes, perhaps often, we may have difficulty accepting what the > > commentaries have to say about the meaning of a passage. However, > > we should not dismiss them just because their view does not > > coincide with our own! > > Especially not when the authors apparently don't know anything at > all, yet pretended they actually know. What I think you mean is that you know better than any of the authors of the commentaries ;-)) Jon #75780 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 2:05 am Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge jonoabb Hi Swee Boon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi Jon, > > > Then we may be talking at cross-purposes. what is your > > understanding of what satipatthana is? > > I have no fixed definition of what satipatthana is. I try to follow > what the Buddha taught in DN 22 as close as possible. It's a process > of discovery, and there could only be a fixed definition perhaps on > the day I attain arahant-ship. Or maybe it doesn't really matter by > then since it would be almost (perhaps certainly) the same as that > taught in DN 22. > > But as far as I can tell, satipatthana does not concern only the > "present moment". Neither is it just a special moment of sati. Interesting. You have said 2 things about satipatthana: 1. It does not concern only the "present moment" (in inverted commas) 2. It is not just a special moment of sati I'd be very interested to hear more, if you'd care to share. > > Take listening to speech. As I understand the position reflected > > in the teachings, at the time of (mere) sound being experienced by > > hearing consciousness, there is no 'voice', no 'speaker', no > > 'word'. These are all things that are 'recognised' a split second > > later after the audible object just heard has been 'thought about'. > > What do you mean by "thought about"? Thinking can be a very tiring > process. Thinking about a billion "audible objects" can be a daunting > task, if not impossible. It would indeed be a daunting task if it required any input fromus. But the thinking here is what might conventionally be called subliminal thinking, i.e., it goes on without our even being aware it's happening. Jon #75781 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 4:06 am Subject: Re: Perfections Corner (06) philofillet Hi Nina I forgot to thank you for your translation the other day, Nina. Sorry that I won't be able to help Han and all in presenting the book or leading discussions. I think I am the most focussed I have ever been on my writing, really enjoying it too - and no doubt that's because I'm staying off the internet. That'll continue for awhile! :) But I am reading and reflecting. I'm glad I'm continuing to appreciate AS despite my many objections. It would have been silly of me to reject her outright, we can learn from all kinds of approaches...I think without Han it would have been harder for me to learn that. Metta, Phil p.s thanks colette - sorry I can't get back to you - and Sarah and Han. > so glad to see you back. Even a short post is appreciated. I am glad > you find the book worth while studying. > Yes, we may cling to developing the perfections but if we have > correct understanding of them the very perfections will lead to less > clinging. #75782 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 4:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (08) sarahprocter... Dear Han & all, --- han tun wrote: > When equanimity arises, we are not disturbed and we do > not utter unsuitable speech to someone who commits > akusala kamma. ... S: This is the same theme of not minding others' akusala and not being disturbed by how others behave. K.Sujin always stresses this - why mind when it just brings more disturbance? We can all think of many examples - how governments or politicians behave, how monks behave, how animals are treated, how members here behave at times....on and on. The problem is only ever the disturbed citta now when we mind. .... Loving-kindness and equanimity arise > with kusala citta. We should not take akusala for > kusala. ... S: No metta or equanimity when there's minding! > P.S. Sarah, please let me know if it is too short. .... S: Pls make the extracts as long or short as you wish, Han. I only made my comment because I thought you were finding it a bit of a burden, but now you have found the on-line version it may be easier, I hope. Actually, there's a lot of wealth in just a few lines, but as you say, one has to look at the context....sometimes it needs to be longer, so as not to cut a quote and so on. Entirely up to your own good judgment. We all like your presentations as they are. (Better if I'd kept quiet!). Metta, Sarah ======== #75783 