#76800 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 1:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Dieter) - In a message dated 9/26/2007 8:29:08 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: Hi Howard and Dieter, - I have read every post between you two on the mundane & supramundane paths. I'd like to give a comment on Howard's concluding remark (below). .............. > Dieter: > I liked your wording: 'If that is so, then I agree... and like to use it too for my comment ;-). > Actually our common understanding is important , less than whether we agree 100% with the wording of the Venerable, isn't it? > --------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes. In fact, quite generally, one must be clear in one's own mind and clear in expressing to others how one is using language terms. We need to be clear ourselves, and there needs to be a commonality of basic understanding and terminology, else proper communication is very difficult, and there is enormous waste of time and effort "talking past" each other. I also think it is useful to avoid terms that are possibly differently understood, and emphasize exactly what one's perspective is and to what extent folks are in agreement as to the facts. It was along such lines that I wrote my recent post to Sarah & Alex. I felt that there was likely more agreement between them than disagreement, and that this could be made clear by delving into some terminology and avoiding other terminology. > T: I second your proposal, Howard. Here in this unique group we have two systems of terminology, if I am not mistaken. 1) The Abhidhammic terminology, and 2) the Sutta terminology that is based on the "conventional truths". So, what do you suggest which terminology is to be avoided in order that the members may reach "more agreement"? ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: It may even be simplifying to say there are only two systems of terminology in use here! Even among the "Abhidhammikas" here, I think there are differences in meaning. Likewise, those of us who are not devotees of the Abhidhamma vary, one from the other, terminologically. (BTW, though I am not an Abhidhammika, I do happily admit to having been influenced by it.) Also, I do not accept that sutta terminology is based solely on "conventional truths," as I consider that the entire Dhamma can be found in the Sutta Pitaka, some of it presented figuratively and some as literally as language will allow. As far as what to do to obtain agreement in understanding of what is meant when we are communicating with each other, as opposed to agreement on interpretation of the Dhamma (which is difficult to obtain and may not even necessarily be desirable), I think the solution lies in spelling things out in simple but detailed language. For example, it is widely assumed that Abhidhammic material is quite precise and detailed. But I have found this to be often not at all the case. I often see the use of terms for which the meaning is never spelled out at all, which leads to using them as meaningless slogan-words, and there are trillions of bytes streaming across cyberspace representing multi-thousands of paragraphs using the terms in intricate ways even though, all the while, exactly *what* is being talked about is left fuzzy or entirely unexamined. (I think, for example, of talking about "not-self" without any clarification of what is intended by the imagined "selves" that are being denied by the term 'not-self'.) The solution lies in detailed spelling out of terminology. It lies in more precision and greater literality of speech rather than less. When it is the case that there simply isn't any standard, clear meaning for a term to found in the Tipitaka or commentaries, any person using the term should make it as clear as possible what s/he personally means by it. As for what terminology to avoid, I would say to avoid unexamined, undefined, unclear terminology, i.e., avoid slogan-words. ------------------------------------------------------- Thanks. Tep ============================== Withy metta, Howard #76801 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Views, Ontology, Philosophy of Buddha as it appears to me. upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Sarah) - In a message dated 9/26/2007 10:23:05 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: "Excerpts from the Treatise on Emptiness from Khudakka Nikaya What is emptiness in [relation to] change? [Because it is] produced, form is empty of own-nature (sabhava); ceased, form is changed and empty. [Because they are] produced, feelings are empty of own-nature; ceased, feelings are changed and empty. [Because they are] produced, perceptions are empty of own-nature; ceased, perceptions are changed and empty. ================================= This is excellent material, Alex. I think it may be from the Patisambhidamagga. I have an opinion with regard to this. If I'm not mistaken, the PTSM was incorporated into the canon at a rather late date, at a time that Mahayana was underway. Now, early Theravada used 'sabhava' as pretty much synonymous with 'lakkhana', signifying (distinguishable) "quality" or "condition". Mahayana, however, used 'svabhava' according to its literal form, meaning "own being" or "own nature," and it properly criticized the notion. I suspect that the material you quoted was in reaction to that Mahayanist critique, an expression from within Theravada that it, too, considered the idea of *own* nature to be contrary to the Dhamma. I see this as a clarification in resonse to language change. As language usage changes, how a point of view is expressed needs to be changed as well. If it is not, misunderstanding arises. With metta, Howard #76802 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views jonoabb Hi Howard upasaka@... wrote: > > > Hi, Jon (and Tep) - > > In a message dated 9/26/2007 9:01:24 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > jonabbott@... writes: > > To my understanding of the Buddha's teaching, the things that exist in > the ultimate (i.e., deepest) sense are those things described in the > suttas as the khandhas, dhatus, ayatanas, etc., the 'dhammas'. > > > ============================== > This won't be news to you (;-), but to me what exists in the deepest > sense is what exists unconditionally, namely nibbana. And this won't be news to you ( ;-)), but unless the distinction you refer to here is one that is found in the texts, I'd be wary about making it! Dhammas are considered such because they have a unique identifying characteristic that can be experienced (by panna). As far as I know, the presence of such a characteristic in no way depends on whether the dhamma is conditioned or unconditioned. As a matter of interest, are you pointing to a difference in the degree of *existence* or of *reality*? > I do, however, agree > entirely that what exists, even for an instant, independently of thinking exists > in a far deeper sense than pa~n~natti. As I see it, the only sense in which pannatti can be said to exist is the conventional. Jon #76803 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 7:31 am Subject: Asoka, Ch 6, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, Khun Santi explains in his lexicon the difference between mindfulness of breathing as a subject of samatha and as an object of vipassanå. We read about mindfulness of breathing as an object of vipassanå: “The paramattha dhamma which is breath is the object. In the ‘Mahå- Satipatthåna Sutta’ the subject of breath has been shown under the section of ‘Mindfulness of Body’, because it regards the body, it is a reality which is a condition for the body. We used to take breath as mine, to think that it is ‘I’ who is breathing. However, when satipatthåna arises it knows the characteristic of what is appearing, the Element of Earth, the Element of Fire or the Element of Wind, which impinges on the body. They are the characteristics of softness, heat or motion, which may appear at the nose tip or upperlip, just any of those characteristics. We may begin to know, we may gradually understand that it is only a reality which has this or that characteristic, that it is a rúpa element which does not know an object. In this way the wrong understanding that it is me who is breathing or my breath can be eliminated. When sati arises one does not pay attention to the place where breath contacts, one only knows the reality which is appearing. Sati which accompanies right understanding arises because of the appropriate conditions, namely, listening until there is right understanding. There is no need for a special preparation, no need to fix one’s attention beforehand, and there should not be the desire that sati must arise. Sati only arises now and then. If there is right understanding, satipatthåna will be aware of different objects appearing through the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind-door, until it can be aware of whatever object appears. Thus, one will not just fix one’s attention on breath which appears through the bodysense. Gradually the truth of anattå will be penetrated and there will be a clearer understanding of realities as they are, so that paññå can become more accomplished. Then the stages of insight knowledge can be reached and eventually the path-consciousness and fruition-consciousness will arise when enlightenment is attained. However, this takes a long time, not just one life. Paññå must be developed on and on by listening, considering and investigation, but we should not have any expectation of result. Expectation is clinging, tanhå, which together with conceit, måna, and wrong view, ditthi, are factors which slow down the development of paññå.” From this quotation we see that the method and aim of vipassanå is different from the method and aim of samatha. In vipassanå no preparation is needed, there is awareness of whatever reality appears, be it kusala, akusala, pleasant or unpleasant. ******** Nina. #76804 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 7:31 am Subject: Conditions, Ch 15, no 8. nilovg Dear friends, Sammå-samådhi, right concentration, is another factor of the right Path. Kusala citta which is intent on dåna, síla or bhåvanå is accompanied by right concentration which conditions the citta and accompanying cetasikas to focus on the object in the wholesome way. Right concentration which is a factor of the eightfold Path has to accompany right understanding of the eightfold Path. We read in the “Kindred Sayings” (V, Mahå-vagga, XLV, Kindred Sayings on the Way, Ch III, Perversion, § 8, Concentration) that the Buddha, while he was at Såvatthí, said to the monks: I will teach you, monks, the ariyan right concentration, which is associated and equipped. Do you listen to it. And what, monks, is the ariyan right concentration which is associated and equipped? It is (associated with) right view, right thinking, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration. Now, monks, the one-pointedness of mind which is equipped with these seven limbs is called “the ariyan right concentration which is associated, likewise which is equipped.” When paññå realizes the true nature of the nåma or rúpa which appears, there is right concentration which assists the citta and the accompanying cetasikas to experience the object. There is no need to think of focusing on the nåma or rúpa which appears. As we have seen, right concentration also conditions the sobhana citta and cetasikas it accompanies by way of jhåna-condition. When right understanding of nåma and rúpa is being developed the other path-factors develop together with right understanding. Some people believe that one should first develop síla and samatha before one develops vipassanå, right understanding of nåma and rúpa. All kinds of wholesomeness are beneficial and they can be developed along with right understanding. However, there is no particular order according to which different ways of kusala should be developed. It depends on the accumulations of the individual, on natural decisive support-condition, and on other conditions which type of kusala citta arises at a particular moment. When right understanding of the eightfold Path arises the object experienced at that moment is a nåma or rúpa which appears. ******** Nina. #76805 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 7:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Asoka, Ch 6, no 4. nilovg Dear DC, Op 26-sep-2007, om 20:15 heeft DC Wijeratna het volgende geschreven: > The most detailed explanation of the path is in DN. The > saama~n~naphala sutta is very instructive. There you get the > complete path (repeated in many suttas). You have to go through > Sila, then Samadhi and reach the 4th Jhaana. Then you need to > concentrate on "knowledge and vision" "yathaabhuuta ~naanadassana". > When you succeed in that you become a sotapanna. So that is the > position according to Buddhavacana. -------- N: Not everybody would first develop jhaana before becoming enlightened. See the Susima sutta. We have had many discussions on this subject. > "knowledge and vision" "yathaabhuuta ~naanadassana" is pa~n~naa > which is highly developed. It is accompanied by right concentration > and the other factors of the eightfold Path. It is, as I see it, > not a matter of concentrating on this stage of pa~n~naa, pa~n~naa > performs its function when it has reached that stage. -------- > DC: How do you define insight? It can have two meanings in ordinary > parlance-Seeing something that you don't see. The other is > basically that it is a mystery; yo can't explain it by what we > would call rational cognitive processes. Communication would become > very meaningful only if the meanings of words are agreed. ------- N: Insight is pa~n~naa that sees nama and rupa as they appear in our daily life as they are. It has to develop in stages. The Patisambidhamagga and the Visuddhimagga give more details on these stages. The beginning stage is to know the difference between the characteristic of naama and the characteristic of ruupa, not merely in theory, but when they appear at this moment. When seeing sees colour, there are both seeing and colour, but when shortly after seeing a citta with awareness arises, it is aware of only one object at a time: seeing or colour or any other dhamma. We are usually thinking of what is seen, thinking of a person or thing. Thinking is not seeing. We have to understand what seeing is: the experience of what is visible, a kind of ruupa. We do not see persons. When there is more understanding of nama and rupa acquired by listening, there are conditions for the growth of understanding of cittas and the objects which are experienced by citta, and also of ruupa. This understanding can condition direct awareness of nama and rupa. We have to learn from the beginning that awareness and understanding do not belong to a self, that they cannot be manipulated or directed. This is difficult since we have accumulated such an amount of clinging. But pa~n~naa can realize when there is clinging. Nina. #76806 From: Dieter Möller Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- mundane right understanding/view moellerdieter Hi DC again (Howard, Tep and Nina..) Nina just quoted - under another topic- from a sutta which fits as well to your question of the difference between both path understandings , here describing the super /supramundane: "We read in the "Kindred Sayings" (V, Mahå-vagga, XLV, Kindred Sayings on the Way, Ch III, Perversion, § 8, Concentration) that the Buddha, while he was at Såvatthí, said to the monks: I will teach you, monks, the ariyan right concentration, which is associated and equipped. Do you listen to it.And what, monks, is the ariyan right concentration which is associated and equipped? It is (associated with) right view, right thinking, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration. Now, monks, the one-pointedness of mind which is equipped with these seven limbs is called "the ariyan right concentration which is associated, likewise which is equipped." This association is like a red thread running through all Path elements, right view being the forerunner (MN 117) , isn't it? with Metta Dieter #76807 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 4:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 9/27/2007 9:50:26 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: As a matter of interest, are you pointing to a difference in the degree of *existence* or of *reality*? ====================== Simply: Yes. ;-) With metta, Howard #76808 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 dcwijeratna Dear Dieter, Many thanks for your reply. You wrote: "What is the difference between the mundane path and the supramundane path. I thought that there was only one path- the Noble Eightfold Path? please compare with my message to Howard and Tep and Nyanatiloka' s definition of 'Magga'. There is only one path , but the difference is due to the individual state of mind development ,i.e. with and without fermentation. MN 117 provides the details.." Yes, I looked at Nyanatiloka and MN 117 both [I use Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation]. I find some points which are not very clear. Nyanatiloka gives two defintions. In definition 1, he uses the term '4 supermundane paths'. In definition 2, he says 'The Noble Eightfold Path. Now MN 117 starts: "I shall teach you noble right concentration..." [paragraph 2 (p 2)] [p 3] "noble right concentration ...is right view etc." [p 6] "...Right view, I say, is twofold: there is right view that is affected by taints, partaking of merit, ripening on the side of attachment; and there is right view that is noble, taintless, supramundane, a factor of the path." Now the words a factor of the path is missing from the first type of right-view. And the word supramundane seems to have been used as an adjective. [p 7] This defines the right view of first type. [p 8] Right view of the second type is defined here. Again the term used is "noble, taintless, supramundane, a factor of the path. This distinction is made for intention, speech, action and livelihood. (The Great Forty) [p 34] "...Thus, bhikkhus the path of the disciple in higher training possesses eight factors, the arahant possesses ten factors." The 10 here includes right knowledge and right deliverance. But what is difficult to understand are their opposites: wrong knowledge and wrong deliverance. Here the path refers to "the path of the disciple in higher trainings" What are your thoughts on this? with Metta Dieter D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #76809 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Controversy? dcwijeratna Dear Sarah, You wrote on 27 Sep.: "So we have to find out for ourselves when our actions are motivated by good kamma and when by bad kamma. We can't make a blanket comment about the actions of others, as in the examples you gave." I find it little difficult to understand this para: kamma is action. So actions are motivated by good actions... Any help? With mettaa D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #76810 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 dcwijeratna Hi, Tep (and Dieter and upasaka) I fully agree with the proposal to define terminology. Well here is something for everybody to have a good laugh. "seyyathaapi bhante amba.m vaa pu.t.tho labuja.m buaakareyya labuja.m vaa pu.t.tho amba.m vaa byaakareyya,..) [Saama~n~naphala sutta] [When questioned about mangoes explains about jack-fruit (or bread-fruit) and vice-versa] With mettaa, D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #76811 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- mundane right understanding/view dcwijeratna Dear Dieter, I have just sent you a message on MN 117. What has been quoted by Nina is the standard description of sammaa samaadhi as a conditioned state--conditioned by the other factors. Now no "Abhidhammic interpretsations", please. D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #76812 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 5:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 9/27/2007 9:50:26 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: As I see it, the only sense in which pannatti can be said to exist is the conventional. ========================== The only way that hardness can be said to exist as a self-existent entity also is conventional. As for pa~n~natti, trees and cars and human bodies exist in the sense that the interrelated dhammas underlying them are not imagined. The word 'exist' is multiple in meaning. Rainbows exist but unicorns do not. Yet, even unicorns exist in a very low-level, limited sense. What is important is that in whatever way the three poisons exist, there is the need to eliminate that existence. With metta, Howard #76813 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Views, Ontology, Philosophy of Buddha as it appears to me. truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, DC Wijeratna wrote: > > I wish to make a few observations on that: > > DC: From time immemorial, dana was the biggest thing in Sri Lanka. Daana paaramitaa was the first paaramitaa in the list of 10 paaramitaas. Jaatakas like Wessantara, sivi, makhaadeva all are related to daana. > > > However, I wish to point out that daana, as it appears to my mind, is a central concept in the suttas. >>>>>>>> Yes it is very important and those who can, should do it. However for some people there comes a time when ALL effort needs to be spent on meditation in a retreat. > > One word about the Dhammapada verse. There dhamma-daana is not teaching-and learning but it referes to actually getting somebody established in Dhamma. I mention this because I spent almost one hour explaining this difference at the temple. >>>>>>>>>> Thank you very much for this correction. > I hope I am not troubling you. > > With mettaa, > > D. G. D. C. Wijeratna > You are not troubling me. Thank you very much for your reply. Lots of Metta, Alex #76814 From: Dieter Möller Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 moellerdieter Hi Howard (and Tep) , you wrote: ' The solution lies in detailed spelling out of terminology. It lies in more precision and greater literality of speech rather than less. When it is the case that there simply isn't any standard, clear meaning for a term to found in the Tipitaka or commentaries, any person using the term should make it as clear as possible what s/he personally means by it. As for what terminology to avoid, I would say to avoid unexamined, undefined, unclear terminology, i.e., avoid slogan-words. ' D: we would indeed need a dictionary of the terms we use , in particular for those a common association can not be assumed.. That no exact English equivalent of a Pali word can be found we observe quite often , not to talk about multiple meanings even in one's native tongue. There is room for plenty of misunderstandings which sometimes only a third party will recognise. And then there is language as well between the lines, isn't it? ;-) Sarah -in a previous posting -compared communication with a dance..difficult especially for new partners (stepping on own's toes ) ..very nicely observed , though somehow always new again too with changing topics. H: I think the solution lies in spelling things out in simple but detailed language. D: agreed though I don't think there is an easy solution other than we try our best for the benefit of common understanding. H: For example, it is widely assumed that Abhidhammic material is quite precise and detailed. But I have found this to be often not at all the case. D: very true! Perhaps we assume too much by expecting general consens of translation/meaning, i.e. are requested to find a 'fitting file' in our mind.. H: When it is the case that there simply isn't any standard, clear meaning for a term to found in the Tipitaka or commentaries, any person using the term should make it as clear as possible what s/he personally means by it. As for what terminology to avoid, I would say to avoid unexamined, undefined, unclear terminology, i.e., avoid slogan-words. D: let us remind eachother on that.. ;-) with Metta Dieter #76815 From: Dieter Möller Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- mundane right understanding/view moellerdieter Dear DC ( Howard, Tep and Nina) you wrote: 'What has been quoted by Nina is the standard description of sammaa samaadhi as a conditioned state--conditioned by the other factors. Now no "Abhidhammic interpretsations", please.' D: not so fast please , DC. What Nina quoted is from Samyutta Nikaya , though the text was interpretated in another context, the