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 5:36 am Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge indriyabala Hi Swee (and any abhidhammika), - Thank you for good comments & good questions. > > Tep: I only know from reading the suttas that many monks graduated with the Arahantship degree without the knowledge about concepts and that concepts are inferior to ultimate realities. > >Swee: The Buddha taught sights, sounds, aromas, tastes, tactile sensations and mind ideas. > > Skillful resolves is a mind idea. > > You may call it a concept, but then according to Abhidhamma, a > concept is not real (does not exist in reality). > ........... T: It might sound like I disagreed with you, but actually I did not. Taking breathing as an example of a "concept". The Buddha and the Arahant disciples never referred to the breaths as such. Yet they effectively and successfully used anapanasati to achieve great benefits. That's why I wrote "many monks graduated with the Arahantship degree without the knowledge about concepts". T: If conepts are not real, do not exist; then it is funny that those monks used illusions to attain arahantship. >Swee: > If concepts don't exist, what then is skillful resolves? > Good question ! You should have asked Nina, Sarah, Scott, Howard, KenH and the whole Abhidhamma gang of DSG. Tep === #75784 From: han tun Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 5:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (08) hantun1 Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for your kind remarks. > When equanimity arises, we are not disturbed and we > do not utter unsuitable speech to someone who > commits akusala kamma. S: This is the same theme of not minding others' akusala and not being disturbed by how others behave. K.Sujin always stresses this - why mind when it just brings more disturbance? We can all think of many examples - how governments or politicians behave, how monks behave, how animals are treated, how members here behave at times....on and on. The problem is only ever the disturbed citta now when we mind. Han: Very true. I never mind others’ akusala. I always look for positive aspects of others. --------------------- > Loving-kindness and equanimity arise with kusala > citta. We should not take akusala for kusala. S: No metta or equanimity when there's minding! Han: I do not quite understand what you mean. Could you kindly explain to me, please. -------------------- > P.S. Sarah, please let me know if it is too short. S: Pls make the extracts as long or short as you wish, Han. Han: Thank you very much. But I would appreciate your guidance and feed-back on a continuing basis. Respectfully, Han #75785 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 5:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Making Comparisons (... Re: Proper Training as a Co...) nilovg Dear Tep, Scott, as soon as we are born we get older. That is the dukkha of life. Nina. Op 1-sep-2007, om 2:46 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > Scott: Oh, is that all. I thought you'd be more upset by the 'old' > > part of the phrase which implies... > > > > T: It implies an old person, but not the kind of self that > means 'soul or ego identity. [:-|) #75786 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 5:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Some Findings About Self and Self Views nilovg Dear Tep, your sutta quotes are always very good. You quote parts of different posts, but do not feel obliged to asnwer my posts. They are just some thoughts and nobody needs to feel any obligation to answer. Our list is very busy. with appreciation, Nina. Op 1-sep-2007, om 5:11 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > T: I will also elaborate and give sutta quotes to support the > proposed study. Just let me know if you are interested. #75787 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 5:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Virtue & Demerit nilovg Dear Andrew, Op 1-sep-2007, om 9:47 heeft Andrew het volgende geschreven: > Andrew: A vivid example of the unlikelihood of being able to read a > translated sutta and correctly discern its meaning without further > reference or study. One can go "off the rails" very badly! The > Sangha who composed, memorised and recorded the commentaries clearly > knew this and have left a wonderful treasure. ------ N: More and more I come to this conclusion. We at the present time are lost without the commentaries. I appreciate your answer, Nina. #75788 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 6:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge (atta and anatta) scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Thanks for the reply: N: "What was in my mind: when we are thinking the reality is thinking. Too much thinking does not bring us very far. Understanding of the present moment solves dilemmas. Then we can know the difference between ultimate reality and concept." Scott: The content of the thinking - the thoughts, I guess - seem so compelling, so important. They seem to contain wisdom and understanding and seem to hold the promise of revealing the most precious and important things. I like learning that pa~n~natti are conventional realities. A moment when thinking is known as thinking is absolute. That's not quite right. The moment that thinking is known for its characteristic is not thinking, nor is the content of the thinking necessarily the object. The thoughts themselves - all the concepts - don't have the authenticity that the dhamma which 'thinks'. They are not even the object of such a moment, I don't think, hence really quite chimeric and irrelevant. Too bad, I love what I think sometimes... Sincerely, Scott. #75789 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 6:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge (atta and anatta) nilovg Dear Scott, Op 1-sep-2007, om 15:29 heeft Scott Duncan het volgende geschreven: > A moment when thinking is known as thinking is absolute. That's not > quite right. The moment that thinking is known for its characteristic > is not thinking, nor is the content of the thinking necessarily the > object. The thoughts themselves - all the concepts - don't have the > authenticity that the dhamma which 'thinks'. They are not even the > object of such a moment, I don't think, hence really quite chimeric > and irrelevant. Too bad, I love what I think sometimes... ------ N: Perhaps I did not express myself clearly. When thinking arises we learn that thinking is a kind of nama, not self. It is for example different from seeing. But usually we are absorbed in the story we think of and find that very important. Nina. #75790 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 6:45 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (65) nichiconn Dear Friends, 12. So.lasanipaato 1. Pu.n.naatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa part 9 Verse: 244. "Yassa braahma.na tva.m bhiito, sadaa udakamotari; tameva brahme maakaasi, maa te siita.m chavi.m hane. 244. Do not do the very thing, brahman, for fear of which you have always gone down to the water, Brahman, do not let the cold strike your skin. Cy: Idaani yadi paapa.m pavaahetukaamosi, sabbena sabba.m paapa.m maa karohiiti dassetu.m "yassa, braahma.naa"ti gaathamaaha. Tattha tameva brahme maakaasiiti yato paapato tva.m bhiito, tameva paapa.m brahme, braahma.na, tva.m maa akaasi. Udakorohana.m pana iidise siitakaale kevala.m sariirameva baadhati Tenaaha- "maa te siita.m chavi.m hane"ti, iidise siitakaale udakaabhisecanena jaatasiita.m tava sariiracchavi.m maa haneyya maa baadhesiiti attho. 244. In order to point out, "Now, if you wish for evil to be carried away in every way, do not do evil," she spoke the verse beginning [Do not do] the very thing, brahman. There, do not do (maakaasi) the very thing, brahman, means: the evil that you are afraid of, that very evil, O brahman (brahme = braaha.na), you should not do (maa akaasi). But [ritual] descent into water like this at the time of cold weather harms your body. Therefore she says, do not let the cold strike your skin. At the time of cold weather like this, you should not strike, you not oppress the skin of your body with the cold produced through ablution in water. That is the meaning. Verse: 245. "Kummaggapa.tipanna.m ma.m, ariyamagga.m samaanayi; dakaabhisecanaa bhoti, ima.m saa.ta.m dadaami te. 245. Noble lady, you have brought me, entered upon the wrong way, back into the noble path. I give you this water-ablution robe. Cy: Kummaggapa.tipanna.m manti "udakaabhisecanena suddhi hotii"ti ima.m kummagga.m micchaagaaha.m pa.tipanna.m paggayha .thita.m ma.m. Ariyamagga.m samaanayiiti "sabbapaapassa akara.na.m, kusalassa upasampadaa"ti (dii. ni. 2.90; dha. pa. 183; netti. 30, 116, 124; pe.tako. 29) ima.m buddhaadiihi ariyehi gatamagga.m samaanayi, sammadeva upanesi, tasmaa bhoti ima.m saa.taka.m tu.t.thidaana.m aacariyabhaaga.m tuyha.m dadaami, ta.m pa.tigga.nhaati attho. 