sutta- I maintain - is in line with MN 117. It is in our interest I believe to find the common in our Dhamma understanding, not necessarily to assume Abhidhammic view 'outside' with Metta Dieter #76816 From: Dieter Möller Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- munbdane right understand/view moellerdieter Dear DC (Howard , Tep and..) you wrote: Nyanatiloka gives two defintions. In definition 1, he uses the term '4 supermundane paths'. In definition 2, he says 'The Noble Eightfold Path. D: yes, but let me repeat : 'There is only one path , but the difference is due to the individual state of mind development ,i.e. with and without fermentation. The latter the path of the Ariyan .. I see no contradiction DC: Now MN 117 starts: "I shall teach you noble right concentration..." [paragraph 2 (p 2)] [p 3] "noble right concentration ...is right view etc." [p 6] "...Right view, I say, is twofold: there is right view that is affected by taints, partaking of merit, ripening on the side of attachment; and there is right view that is noble, taintless, supramundane, a factor of the path." Now the words a factor of the path is missing from the first type of right-view. And the word supramundane seems to have been used as an adjective. [p 7] This defines the right view of first type. [p 8] Right view of the second type is defined here. Again the term used is "noble, taintless, supramundane, a factor of the path. This distinction is made for intention, speech, action and livelihood. (The Great Forty) [p 34] "...Thus, bhikkhus the path of the disciple in higher training possesses eight factors, the arahant possesses ten factors." The 10 here includes right knowledge and right deliverance. But what is difficult to understand are their opposites: wrong knowledge and wrong deliverance. Here the path refers to "the path of the disciple in higher trainings" What are your thoughts on this? D: again I like to repeat from my previous message: 'The supermundane path , that without fermentation (MN 117 ) ,is unfolding for the Ariyan, i.e. right view links right thinking- right speech -right bodily action ( wholesome kamma) which is the base for right effort etc etc. In case of the mundane path the 'sign posts ' , i.e. its elements , are not yet visible and I think that is what the Venerable meant by stating the path isn' t really a path , because only by step to step development it gradually becomes like that (see above).' In other words for the wordling, the path isn't yet a path , it has to be developed as such. And so it becomes 'the path of the disciple in higher trainings' , i.e. for the Ariyan , fourfold for further progress according to the state of that Noble One. I still do not understand a contradiction you may see here.. perhaps Howard and Tep may help here too.. with Metta Dieter #76817 From: Dieter Möller Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 moellerdieter Hi Tep , you wrote: 'I have read/studied every lecture Acharn gave, and am convinced that Acharn Mun was an Ariyan. That deepest respect of him might bias my opinion, therefore I should stay out of the discussion. ' D: I respect that of course.. but let me asked as you have studied much of his teaching , of which probably much has not been translated yet , whether Ven. Thanissaro's article http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/mun/released.html provides a good first impression about Acharn Mun? with Metta Dieter #76818 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Views, Ontology, Philosophy of Buddha as it appears to me. truth_aerator Hi Howard and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ================================= > This is excellent material, Alex. I think it may be from the > Patisambhidamagga. >>>> Yes, it is someone's (not mine) translation of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >early Theravada used 'sabhava' as pretty much synonymous > with 'lakkhana', signifying (distinguishable) "quality" or "condition". > Mahayana, however, used 'svabhava' according to its literal form, meaning "own being" or "own nature," and it properly criticized the notion. >>>>> Please forgive me for this question. What is exact difference between quality/condition & own being/nature ? It seems to me that it is impossible to separate the qualities of an object from the object itself. How can you separe qualities from noumenon (to use western terminology)? >>>>>>>>> I suspect that the material you quoted was in reaction to that Mahayanist critique, an expression from within Theravada that it, too, considered the idea of *own* nature > to be contrary to the Dhamma. I see this as a clarification in resonse to > language change. As language usage changes, how a point of view is expressed > needs to be changed as well. If it is not, misunderstanding arises. > > With metta, > Howard > So this shows that Patisambhidamagga is even later than some early Mahayana? Lots of Metta, Alex #76819 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Views, Ontology, Philosophy of Buddha as it appears to me. upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 9/27/2007 3:26:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi Howard and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ================================= > This is excellent material, Alex. I think it may be from the > Patisambhidamagga. >>>> Yes, it is someone's (not mine) translation of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >early Theravada used 'sabhava' as pretty much synonymous > with 'lakkhana', signifying (distinguishable) "quality" or "condition". > Mahayana, however, used 'svabhava' according to its literal form, meaning "own being" or "own nature," and it properly criticized the notion. >>>>> Please forgive me for this question. What is exact difference between quality/condition & own being/nature ? ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: As I see it, '(paramattha) dhamma', 'condition', 'phenomenon', and 'quality' are all pretty much the same in meaning, though 'condition' also carries the additional sense of serving as partial causal basis for other dhammas. It is a fact, I believe that dhammas are distinguishable. No two dhammas are identical; in fact even to speak of "two" implies that. No two sounds are identical, and no sound is the same as any sight. There are distinguishable experiential qualities, not a homogeneous experiential mass/porridge. If that fact, and I do think it is certainly a fact, is what folks mean by sabhava, then I do not dispute sabhava. If, however, one conceives of a sound, for example, as a separate, independent, self-existent entity with identity/own being, and *that* is what one means by sabhava, then I *do* dispute it and deny it, for I consider that to be atta-view. An alleged identity or core of self-existence in a person (i.e., namarupic stream) is what soul or personal self is supposed to be. And belief in an alleged identity or core of self-existence in any dhamma is reification and also a form of atta-view. It is the atta-view of personal self that is most pernicious, though. ------------------------------------------------------------ It seems to me that it is impossible to separate the qualities of an object from the object itself. ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Oh, indeed. I quite agree, at least as regards paramattha dhammas. The paramattha dhammas do not "have" qualities, but ARE qualities. For example, hardness is viewed as a property of a table, warmth as a property of fire, and agitation as a property of the mind. ------------------------------------------------------------ How can you separe qualities from noumenon (to use western terminology)? >>>>>>>>> I suspect that the material you quoted was in reaction to that Mahayanist critique, an expression from within Theravada that it, too, considered the idea of *own* nature > to be contrary to the Dhamma. I see this as a clarification in resonse to > language change. As language usage changes, how a point of view is expressed > needs to be changed as well. If it is not, misunderstanding arises. > > With metta, > Howard > So this shows that Patisambhidamagga is even later than some early Mahayana? --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't know for sure. I'm not a good historian of any sort, and that includes Buddhist history. I do *think* that very early Mahayana at least was already underway. I believe the Lotus Sutra mentions "Mahayana" and that sutra dates to the 1st century BCE, and Mahayana probably began a century or so before that. Now, the PTSM was likely incorporated into the Pali canon also a century or or so before that. In an article at _http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebsut053.htm_ (http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebsut053.htm) , Dr.Bimala Churn Law writes the following: "Itivuttaka, the Udana and the Patisambhidamagga are the remaining three books of the Khuddaka Nikaya of which the date of composition must depend upon mere conjecture till accidentally we obtain any reliable date. The Itivuttaka is a book of questions of genuine sayings of the Buddha, making no reference to any canonical work or to any historical event ascertaining its date, though it seems that it was the result of an afterthought, of a critical study of the authentic teachings of the Buddha in a certain light and for a specific purpose. The Udana is a curious medley of legends and historical records, presented in a particular setting with a view to emphasising some prononne ed opinions of the Buddha on certain contrversial matters. The Patisambhidamagga presents a systematic exposition of certain important topics of Buddhism, and as such it deserves to be classed rather with the books of the Abhidhammapitaka than with those of Suttanipata. It is quite possible that before the development of the extant Abhidhamma pitaka, it passed as one of the Abhidhamma treatises, Concering there three books the utmost that we can say that they are mentioned even in the list of the Dighabhanakas, being counted there as three among the twelve books of the Khuddaka Nikaya, and that if the tradition about this list is at all credible, these three books must have existed when the list was drawn up, say, in the second century B. C." ------------------------------------------------------- Lots of Metta, Alex =========================== With metta, Howard #76820 From: "Evie" Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] New to the Buddhist community. eviebgreen Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Evie, > > --- Evie wrote: > > > Hello Sarah, > > > > I know that you asked a few questions and I will answer them for > > you. I know that a few people are probably wondering themselves. > ... > S: Many thanks for kindly taking the time and trouble to give us such a > thorough and interesting introduction. > > You see, I was a born and raised Protestant Christian. And once I was > > a teenager and going through my confirmation and we were learning > > about different types of religion, I always wondered why we didn't > > learn about things like Buddhism. > ... > S: I could have written this myself! Later, when I started picking up > books on different religions, it was always the chapters on Buddhism which > caught my interest, especially with the emphasis on 'check it out for > yourself', rather than just 'believe!'