245. Me, entered upon the wrong way means: me, standing there, thinking, "There is purity through ablution in water," I entered a wrong way, taking up a wrong grasping. You have brought me back (samaanayi) into the noble path (ariya-magga.m) means: you have brought me back, you have brought me properly (samma-d-eva upanesi) to the noble path trod (ariyehi gata-magga.m) by the Buddhas, etc, with the words, "Not doing any evil, [gain] full ordination as meritorious action." Therefore, noble lady, I give you this robe, this gift of joy, as a teacher's fee. Please accept it. Verse: 246. "Tuyheva saa.tako hotu, naahamicchaami saa.taka.m; sace bhaayasi dukkhassa, sace te dukkhamappiya.m. 246. Keep the robe for yourself. I do not want the robe. If you are afraid of pain, if pain is unpleasant for you, Cy: Saa ta.m pa.tikkhipitvaa dhamma.m kathetvaa sara.nesu siilesu ca pati.t.thaapetu.m "tuyheva saa.tako hotu, naahamicchaami saa.takan"ti vatvaa "sace bhaayasi dukkhassaa"ti-aadimaaha. Tassattho- yadi tuva.m sakalaapaayike sugatiya~nca aphaasukataadobhaggataadibhedaa dukkhaa bhaayasi. Yadi te ta.m appiya.m na i.t.tha.m. 246. She rejected it and taught him the Doctrine in order to establish him in the refuge of virtuous conduct, saying, Keep the robe for yourself. I do not want the robe. And she said, if you are afraid of pain, etc. The meaning of that is: if you are afraid of birth in all the lower realms and of the pain that is divided into the uncomfortable, misfortune, etc. If it is unpleasant to you, not desired [by you]. ===tbc, connie. #75791 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 6:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (07) nilovg Dear Han, Op 31-aug-2007, om 4:13 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > If we do not develop satipa.t.thaana, we are easily > affected by attachment and aversion and the citta is > not calm. We encounter external objects which cause > sadness and distress. Our unhappy mood is conditioned > by unpleasant objects which appear through eyes, ears, > nose, tongue and bodysense. People who are free from > sorrow are unaffected by attachment and aversion with > regard to people and events and this means that they > have developed the perfection of equanimity. -------- If we do not at least begin to have more understanding that one object is experienced through one doorway at a time, we are infatuated by the 'stories' about this or that person, this or that event. Then it is very difficult to have equanimity and we can notice that it does not arise on command. Satipatthana leads to understanding conditions which are byond control. Gradually we may learn that whenever there is seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting or the experience of objects through the bodysense, it is vipaakacitta produced by kamma. As I wrote in 'Asoka', the monk who follows the Buddha's teaching can accept any kind of vipåka with evenmindedness. We still like pleasant objects and dislike unpleasant objects, but right understanding leads to being less enslaved. Nina. #75792 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 6:56 am Subject: [dsg] Re: satipatthana as island of refuge (atta and anatta) scottduncan2 Dear Nina, No, you were clear. The 'that's not quite right' was in reference to my own sentence just prior to it. I left the 'not quite right' sentence in in case it was 'sort of right'. N: "...When thinking arises we learn that thinking is a kind of nama, not self. It is for example different from seeing. But usually we are absorbed in the story we think of and find that very important." Scott: Exactly. I see it as you do; you express it well. The story is so compelling... Sincerely, Scott. #75793 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 6:24 am Subject: Conditions, Ch 13, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, We read in the “Patthåna” (Faultless Triplet, VII, Investigation Chapter, § 430) about the faculties which are the five senses, under the section indeterminate dhamma (avyåkata, neither kusala nor akusala, including vipåkacitta, kiriyacitta or rúpa) that indeterminate dhamma which is rúpa is related to another indeterminate dhamma which is vipåkacitta by way of faculty-condition: Eye-faculty is related to eye-consciousness by faculty-condition; ear- faculty to ear-consciousness... nose-faculty to nose-consciousness... tongue-faculty to tongue-consciousness... body-faculty is related to body-consciousness by faculty-condition. The rúpas which are the five senses are also physical bases or places of origin, vatthus; they condition the five pairs of sense- cognitions, the dvi-pañca-viññånas, also by dependence-condition, nissaya-paccaya (see Ch 6), and by prenascence-condition, pure-jåta- paccaya (see Ch 9), since they have to arise previously to the citta for which they are the base. The faculties which are rúpa are produced by kamma. The quality of these faculties is different for different people: some have keen eyesense, others have weak eyesense, and the same for the other faculties. One may wonder why the rúpas which are the five senses are faculties and why, for example, the four Great Elements on which the other rúpas depend are not faculties. If there were no senses the four Great Elements could not even appear. Objects can only be experienced because there are faculties which condition the experience of objects by way of faculty-condition. If satipatthåna is not developed we cannot really understand the functions of the faculties which are the five senses, we will have only theoretical understanding of the faculties. When there is no awareness of realities as they appear one at a time, we do not know when there is seeing and when there is hearing. Different experiences seem to occur at the same time. If there can be awareness of visible object, the reality which appears through the eyesense, we can begin to understand that visible object could not appear without eyesense; and thus the function of the eye faculty, the “leader” in the field of seeing, will be clearer. Eyesense is different from earsense or bodysense. The senses do not belong to a self who could coordinate the different functions of seeing, hearing and the other experiences. We are inclined to confuse the different realities which appear at different moments; we may not be able to distinguish, for example, the characteristic of seeing from the characteristic of touching. ******* Nina. #75794 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 3:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Some Findings About Self and Self Views upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 8/31/07 11:11:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes with regard tothe Buddha's teaching on anatta: > T: I will also elaborate and give sutta quotes to support the > proposed study. Just let me know if you are interested -------------------------------------- Howard: Of course. It is always useful to clarify what the anatta teaching is! ====================== With metta, Howard #75795 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 7:27 am Subject: Knowing Vedana indriyabala Hi Sarah, Scott, Han, - Han's question: How I can reconcile "when an object is repulsive one can see it as unrepulsive (MN 152)" with "pleasant feelings should be known as painful (SN 36.5)"? The "committee" chose Option(3) and assigned Tep to attempt to answer Han's question. Please take the answer to be given below as a "strawman" that you can add or subtract something to and from it; modify or correct it anyway you want, or even completely reject it and give your own version. The relevant satta and Patism quotes are as follows. I) MN 152: "And how, Ananda, is one a noble one with developed faculities? [note: 'Ariya bhaavitindriya: the arahant is meant']......... If he should wish: 'May I abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive,' he abides perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive. If he should wish: 'May I abide perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive,' he abides perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive......'unrepulsive in the repulsive and unrepulsive......'.....'repulsive in the unrepulsive and repulsive.....'May I, avoiding both the repulsive and unrepulsive, abide in equanimity, mindful and fully aware,' he abides in equanimity towards that, mindful and fully aware." II) SN 36.5 Datthabba Sutta : "There are, O monks, these three feelings: pleasant, painful and neither-painful-nor-pleasant. Pleasant feelings should be known as painful, painful feelings should be known as a thorn, and neither- painful-nor-pleasant feelings should be known as impermanent. If a monk has known the feelings in such a way, it is said of him that he has the right outlook. He has cut off craving, severed the fetters (to existence) and, through the full penetration of conceit, he has made an end of suffering." Who sees the pain in happiness and views the painful feeling as a thorn, perceives the transience in neutral feeling which is peaceful — right outlook, truly, has such a monk who fully understands these feelings; And having penetrated them, he will be taint-free in this very life. Mature in knowledge, firm in Dhamma's ways, when once his life-span ends, his body breaks, all measure and concept he has transcended. III) Patisambhidamagga: (DSG # 75645) 27. What is Noble Ones' success? Here if the Bhikkhu should wish (1) 'May I abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive', he abides perceiving the unrepulsive there. If he should wish (2) 'May I abide perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive', he abides perceiving the repulsive there. If he should wish (3) 'May I abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive and the