. > > I'm very sorry to hear about your injury and all the surgeries you've had > to endure. We never know what will lead to what, however. Perhaps it has > been a condition for you to reflect more deeply on the Buddhist teachings. > > Thanks for also telling us that you live in Missouri. Many friends here > live in different parts of the States. Others, of cours, live all over the > world. Jon and I live in Hong Kong. E: I am happy to introduce myself to people who are interested in my life and my thoughts. I believe that every thing that I have gone through in my life has made me a better person. :) > .... > > What do I think about the teaching of 'Non-self' or anatta??? > > > > I have to be honest with you when I say, it has only really been this > > last month that I began to start reading about how Buddhism came to be > > and what Buddhism is about. Because I am a fast, quick learner with > > things that I want to learn about I know so much already, but not so > > much on the teachings of 'Non-self'. > > > > I have read I am sure in my books about the teachings, and have looked > > up information that talks about it and briefly read the post that was > > writing up about it here. > .... > S: Take your time. It really takes a while to assimilate new teachings and > ways of looking at the world. > > If you go to the files section of DSG and look in 'Useful Posts', try > scrolling down to 'Abhidhamma-beginners' and 'New to the Dhamma and New to > the List'. Click on the messages in these sections and you may find them > helpful. Also, if you have any comments on the series James is posting on > 'Buddhism - an Introduction', that would be helpful. > > Ask any questions on anything you read too! E: I will take my time with everything. I know that rushing into something does not create good results, so with patience good things happen. Good things come to those who wait. And I am taking my time to teach myself on how to be a better person, on who to live a better and more peaceful life. E: Thank you for listing where I can find information in the files section, where I can read more about the beginners section on the teachings of Buddhism. :) > .... > > I understand which looks like the basic concept but would love to > > learn more about everything. So I will take some time tonight to read > > more about the teachings and get back to the group on what my thoughts > > are. > ... > S: Please do. Let us know what you are reading and what your thoughts are. > I enjoy your sharings:-) > > Metta, > > Sarah E: I will let you all know if I have any questions on anything. I know that sometimes I feel upset with myself for not doing my meditation every day, because I know how at peace I feel afterwards. But I know that I am a beginner with everything, so one step at a time with everything with Buddhism. I know that I am making good choices in my life now that will help shape my life for the future. I may have questions later on how different families have raised their children with the Buddhist teachings and Buddhist ways. But for now as I am just married with no children as of now, I know that I do not need to be concerned with how to raise my children as of yet. If anyone would like to describe their experiences with me about Buddhism I would appreciate it. Thanks and peace be with you. -Evelyn #76821 From: "Evie" Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:36 pm Subject: Pictures eviebgreen Hello everyone, If you are interested in seeing who I am, I have pictures up under the 1Members file. Three photos, 1-showing myself and my two cats 2-showing myself and my late cat 3-showing myself and my husband, picture was actually taken in yr. 2005 but we first met each other in the year 2000. There are so many wonderful people here and it is good to meet you all. -Evelyn LINK: http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/photos/browse/a2e0?b=81&m=t&o=\ 0 #76822 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 3:40 pm Subject: Re: Puggala pa~n~natti indriyabala Hi Sarah (Han and Jon), - I hope we are going to clear up any misunderstanding about this important 'puggala pa~n~natti' soon. > >Tep: Reason 1. The article/book you used as a reference includes khandha, aayatana, and dhaatu in the "concepts" group. But these dhammas are known to the DSG Abhidhammikas as ultimate realities. Is the author wrong, or have you all been wrong for a long time? I hope the former is the case. >S: As made clear (I thought), these are 'designations'or 'indications' about the real or 'existing'. Khandhas, ayatanas and dhaatu are realities, but we use concepts to talk about them. Visible object is an ultimate reality, but the words we use to describe it now are concepts used for convenience and mutual understanding. So we're all correct! ........... T: We use the conventional language to talk about ultimate realities like Khandhas, ayatanas and dhaatus; that is easy for me to understand. It is also easy to understand the author's definitons of 'pa~n~natti', i.e. it means 'explanation,' 'preaching,' 'pointing out,' 'establishing,' 'showing,' and 'exposition.'. Therefore,'puggala pa~n~natti' straightforwardly means an explanation, by pointing out, or by showing, or by an exposition about 'puggala'. [Here, exposition is a detailed statement or explanation of facts.] So I am also clear with regard to the basic definition. ............. "At the outset, the author classifies the 'pa~n~natti,' or notion into group (khandha), locus (aayatana), element (dhaatu), truth (sacca), faculty (indriya), and person (puggala). Of these six, the last one is the subject-matter of this work." ............. T: The confusion, however, was caused by my "jumping to the conclusion" from reading the above quote that the author mistakenly grouped 'puggala' in the same class with Khandhas, ayatanas and dhaatus. In fact, he only talked about the exposition of (or "notion into") these three realities along with the exposition of "persons" (puggala). I am sorry for my error and request that the Reason 1 be omitted. Concerning the "Grouping of Human Types by One", your long QUOTE of commentaries on 'no person' has not helped, because it does not address the issue, i.e. why did he designate non-existent human into five types-- why wasted time making a big deal out of no-thing -- why did he not directly give the designation of citta types if citta is the "real" issue ? ........... S: "The Buddhas have two kinds of discourse, the popular and the philosophical. Those relating to a being, a person, a deva, a brahma and so forth, are popular discourses, while those relating to impermanence, ill, soul-less, the aggregates, the elements, the senses, the application of mindfulness, the intent contemplation, and so forth, are discourses on highest meaning." T: I am gald that you came down from "the blue sky above" to kindly talk to me about the Teachings. Dear Sarah, it does not make any logical sense to me why He spent a great deal of time talking about "a being, a person, a deva, a brahma and so forth' in the sutta- pitaka, if these beings, puggalas, bhrahmas, etc. and the monks themselves were non-existent. Why did He specify the Dhamma-vinaya in the Vinaya-piyaka as the practice for the non-existent monks? It is true that He talked about the higher siila, higher samaadhi, and higher pa~n~naa in the Tipitaka. But in these suttas He always talked to the monks the same way He did in the "popular discourses". ............ S: Take (5)above "One liable to fall away (gotrabhuu)". Gotrabhuu refers to a single citta (chane-of-lineage citta) which is succeeded by the single citta of magga citta (path-consciousness). T: I understand differently, Sarah. 'Gotrabhuu' is the designation of a Bhikkhu or a lay-Buddhist. PTS Dictionary: Gotrabhuu "become of the lineage"; a technical term used from the end of the Nikaaya period to designate one, whether layman or bhikkhu, who, as converted, was no longer of the worldlings (puthujjanaa), but of the Ariyas, having Nibbaana as his aim. It occurs in a supplementary Sutta in the Majjhima (Vol. III. 256), and in another, found in two versions, at the end of the Anguttara (A iv.373 and v.23). Defined at Pug 12, 13 & Vism 138; amplified at Ps i.66 -- 68, frequent in P (Tikap. 154 sq., 165, 324 etc.), mentioned at VvA 155. On the use of gotrabhuu in medieval psychology see Aung, in Compendium, 66 -- 68. [endquote] ............ Thank you for bearing with my argumentative discussion for so long. I know you have a very strong belief in your knowledge and you also have some "status" to keep (so you have to be right). So far I have known of nobody who can change your mind, once you've firmly believed in something. Perhaps, Jonathan may say 'Tep is right!' ? ;-) Tep === #76823 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 4:31 pm Subject: Re: Puggala pa~n~natti indriyabala Dear Nina (Han, Sarah, Jon, Scott, Howard, Dieter, ..), - Indeed the Dhamma is very deep -- hard to understand correctly --, that's why each person has his/her own personal perspective and interpretation (that depends on pa~n~naa). I think your Dhamma perspective is not as strong & inflexible as most people I know. N: Tep, I admire you so much. You said that you consider speech beforehand. You changed so much since the time you were on the list before. It is the Dhamma that did it, no self. T: That was a very kind thought, Nina. My maturity just came late in life. There is nothing special about it. :-) ............. N (to Han): It is most helpful that the Buddha spoke in vohaara about the different inclinations of individuals so that we can be reminded of our unwholesome inclinations. He spoke about those who develop dry insight and could attain enlightenment, without developing jhanas. It all depends on the inclinations of the different individuals. This shows us how different humans are. We can have more understanding of people's inclinations. Thus, indeed he spoke about cittas and cetasikas and tendencies accumulated in the citta, and these are in different individuals. We are not the same, but altogether different and that is because of different conditions. T: Please correct me if you think I misunderstand your statements above. I think you are saying that "cittas and cetasikas and tendencies accumulated in the citta" cannot be separated from individuals (persons). Thus, both the paramattha dhammas and persons (puggala) exist together in a given moment. How nice! The Dhamma in this flexible framework logically includes all the Teachings in the Vinaya-, Sutta- and the Abhidhamma-Pitaka. The Dhamma-vinaya, the Sutta & the Abhidhamma together are "the Teachings" for monks, the 8 ariya-puggalas, lay-Buddhists, devas, etc.. It is so neat that it can solve the sticky problem of 'no person practices' according to the Dhamma, a person is not real, and there is 'no Buddha'. .......... N: He gave us a deep teaching but helped us to understand it by using terms like human types. We all think of human types in daily life. Now we can have more understanding of these types and the conditions for their differences. As we also read: for some the Buddha explained by way only of ultimate truth, for some he used conventional truth in order to clarify ultimate truth. T: Beautifully and carefully spoken! Thank you very much, Nina. Tep === #76824 From: "R. K. Wijayaratne" Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 4:34 pm Subject: A Certain Person * rwijayaratne Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammâ Sambuddhassa! <...> Taken from mettanet.org1 Translated from Pali by Sister Upalavanna A CERTAIN PERSON Anguttara Nikâya 1.13 - Ekapuggalavagga2 170. Bhikkhus, a certain person is born in the world for the welfare and pleasantness of gods and men. Who is it? It is the Thus Gone One, worthy and rightfully enlightened (Lord Buddha), born out of compassion for the world. 171. Bhikkhus, a certain person's appearance in the world is rare. Who is it? It is the Thus Gone One, worthy and rightfully enlightened, his appearance is rare in the world. 172. Bhikkhus, a certain person is born supreme in the world. Who is it? It is the Thus Gone One, worthy and rightfully enlightened. He is born supreme in the world. 173. Bhikkhus, a certain person's demise brings remorse to many. Who is it? It is the Thus Gone One, worthy and rightfully enlightened. His demise brings remorse to many. 174. Bhikkhus, a certain person is born in the world without a compare, to achieve the not yet achieved without a counterpart and chief among men. Who is it? It is the Thus Gone One, worthy and rightfully enlightened. He is born in the world without a compare, to achieve the not yet achieved without a counterpart and chief among men. 175-186. Bhikkhus, a certain person's arising in the world, is the arising of, great vision, an effulgent light, the six superior states, the fourfold mastership in analysis, the innumerable elements and the various elements, realizing the fruits of release with understanding, realizing the fruits of entering the stream of the teaching, realizing the fruits of returning once, realizing the fruits of not returning and realizing the fruits of arahantship. Who is it? It is the Thus Gone One, worthy and rightfully enlightened. Who is it? It is the Thus Gone One, worthy and rightfully enlightened. Who is it? It is the Thus Gone One, worthy and rightfully enlightened. Bhikkhus, his arising in the world is the arising of, great vision, an effulgent light, the six superior states, the fourfold mastership in analysis, the innumerable elements and the various elements, realizing the fruits of release with understanding, realizing the fruits of entering the stream of the teaching, realizing the fruits of returning once, realizing the fruits of not returning and realizing the fruits of arahantship. 