unrepulsive', he abides perceiving the unrepulsive there. If he should wish (4) 'May I abide perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive and the repulsive', he abides perceiving the repulsive there. If he should wish (5) 'Avoiding both [aspects] in the repulsive and the unrepulsive, may I abide in equanimity towards that, mindful and fully aware', he abides in equanimity towards that, mindful and fully aware. (1) How does he abide perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive? In the case of a disagreeable object he is intent upon it with loving- kindness, or he connects it with principles. That is how he abides perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive. .... ... ... IV) My one-franc answer: The second part of SN 36.5 states that "Who sees the pain in happiness and views the painful feeling as a thorn,.." has the "right outlook" and "fully understands these feelings". Such right understanding is necessary for her/him to transcend "all measure and concept", which to me means complete abandoning of upadana. 1. Why seeing pain in happiness ? Because seeing happiness with delight(nandi-raga) cannot transcend cravings. 2. What about seeing repulsive object as unrepulsive? This "right outlook" of "perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive" [MN 152] is again for the purpose of transcending cravings in unrepulsive things. Seeing dangers in pleasureable/unrepulsive objects leads to nibbida. 3. How is the nibbida contemplation practiced? Patism explains as follows: "In the case of an agreeable object he is intent upon it as foul, or he connects it with impermanence. That is how he abides perceiving the repulsive in the unrepulsive." The first is samatha (kayagata-sati), and the second is vipassana. I hope the above reply is adequate. Please advise. Tep === #75796 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 6:35 am Subject: Asoka, Ch 3, no 8. nilovg Dear friends, The monk who is even-minded when he is vexed by others has developed satipatthåna to the degree that he realizes “kammassakata ñåna”. He does not think about other people who annoy him and about the unpleasant object he hears, he realizes directly vipåka which is conditioned by kamma. At that moment there is no world, no other people, no self. We then read that Såriputta said: “If, your reverences, others comport themselves in undesirable, disagreeable, unpleasant ways towards that monk, and he receives blows from their hands and from clods of earth and from sticks and weapons, he comprehends thus: ‘ This body is such that blows from hands affect it and blows from clods of earth affect it and blows from sticks affect it and blows from weapons affect it. But this was said by the Lord in the Parable of the Saw: “If, monks, low-down thieves should carve you limb from limb with a two-handled saw, whoever sets his heart at enmity, he, for this reason, is not a doer of my teaching.” Unsluggish energy shall come to be stirred up by me, unmuddled mindfulness set up, the body tranquillised, impassible, the mind composed and one-pointed. Now, willingly, let blows from hands affect this body, let blows from clods of earth... from sticks... from weapons affect it, for this teaching of the Awakened Ones is being done.’... “ The monk who follows the Buddha’s teaching realizes without having to think about it that pain is vipåka conditioned by kamma. He can accept any kind of vipåka with evenmindedness. So long as we confuse nåma and rúpa we are full of the idea of self, of “my mind” and “my body”. When we begin to be mindful of one reality at a time we are on the way to right understanding of nåma and rúpa. At the first stage of vipassanå ñåna nåma and rúpa are clearly distinguished from each other and only then their nature of non-self can be realized. But after this first stage paññå has to be developed further so that the subsequent stages can arise and the characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anattå will be penetrated more clearly. As insight develops there will be more detachment from nåma and rúpa and eventually enlightenment can be attained. ********* Nina. #75797 From: "nidive" Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 7:57 am Subject: Re: Another Observation about Mindfulness nidive Hi Jon, > Again, I'll need you to explain. I don't understand why the idea > of "insight with jhana as basis" should be indicative of a bias > against samatha. Please say a little more about how you see this. If there is "insight with jhana as basis", there would also be "insight without jhana as basis". Am I right to say that? Consequently, one can claim that full awakening is attained by means of insight