187. Bhikkhus, I do not know of any other person who could follow up the teaching proclaimed by the Thus Gone One other than Sàriputta. Bhikkhus, Sàriputta follows up the teaching proclaimed by me. Notes 1. More suttas from mettanet.org can be found here http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/index.html 2. This sutta can be found here http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara-Nikaya/Anguttara1/1-ek\ anipata/013-Ekapuggalavaggo-e.html (case-sensitive web address). <....> #76825 From: han tun Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 5:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Puggala pa~n~natti hantun1 Dear Sarah and Tep, The following excerpts are what Sarah wrote to Tep & Han. S: As made clear (I thought), these are 'designations' or 'indications' about the real or 'existing'. Khandhas, ayatanas and dhaatu are realities, but we use concepts to talk about them. Visible object is an ultimate reality, but the words we use to describe it now are concepts used for convenience and mutual understanding. So we're all correct! S: Yes, 'human' and citta are not the same. 'Citta' is a concept about the real, while 'human' is a concept about the unreal. However, we know that when the Buddha and his disciples talk in terms of people and humans, they are using these concepts for convenience. In fact there are only cittas, cetasikas, rupas and nibbana. Even an arahant doesn't go around saying 'citta said this' or 'citta did that'. ------------------------------ Han: As I understand it, the paramattha dhammas are only four: citta, cetasika, ruupa and Nibbana. But the words “citta”, “cetasika”, “ruupa”, “Nibbana” themselves are vohaara or designations. The ultimate realities cannot be described by words or by writing. For example, when I say “citta” the Sarah and her colleagues do not understand what I am saying, because we (Burmes) pronounce it differently. So in the ultimate sense, “khandhas”, “ayatanas” and “dhaatu” are also NOT realities, they are just designations to designate naama and ruupa. The words “naama” and “ruupa” are also designations. Therefore, I say that the ultimate realities cannot be described by words or by writing. What do you think? Respectfully, Han --- sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Tep & Han, > > --- Tep Sastri wrote: > > T: With all due respect, no, Sarah, it does not > help. ;-)) > > I am explaining below. #76826 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 5:23 pm Subject: Re: Citta indriyabala Hi Scott (and Anyone Else Who Minds), - I like the words you use to denote other readers. Neat. Scott, at the end of the Citta presentation, you wrote : "I starter with this because it nicely addresses "the view that opposes the purist stance is a practical view of people in the 'conventional' world," (Tep, Message #76764)." ......... T: First, I want to thank you many times for the presentation that is very relevant and very useful and I agree with everything. Secondly, allow me to give you a feedback on what I think I understand these passages from the Dhammasa"nganii, pp. 84-45. Then, I am going to respond to your clever reply above. 1. Citta is the consciousness that can think, and a series of cittas defines the process of a thought. The thought process that results from a series of cittas is also called 'citta' (consciousness). 2. Citta is accumulated by kamma and the corruptions. (T: what corruptions are meant here?) 3. Cittas have a capacity to produce vrious effects. The various kinds of cittas are defined according to the sensed objects. 4. The quality (low, medium, exalted) of citta is determined by the characteristics of a) association, b) locality, c) object, d) the degrees of comparison and dominance. .............. Scott: When citta is examined, as in the above, the meaning invalidates the false distinction between 'purist' and 'conventional' stance. Whether 'low', 'medium' or 'exalted' citta is still citta. Citta underlies the process by which thoughts of 'conventional world' or 'purist stance' are formed and without citta, functioning as described above, there would be none of these thoughts. T: The key fact given in the above summary is that citta is defined by its objects that are sensed by a real person's sense sphere (ayatana). Citta is also defined by kamma and the corruptions that result from the individual's actions (bodily, verbally, mentally) in the real world. S/he might hurt someone or some (real) beings, for example, because the citta is associated with hate. When s/he gives 'dana' to a monk the citta in that moment is associated with joy, etc. In conclusion, the purist stance is not realistic, unless the citta is interacting with the real world of beings. Tep === #76827 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 5:45 pm Subject: Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 indriyabala Hi Howard and Dieter, - Thank you very much for giving a clear explanation of the problem, and a suggestion of the appropriate way (solution) to arrive at "more precision and greater literality of speech". The fuzzy not-self talk is a good example of poor speech that I myself often give :-). Howard: As far as what to do to obtain agreement in understanding of what is meant when we are communicating with each other, as opposed to agreement on interpretation of the Dhamma (which is difficult to obtain and may not even necessarily be desirable), I think the solution lies in spelling things out in simple but detailed language. T: Absolutely! After a few years of unsuccessfully trying to reach an "agreement on interpretation of the Dhamma" with everyone here and elsewhere, I know exactly what you mean. ............ Howard: The solution lies in detailed spelling out of terminology. It lies in more precision and greater literality of speech rather than less. T: I think that solution requires that anyone who does not have the right terminology and skill to express it clearly, should not post a message. Right? Tep === #76828 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 5:51 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 indriyabala Hi DC, Howard and Dieter, - T: Howard is the main man. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, DC Wijeratna wrote: > > Hi, Tep (and Dieter and upasaka) > > I fully agree with the proposal to define terminology. > > Well here is something for everybody to have a good laugh. > > "seyyathaapi bhante amba.m vaa pu.t.tho labuja.m buaakareyya labuja.m vaa pu.t.tho amba.m vaa byaakareyya,..) [Saama~n~naphala sutta] > > [When questioned about mangoes explains about jack-fruit (or bread- fruit) and vice-versa] > T: Sometimes, it is because that person knows only one kind of fruit (or refuses to accept that there is another kind that may taste better). Tep === #76829 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:12 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views indriyabala Hi Howard and Jon, - I like these analogies! > Howard The only way that hardness can be said to exist as a self- existent entity also is conventional. As for pa~n~natti, trees and cars and human bodies exist in the sense that the interrelated dhammas underlying them are not imagined. The word 'exist' is multiple in meaning. Rainbows exist but unicorns do not. Yet, even unicorns exist in a very low-level, limited sense. > What is important is that in whatever way the three poisons exist, there is the need to eliminate that existence. > T: It is very important to establish the same fundamentals that describe (or explain) "existence" and "reality" like you are suggesting, Howard. I want to comment that rainbows exists because they are not imaginary/illusive, but water in a mirage does not. In the same token the four perversions of perception(sa~n~na vipallasa) are illusive, hence they are not the truth. Tep === #76830 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:27 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 indriyabala --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Dieter Möller wrote: > > Hi Tep , > > you wrote: > > 'I have read/studied every lecture Acharn gave, and am convinced that Acharn Mun was an Ariyan. That deepest respect of him might bias my opinion, therefore I should stay out of the discussion. ' > > D: I respect that of course.. > but let me asked as you have studied much of his teaching , of which probably much has not been translated yet , whether Ven. Thanissaro's article http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/mun/released.html > > provides a good first impression about Acharn Mun? > T: Even the original article in Thai is not impossible for two Thai persons to understand what Acharn Mun said exactly the same way, so how can we fairly expect an English translation to provide an accurate representation of his teachings? As to Ven. Thanissaro who is very fluent in the Thai language (he lived there for several years), his translation is pretty good despite a number of controversies that are perhaps due to his interpretation of the Thai words that are not found in the Suttas. The readers must have an open mind to learn a great deal from that article. Tep === #76831 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Puggala pa~n~natti indriyabala Hi Han and Sarah, - I have a feeling that Han Tun who I used to think I know has already changed. His questions have become many times more difficult. ;-) > Han: > So in the ultimate sense, "khandhas", "ayatanas" and > "dhaatu" are also NOT realities, they are just > designations to designate naama and ruupa. The words > "naama" and "ruupa" are also designations. > > Therefore, I say that the ultimate realities cannot be > described by words or by writing. > What do you think? > T: I am a simple man, so I am going to give a simple answer, using vedana as an example. But you have to keep in mind that I am not an Abhidhammika. Feeling (vedana) is a consciousness concomitant(cetasika), thus it is an ultimate reality by definition. I can describe feeling such as happiness (sukha, somanassa) easily; but can you not? Many non- Buddhist, non-Abhidhammika can do it too. Tep === #76832 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 7:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- munbdane right understand/view dcwijeratna Dear Dieter, Many thanks for your prompt response to my e-m. The distinction, to my mind is as follows: 1. There is only one path. 2. That path, if one travels, starts naturally, as a puthujjana and ends up as an arahant. 3. If the path is divided into two as lokottara and lokiya, then they are portions of the path, with different path factors such as sammaa di.t.thi... 4. A further issue is lokiiya magga end up not in Nibbaana. But magga is generally used in the Tipitaka to denote the Noble Eightfold Path. 5. Now to one other point--Paragraph starting with "First of all,..." , pg. 109, of Buddhist Dictionary, Nyanatiloka. In that paragraph, the following sentence occurs: "In reality,, however, the links 3-5 constituting constituting moral training (sila), are the first three links to be cultivaed...and at last right view..." I have a great difficulty in understanding this--I thought the path starts with right view, and naturally that is the first thing to be developed. Can you reconcile that? With mettaa D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #76833 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 7:34 pm Subject: Re: Citta scottduncan2 Dear Tep, Thanks for the reply: T: "1. Citta is the consciousness that can think, and a series of cittas defines the process of a thought. The thought process that results from a series of cittas is also called 'citta' (consciousness)." Scott: I'll look at the first point here, the others later. Dhs.: "By 'consciousness' (citta) is meant that which thinks of its object, is aware variously..." Scott: I'd clarify that it is not that citta *can* think; it is that citta *is* thinking (not to be confused with vitakka or vicaara cetasikas) or awareness or consciousness. Also, it is 'the dhamma that has these characteristics' (not 'the consciousness that can think'). Here's an interesting quote from Visuddhimagga XIV,82: "...And what has the characteristic of cognizing (vijaanana)? Consciousness (vi~n~naa.na); according as it is said, 'It cognizes, friend, that is why it is called "consciousness" is said' (M.i,292). The words vi~n~naa.na (consciousness), citta (mind, consciousness), and mano (mind) are one in meaning." Scott: I think that the series of cittas is called citta-vithi. I clarify this because the series is not a whole in and of itself hence it is not called 'citta' as well. Citta is only for a single consciousness. The 'series' arises due to conditions. Sincerely, Scott. #76834 From: han tun Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Puggala pa~n~natti hantun1 Dear Tep, No, I have not changed. I am only puzzled. The word “vedanaa” is the “designation” of your state of mind you just described. Thus the word “vedana” is just a vohaara or designation. The word “vedana” is not the reality by itself, but the designation. That’s what I am trying to say. I may be wrong. I don’t know. I don’t know anything now! Respectfully, Han --- Tep Sastri wrote: > Hi Han and Sarah, - > > I have a feeling that Han Tun who I used to think I > know has already > changed. His questions have become many times more > difficult. ;-) > #76835 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Puggala pa~n~natti indriyabala Dear Han, - Your reply sounds funny, but did you intend to make it so? :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > No, I have not changed. > I am only puzzled. > > The word "vedanaa" is the "designation" of your state > of mind you just described. Thus the word "vedana" is > just a vohaara or designation. The word "vedana" is > not the reality by itself, but the designation. That's > what I am trying to say. > > I may be wrong. I don't know. I don't know anything > now! > T: I think a word that describes or designates something is man made; it is just a label or a name. So it is not a paramattha dhamma, while the vedana-cetasika is clearly a conditioned reality that is not controlled/made by man. Do I make sense to you? [ Now I find myself talking like an Abhidhammika, and that is really funny!] Tep === #76836 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 4:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 9/27/2007 8:49:29 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: Howard: The solution lies in detailed spelling out of terminology. It lies in more precision and greater literality of speech rather than less. T: I think that solution requires that anyone who does not have the right terminology and skill to express it clearly, should not post a message. Right? --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm, well, that goes a bit further than I would go. For one thing, it is not a given what is "right" terminology. We simply each need to attempt to be as clear as possible. Also, as for skill in expression, sometimes that is in the eye of the beholder. As I say, let us all do the best we can, but no one should fear posting because of possible imperfection in the ability to express himself/herself. =========================== With metta, Howard #76837 From: han tun Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Puggala pa~n~natti hantun1 Dear Tep, I am writing how I understand it. To me, these are all vohaaras. I told you I may be wrong. If you think what I wrote was fuuny, please just ignore it. Respectfully, Han --- Tep Sastri wrote: > Dear Han, - > > Your reply sounds funny, but did you intend to make > it so? :-) > #76838 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 4:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 9/27/2007 9:14:38 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: Howard. I want to comment that rainbows exists because they are not imaginary/illusive, but water in a mirage does not. ========================== Yes, there is greater reality to a rainbow than to mirage water. However, a rainbow is delusive as well. It seems to be some thing that stretches across the heavens in a particular place, but as we move, so does the rainbow seem to move! And as the sun is covered by a dark cloud, the rainbow fades, and when the sunlight diminishes sufficiently or the rain ceases entirely, the rainbow vanishes. More than that, were one to aqscend in a balloon to get a closer look at the heavenly bow, it would be discovered that there is nothing to find! As I see it, all of samsara, the appearance realm of separate things, is more akin to rainbows and mirages than to anything partaking of genuine reality. No conditions last, no conditions satisfy, and nothing whatsoever is or has self. As the Buddha so beautifully said: Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick — this has been taught by the Kinsman of the Sun. However you observe them, appropriately examine them, they're empty, void to whoever sees them appropriately. With metta, Howard #76839 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Puggala pa~n~natti sarahprocter... Dear Han & Tep, Han: >>Thus the word "vedana" is > > just a vohaara or designation. The word "vedana" is > > not the reality by itself, but the designation. That's > > what I am trying to say. .... S: Yes!! .... > T: I think a word that describes or designates something is man made; .... S: Or rather citta (and cetasikas) made!! ... > it is just a label or a name. So it is not a paramattha dhamma, while > the vedana-cetasika is clearly a conditioned reality that is not > controlled/made by man. Do I make sense to you? [ Now I find myself > talking like an Abhidhammika, and that is really funny!] .... S: Yes!! Keep up the 'talking like an Abhidhammika', no matter how funny it sounds, Tep:-)) Metta, Status-less Sarah who (for the record) is often wrong!!! ====================================================== #76840 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Puggala pa~n~natti sarahprocter... Dear Han, (Tep), ((Howard)), (((Any others still following along!!))) --- han tun wrote: > Han: > As I understand it, the paramattha dhammas are only > four: citta, cetasika, ruupa and Nibbana. > But the words “citta”, “cetasika”, “ruupa”, “Nibbana” > themselves are vohaara or designations. .... S: Yes!! ... >The ultimate > realities cannot be described by words or by writing. .... S: Well, the Buddha did his best and we in turn do our best to describe them in words. Of course, words are never ultimate realities, as you say! ... > For example, when I say “citta” the Sarah and her > colleagues do not understand what I am saying, because > we (Burmes) pronounce it differently. .... S: There, you'r wrong - we understand you! We know that some people, like the Burmese, pronounce citta with an 's' sound, and others with a 'ch' sound. Probably something in between is most accurate:-) ... > So in the ultimate sense, “khandhas”, “ayatanas” and > “dhaatu” are also NOT realities, they are just > designations to designate naama and ruupa. The words > “naama” and “ruupa” are also designations. .... S: Exactly! .... > Therefore, I say that the ultimate realities cannot be > described by words or by writing. > What do you think? ... S: True! A description of visible object is never a visible object. However, if we didn't attempt to read and use words to describe realities, we'd never understand them. So they're the best use of concepts or designations we can find, that's all. As Howard explained, often there are misunderstandings because we may use terms differently and with different understandings. That's why we can use more short-hand and Pali terms when talking to someone we know or with a similar background. When we're still stepping on toes, we have to use longer explanations and check and question the meanings in more detail. I agree with Howard that one's own language carefully considered is best for this in general. However, if I'm speaking to either of you, 'nama and rupa' is likely to be more helpful than English, Thai or Burmese translations, though we may still need to check we're on the same page! Metta, Sarah ========= #76841 From: han tun Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Puggala pa~n~natti hantun1 Dear Sarah and Tep, Thank you very much for your kind reply. Whatever words we use, or whatever language we use, as long as we understand in our hearts what the Buddha meant, I think it will be good enough. Tep, I just ramble. Please do not mind me! Thank you both of you for your kind understanding. Respectfully, Han #76842 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:40 pm Subject: Unshakable Equanimity! bhikkhu0 Friends: How to train, stabilize, & purify Imperturbable Equanimity! Sitting alone, in silence, each early morning, with closed eyes one wishes: May I radiate and meet only calm, imperturbable, & even equanimity! May I & all the various beings on the 31 levels of existence develop & find only the composure and poise of calm, imperturbable, & even equanimity! May I & all beings on the sense-desire, fine-material, & the formless plane develop & encounter this serene, calm, imperturbable, & even equanimity! May I & all beings in the front, to the right, the back, the left & below as above develop & experience cool, calm, imperturbable, & even equanimity! May I & all beings in this city, country, and universe always be fully aware and deeply mindful of this steady, calm, imperturbable, & even equanimity! May I & all beings in this city, country, and universe examine all details & subtle aspects of this unstirred, placid, imperturbable, & even equanimity! May I & all beings in this city, country, & universe put enthusiastic effort into their training of this solid, calm, imperturbable, & even equanimity! May I & all beings in this city, country and universe find enraptured joy & jubilant gladness in this unmovable, calm, imperturbable, & even equanimity! May I & all beings in this city, country, & universe cultivate the tranquillity of quiet, silent, stilled, & all smiling calm, imperturbable, & even equanimity! May I & all beings in this city, country and universe attain concentrated & absorbed one-pointedness by stoic, deep, imperturbable, & even equanimity! May I & all beings in this city, country, and universe dwell in undisturbable & imperturbable equanimity of unexcitable and unreactive detachment... Yeah! Print this out, dwell in each state until pure, use ~ 25-45 minutes. Comment: Imperturbable Equanimity is the 4th infinite state (AppamaññÄ?) This gradually reduces all desire, attraction, drift, tendency, bias, preference, favouritism, one-sided partiality & unhappiness related with all these states. Equanimity is the proximate cause of any knowing & seeing leading to Wisdom... Equanimity is an extremely subtle form of solid, calm and peaceful Happiness... Equanimity purifies all other advantageous states & brings them to Perfection... Equanimity is unresponsive indifference, unstirred, unaffected, & untroubled!!! There is Equanimity both regarding all live beings and all dead things! There is Equanimity both regarding all internal & all external states! There is Equanimity both regarding all past, all present & all future events! There is Equanimity both regarding all what is mental & all which is physical! There is Equanimity both regarding all what is material & all which is immaterial! There is Equanimity both regarding all formed & all formless phenomena! Cultivating such six-fold equanimity brings this supreme state to completion. http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Even_is_Equanimity.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Equanimity_Upekkha.htm Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka * <....> #76843 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Controversy? sarahprocter... Dear DC (& Colette), --- DC Wijeratna wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > You wrote on 27 Sep.: > > "So we have to find out for ourselves when our actions are motivated by > good kamma and when by bad kamma. We can't make a blanket comment about > the actions of others, as in the examples you gave." > > I find it little difficult to understand this para: kamma is action. So > actions are motivated by good actions... .... S: Yes, you're right to pick it up. I was trying to keep it simple (for a change!) and follow Colette's terminology. The confusion arises because kamma(or karma) is commonly used to refer to actions, as Colette used the word and as you indicate. For example, we might say that beating protestors or harming others in any way is 'bad karma/kamma', while doing good deeds is 'good karma/kamma'. To be precise, however, kamma refers to the kusala (wholesome) cetana (intention) or the akusala (unwholesome) cetana. It is this cetana which motivates good or bad deeds and can produce results later on. So, while it's true that there is kusala and akusala kamma through body, speech and mind, it is the intention involved which is critical. Other factors will determine whether it is a 'completed action' which can bring a result. For example, there might be the action of killing, but it may be a mistake without any intention to harm. In order for it to be an act of killing, a 'completed action' (kamma-patha), there has to be the intention to kill and also, a living being, knowledge of this, effort to kill and the death of the living being. I hope this clarifies rather than confuses further! If so, please share your own thoughts on the topic. Metta, Sarah ======= #76844 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 2:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pictures nilovg Dear Evie. Lovely pictures, thank you. Nina. #76845 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 3:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] the Bodhisatta's insight development. to Sarah. sarahprocter... Dear Nina, --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Sarah, > I remember that there was a discussion about anuloma ~naa.na of the > Bodhisatta when he was Jotipala. ... S: That's what the Ghatikara Sutta and comy (MN 81)is usually read to say and I think you and Ven Dhammanando referred to this sometime. KS disagreed this is what is meant and I had long discussions with her on this and related topics. You may have heard them on the recordings. ... >In Ven. Bodhi's translation, p. 308 > above: the Co states that the Bodhisatta developed insight only as > far as purification by knowledge and vision of the way, without > attaining purification by knowledge and vision. > The footnote says that the latter is supramundane. > In the Visuddhimagga (p. 745) there is the Description of > Purification by Knowledge and Vision of the Way. I remember that this > was discussed with Kh Sujin and the conclusion was: the development > was to that extent that it was ready for becoming mature at the > moment of enlightenment. .... S: Yes, yes, but the question is 'when did the Bodhisatta develop such a degree of vipassana ~naan.a? When was it ready or mature enough for enlightenment? As Jotipala or only when all the paramis had been perfected, 'thoroughly cooked' just before enlightenment in his last life? ... > I do not know much about this subject, but perhaps this text can > throw some light upon the matter? .... S: It depends how we read it. Impossible, I think, that insight can be developed to anuloma ~naa.na and not followed by enlightenment. Metta, Sarah ========= #76846 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 4:11 am Subject: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 buddhatrue Hi Howard, Tep, Dieter and others, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Dieter Möller wrote: > > Hi Howard, Tep ( James and others), > > you wrote: > > ' My opinion: A very worthwhile topic! :-) ' > > D: I assume that you have in mind to exchange views on Nyanatiloka's definition of 'magga' first ... as a base to comment at opportunity the series of introduction James announced? Sorry I haven't contributed to this thread for a few days, even though it was addressed to me. There was a Moon Festival holiday; I got a cold; and I have a new Siamese kitten who is very high maintenance :-) When things settle down a bit I will post my views. I was thinking about a comparison of Right View with the fifth stage of insight described in the Vism. "Purification by Knowledge and Vision of What Is and What Is Not Path". Right View relates to knowing what is and what is not path- on a mundane and a supermundane level. Perhaps a deeper analysis of what the Vism. states could help to better understand Right View. Anyway, I will post more on my thoughts later, when things settle down. Just thought I would pop in for a sec. Metta, James #76847 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 4:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions, Ch 14, no 1. jhaana-condition. sarahprocter... Dear Nina, Just a point/question here on another knotty point which the last one has reminded me of: --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear friends, > > Chapter 14 > > Jhåna-Condition (Jhåna-Paccaya) ><...> The word > jhåna has been explained as being derived from “jhåyati”, to > contemplate, or to think closely of an object. Or else “jhåyati” can > mean to burn (Vis. IV, 119) [1], since the jhåna-factors which are > developed burn the “hindrances” (akusala cetasikas) away. ... S: I'm wondering if KS actually gave this definition before on her talks on jhana paccaya in the Paccaya series? I recall this definition is given in the PTS dictionary, but whenever I've ever referred to these two meanings/derivations of jhana, KS has adamantly said that jhaana only means the second one, i.e 'to burn' and then 'to burn sensuous objects' (rather than the hindrances, as I recall). She's said that the meaning of 'to contemplate' can refer to upacara samadhi only and this is why some objects which need contemplation can only be developed as objects of samatha up to upacara, such as Buddhanussati. Pls let me know if I've misunderstood anything. Metta, Sarah ======= #76848 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 4:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "there is no '; - "The controversy on 'person'‚... sarahprocter... Hi Howard (James & all), As you addressed the message below (#76367) to me, I just wished to say that I thought you gave a good and clear response and summary of the issue: --- upasaka@... wrote: > S:....I saw Vism XV111 25 (often quoted) which includes: > > " 'This is mere mentality-materiality, there is no being, no person'" > Pali: "naamaruupamattam ev'ida.m, na satto, na puggalo atthi tii..." <...> > ------------------------------------------------------------------ >Howard: If this is the Pali, and I have no doubt that it is, from the very tiny bit I know of a few Pali words and from what I know of several Indo European languages, 'na satto, na puggalo' should translate as "no being, no person," or, more likely, as "neither being nor person", but in any case is certainly an anti-puggalavadin position. Now, James, the section you quoted was XVIII 24, but what Sarah has quoted was XVIII 25, and maybe there is a comparing of apples and oranges going on. In any case, James, when you agree that there is nothing more to the person than mental and physical conditions, how are we differing on this issue except in terminology. If there is nothing other than the mentality and the physicality, why is it not simply a convention to think and speak of the aggregate of all these interrelated namic & rupic occurrences as a being or person? It seems to me that to say that there is nothing more to the person than these and to say that that there is neither being nor person (as an ontological reality) are two ways of saying the same thing. It is no different from "the chariot," it seems to me. When the "elements" are in a certain relation, it is convention to speak of a chariot. Likewise, for "the person". It is the relational coherence that enables the convention of "a person", but when "the person" is looked for, none per se is found but only a complex of fleeting, interrelated namas and rupas.< .... Metta, Sarah p.s James, just saw your post - hope the cold gets better and glad to see you have a new feline companion! ============ #76849 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 4:48 am Subject: Re: Citta scottduncan2 Dear Tep, To continue... T: "2. Citta is accumulated by kamma and the corruptions. (T: what corruptions are meant here?)" Dhs.: "...And the resultant is also termed 'consciousness' because it is accumulated (cito) by kamma and the corruptions." Scott: The Pali is: "Vipaaka.m kammakilesehi citanti citta.m." I'm not sure but we seem to be dealing with vipaaka-citta ('the resultant') in this case. To me this refers to the way in which citta now arises due to kamma condition, among others. Each moment of consciousness arises due to conditions and kamma-condition is one of these. PTS PED: 'Cita' ("Cita [pp. of cinaati] heaped; lined or faced with) as shown, is related to "Cinaati...to heap up, to collect, to accumulate...Pass. ciiyati...Caus. cinaapeti to construct, to build...Note cinaati at J ii.302 (to weave) is to be corr. to vinaati." ("Vinaati [vi, by -- form of vaa to weave: see vaayati] to weave"). Scott: This is for 'accumulates'. I think it refers to kamma-paccaya and vipaaka-paccaya. Here I'd appreciate correction. There is often mention of 'accumulations' ("Anusaya...Bent, bias, proclivity, the persistence of a dormant or latent disposition, predisposition, tendency"). I think the sense of 'accumulate' in Dhs. is meant differently, although may be related to the sense of 'anusaya', perhaps as a description of how things carry over as latencies or potentials and arise with each citta. 'Corruptions' I think refer to lobha, dosa, moha, maana, di.t.thi, vicikiccaa, thiina, uddhacca, ahirika, and anottappa - the kilesas. So, this seems to refer to the link between kamma, and in particular kamma arising out of the kilesas, and vipaaka. As always, correct/clarify these above speculations of mine as needed. Sincerely, Scott. #76850 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 4:54 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (67) nichiconn Dear Friends, Part 9 of "The commentary on the verses of Theri Rohinii": verse: 277. "Kaayakamma.m suci nesa.m, vaciikamma~nca taadisa.m; manokamma.m suci nesa.m, tena me sama.naa piyaa. 277. Their physical activity is pure, and their verbal activity is likewise. Their mental activity is pure. Therefore, ascetics are dear to me. txt: Eva.m "sama.naa sucikaarino"ti sa"nkhepato vuttamattha.m vibhajitvaa dassetu.m "kaayakamman"ti gaathamaaha. Ta.m suvi~n~neyyameva. Pruitt: 277. So, in order to show what is said in brief with "ascetics doing pure actions" by dealing with the meaning in detail, she spoke the verse [beginning] Their physical activity [is pure]. This is easily understood. verse: 278. "Vimalaa sa"nkhamuttaava, suddhaa santarabaahiraa; pu.n.naa sukkaana dhammaana.m, tena me sama.naa piyaa. 278. They are spotless like mother-of-pearl, purified inside and out, full of good mental states. Therefore, ascetics are dear to me. txt: Vimalaa sa"nkhamuttaavaati sudhotasa"nkhaa viya muttaa viya ca vigatamalaa raagaadimalarahitaa. Suddhaa santarabaahiraati santara~nca baahira~nca santarabaahira.m. Tato santarabaahirato suddhaa, suddhaasayapayogaati attho. Pu.n.naa sukkaana dhammaananti ekantasukkehi anavajjadhammehi paripu.n.naa, asekhehi siilakkhandhaadiihi samannaagataati attho. 278. They are spotless like mother-of-pearl (sa"nkha-muttaa) means: they are without the stains of desire, etc, like well-washed mother-of-pearl (sudhota-sa"khaa) and like a pearl (muttaa) that is without stain. Purified (suddhaa) inside and out (santara-baahiraa) means: inside and out (santara-baahira.m), both inside (santara~n ca) and outside (haavira~n ca). Therefore, they are purifed inside and out (santara-baahirato), their inclination [inside] and effort [outside] are pure (suddhaasaya-payogaa). That is the meaning. Full (pu.n.naa) of good (sukkaana) mental states (dhammaa.na.m) means: they are quite full (paripu.n.naa) of mental states that are faultless (anavajja-dhammedhi) and absolutely pure (ekanta-sukkehi). They are possessed of the qualities of virtuous conduct, etc, of those beyond training. That is the meaning. verse: 279. "Bahussutaa dhammadharaa, ariyaa dhammajiivino; attha.m dhamma~nca desenti, tena me sama.naa piyaa. 