alone. Am I right to say that? > > 4) The commentaries explained the second answers in the > > following different ways [each comparing the different > > states] > > a) Because of kilesa, one is said to sink. Because of > > abhi-sankara [bad and good kamma], one is said to be swept > > away. > > b) Because of attachment and wrong view, one sinks. Because > > of the rest of kilesa and abhi-sankhara, one is swept away. > > c) Because of attachment, one sinks. Because of dithi, one > > is swept away. > > d) Because of the wrong view of eternalism, one sinks. > > Because of the wrong views of annihiliation, one is swept > > away. This is because bhava-dithi is attached to the self > > [???], but vibhava-dithi is attached to what is unknown > > [speculative?]. > > e) Because of attachment, one sinks. Because of the > > udhacca, one is swept away. > > f) Because of self-torture, one sinks. Because of > > over-indulgence, one is swept away. > > g) Because of all the akusala states, one sinks. Beause of > > all the mundane kusala states, one is swept away. > !! !! Well you obviously have a bias against the commentaries ;-)) > Apart from that, though, what exactly don't you agree with in the 7 > different ways of 'sinking' and 'being swept away'. With reasons, > please ;-)) If the authors of the commentaries actually knew what the Buddha is talking about, would they need to explain it in 7 different ways. The Buddha never said that there are 7 different ways of interpretation in the sutta itself. So why the number 7? Regarding (d), if one doesn't have the wrong view of eternalism & the wrong view of annihilationism, does it mean that one has crossed over the floods? Honestly Jon, do you think you still have wrong view of eternalism or annihilationism? If not, why haven't you crossed over the floods? Or why hasn't Howard crossed over the floods? Why aren't both of you arahants yet? Also, is the flood of wrong views of self the only flood to be crossed? What about the flood of sensuality? > What I think you mean is that you know better than any of the > authors of the commentaries ;-)) I have expressed that this interpretation of the Ogha-tarana is my belief & opinion right from the start. I have never said that "I KNOW BETTER THAN ANY OF THE AUTHORS OF THE COMMENTARIES". That would be pure conceit. But it has been proven without doubt (at least for me) that the authors of the commentary on the Ogha-tarana Sutta have proved themselves to be incompetent fools, which is why I do not put any hope on them. At the very least, I have backed up my interpretation of the Ogha- tarana Sutta with another sutta also spoken by the Buddha himself. Whose interpretation is more credible based on facts & merit? *Your* answer depends on your own biasness. Swee Boon #75798 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 7:58 am Subject: Re: Knowing Vedana .. a missing answer .. indriyabala Hi Sarah, Scott, Han (Nina and Howard), - In the earlier post I mistakenly omitted the second part of Han's question : perceiving the unrepulsive in the repulsive. The purpose is to guard against aversion in a repulsive (unpleasurable) object. This case is the opposite to the "perceiving the resulsive in the unrepulsive" that I explained earlier. With loving-kindness towards a person we do not like, we can avoid hate or anger. Or, by seeing a person as dhatus, not as a person, we can transcend upadana in the aggregates and avoid aversion. This is an excellent example of how a wise meditator sees the conventional truth and ultimate truth as co-existing with no conflict. S/he simply switches the perception from one domain to another whenever it is advantageous to transcend a wrong view. Tep === #75799 From: "nidive" Date: Sat Sep 1, 2007 8:55 am Subject: Re: satipatthana as island of refuge nidive Hi Jon, > 1. It does not concern only the "present moment" There can be contemplation on the past (recollection of past lives, reflection on what has been done through bodily, verbal & mental actions) and the future (contemplation on corpses and applying it to one's very own body in the future), not just the present. > 2. It is not just a special moment of sati Mindfulness is useful all the time as the Buddha said. > It would indeed be a daunting task if it required any input > fromus. But the thinking here is what might conventionally be > called subliminal thinking, i.e., it goes on without our even being > aware it's happening. Did the Buddha teach about subliminal thinking in the suttas? If it "goes on without our even being aware it's happening", I am very sure the Buddha didn't teach it in the suttas. If the Buddha didn't teach it in the suttas, it is irrelevant to the Dhamma. Swee Boon