279. Having great learning, expert in the Doctrine, noble, living in accordance with the Doctrine, they teach the goal and the Doctrine. Therefore, ascetics are dear to me. txt: Suttageyyaadibahu.m suta.m etesa.m, sutena vaa uppannaati bahussutaa, pariyattibaahusaccena pa.tivedhabaahusaccena ca samannaagataati attho. Tameva duvidhampi dhamma.m dhaarentiiti dhammadharaa. Sattaana.m aacaarasamaacaarasikkhaapadena ariiyantiiti ariyaa. Dhammena ~naayena jiivantiiti dhammajiivino. Attha.m dhamma~nca desentiiti bhaasitattha~nca desanaadhamma~nca kathenti pakaasenti. Atha vaa atthato anapeta.m dhammato anapeta~nca desenti aacikkhanti. 279. They have heard many (bahu.m sutam) discourses, stanzas, etc; or, they arose through learning (sutena), thus, having great learning (bahu-ssutaa). They are possessed of great learning through the texts (pariyatti-baahusaccena) and great learning through penetrating [knowledge] (pa.tiveha-baahusaccena). That is the meaning. So they know (dhaarentii) this twofold Doctrine (dhamma.m), thus they are expert in the Doctrine (dhamma-dharaa). They have approached (arii-yantii) through the training precept of [moral] conduct and behaviour, thus, they are noble. Living (jivantii) according to the method of the Doctrine (dhamma-jiivino). They teach (desenti) the goal (attha.m) and the Doctrine (dhamma~n ca) means: they inform about, they explain, both the meaning of what is said (bhaasitattha~n ca) and the discourses on the Doctrine (desanaa-dhamma~n ca). Or, they expound, they teach that which does not deviate from the goal (atthato), which does not deviate from the Doctrine. ===tbc, connie #76851 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Controversy? dcwijeratna Dear Sarah, You wrote: " To be precise, however, kamma refers to the kusala (wholesome) cetana (intention) or the akusala (unwholesome) cetana. It is this cetana which motivates good or bad deeds and can produce results later on." DC: Our understanding is that kamma is distinct from cetana. We understand it this way because "I declare, O Bhikkhus, that volition (cetanaa) is Kamma. Having willed one acts by body , speech and thought." (AN iii) [cetanaaha.m bhikkhave vadaami kamma.m, cetayitvaa karoti kamma.m kaayena, vvacaaya manasaa] Moreover, the first verse of Dhammapada, the famous "mano pubba.mgamaa dhamma" says that mind is the forerunner... It is absolutely necessary to distinguish between kamma and cetanaa. One has to do with the "naama" aspect of "naama-ruupa" and the other to "ruupa". Action and "vedanaa" Two separate and distinct dimensions of naama-ruupa. I hope I have made myself clear. We would say that it is not cetana that produce results later but kamma. So many times I think of robbing banks. I never do rob. Is there kamma? Is there any result. It is the action that matters not cetanana. Even the words "later on" is quite ambigous. In the Buddha-word, there is no such thing as later on. It's result are from the moment the kamma is committed. This is how we look at this issue. And it is purely based on the Buddha-vacana. Sarah, one thing, I am not writing these things for the sake of argument. I hope you'll understand that. With mettaa, D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #76852 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "there is no ‘person’" - "The controversy on ‘person’ is ended" sarahprocter... Hi Tep, This is back to an interesting older message of yours, #76363 --- Tep Sastri wrote: > T: I have a good reason to believe that when the dhamma (mentality- > materiality) in the ultimate sense is the main concern, "not a being, > not a person" is the right perspective of the ariyans who do not > identify with mentality-materiality, since they do not have > attanuditthi or attavaadupaadaana. ..... S: True! .... > Similarly, in the ultimate sense no being or no person can be found > in the dhamma. This is analogous to seeing only molecules and atoms > that make up the body of a being/person. It is the matter of > perspective/view. .... S: Or could we say it is a matter of understanding of realities? .... > > I have a quote from the Vism for you all to consider. > > "Individual self-hood" (atta-bhaava) is what the physical body is > called; or it is simply the pentad of categories, since it is > actually only a descriptive device derived (upaada-pa~n~natti) > upon the pentad of categories (Vis. Ch. IX/p. 310). "Here when the > categories are not fully known, there is naming (abhidhaana) of them > and of the consciousness as 'self,' that is, the physical body > or alternatively the five categories... (it is) presence (sabbhaava) > as a mere description in the case of what is called a 'being' > (bhaata), though in the ultimate sense the 'being' is non-existent > (avijjamaana)" (VisA. 298). .... S: This is an interesting and difficult passage. What are your comments on it? Presumably, 'categories' is a translation of khandhas here? ... > Of course, when the "categories" are "fully known" to someone, s/he > then becomes an ariya whose perspective changes to the ultimate > realities because attanuditthi has been terminated. In the ultimate > dhamma world 'the being' is non-existent -- but it is just the > consequence of a completely new perspective. .... S: or understanding. Such understanding has to develop in order for the right 'perspective' to fully develop so that attanuditthi is eradicated. The 'ultimate dhamma world' is now as we speak. 'The being' is 'non-existent' now as we speak. However, as you stress, because of the old perspective and strong clinging to attanuditthi, we continue to take such beings for realities, for dhammas even. ... >Buddhas and Arahants > always exist and there will always be good Buddhists who practice > according to the Dhamma. .... S: Conventionally speaking perhaps, though even on a conventional level this may be controversial:-). I'll look forward to any more of your (or anyone else's) thoughts on the Vism passage. Metta, Sarah ======= #76853 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:26 am Subject: Conditions, Ch 15, no 9. nilovg Dear friends, Paññå of the noble eightfold Path develops very gradually. When it is more developed different stages of insight can arise. The first stage of insight is knowing the difference between the characteristic of nåma and of rúpa, and it is at a later stage of insight that their arising and falling away can be realized. We may think of the stages of insight but when desire for them arises paññå will not develop. Instead of thinking of the stages of insight we should consider realities which appear now, at this very moment, so that we can have more understanding of them. When seeing arises it sees all that appears through the eyesense. Seeing only sees, it does not think or classify what is seen as different things. When we know that there is a tree or a house we classify different shapes, different images of a “whole” and identify them. That is not seeing. However, if there had not been seeing of all that appears through the eyes there could not be thinking about it. It is the same in the case of hearing. When hearing hears sound, there is no thinking, no classifying. However, since there is hearing there can be thinking of the meaning of the sounds which are heard. There is so much to be considered in daily life and we have hardly begun to do so. When we consider realities which appear in daily life and begin to be mindful of them, right understanding of the eightfold Path develops. It develops because of conditions, we do not have to think of progress or worry about the lack of progress. By the development of the noble eightfold Path enlightenment can be attained and defilements can be eradicated stage by stage. When the last stage of enlightenment, the stage of the arahat, has been realized, all defilements are eradicated and there will be the end of the cycle of birth and death. ******* Nina. #76854 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:26 am Subject: Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. nilovg Dear friends, From the beginning we should remember that there is no self who can do anything to have more awareness and understanding. We should not try to change our character and become a better person with the aim to develop right understanding. It is right understanding itself which has the function to eradicate akusala. We should not try to be aware of breath, because it is very subtle. It is tangible object, conditioned by citta, but it is already very difficult to be aware of other kinds of tangible objects such as hardness of the different objects we touch, and therefore, why should we try to be aware of breath which is so subtle? People in the Buddha’s time who were highly gifted, who could become arahats with special distinctive qualities (mahå-purisas), could develop mindfulness of breath as a subject of samatha and vipassanå. We read in the “Kindred Sayings” (V, Mahå-vagga, Book X, Kindred Sayings about In-breathing and Out-breathing, Ch I, § 8, The Lamp) that the Buddha, while he was at Såvatthí said to the monks: ”Monks, intent concentration on in-breathing and out-breathing, if cultivated and made much of, is of great fruit, of great profit.” He then explained how to be aware of breath and to attain calm by means of this meditation subject [1]. The person who develops this subject can attain all stages of rúpa-jhåna and arúpa-jhåna, and also “extinction” (nirodha). This is temporary extinction of consciousness, which can only be attained by non-returners and arahats who have developed all stages of rúpa-jhåna and arúpa-jhåna. The Commentary to this sutta , the “Såratthappakåsiní” explains about the benefits of “Mindfulness of Breath”. We read: “The monk who needs to have superpowers which are of the ariyan, the four stages of rúpa-jhåna, the four stages of arúpa-jhåna and the attainment of “extinction”, must be interested in thorough concentration on the the subject of breath..." The commentary explains that when this subject has been developed in all ways, all these benefits will occur to the meditator. All arahats have eradicated the defilements, but they have different abilities, different talents. Some had superpowers which are “worldly” (lokiya, not lokuttara) and lokuttara (supramundane) [2]. Thus, we see that great benefits of “Mindfulness of Breath” occur to very special persons, to arahats who are highly gifted and have distinctive qualities. In our time the teachings are declining and there are in the human world no more arahats. The sutta and the commentary which I mentioned can remind us that it is difficult to properly develop “Mindfulness of Breath” and that this subject is not suitable for everybody. ---------- 1. See the “Visuddhimagga” VIII, 145- 245, which gives a detailed explanation. 2. Abhiññå, including magical powers such as walking on water, divine ear, penetration of other people’s minds, divine eye, remembrance of former lives, eradication of all defilements. ******** Nina. #76855 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 2:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 upasaka_howard Hi, James (and Tep & Dieter) - In a message dated 9/28/2007 7:13:28 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: Hi Howard, Tep, Dieter and others, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Dieter Möller wrote: > > Hi Howard, Tep ( James and others), > > you wrote: > > ' My opinion: A very worthwhile topic! :-) ' > > D: I assume that you have in mind to exchange views on Nyanatiloka's definition of 'magga' first ... as a base to comment at opportunity the series of introduction James announced? Sorry I haven't contributed to this thread for a few days, even though it was addressed to me. There was a Moon Festival holiday; I got a cold; and I have a new Siamese kitten who is very high maintenance :-) When things settle down a bit I will post my views. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Sorry about the cold, but pleased about the kitten. :-) Is s/he beautiful? By "high maintenance", do you refer to kittens' sometimes pesky playfulness? (My son had adopted a stray kitten, very young, who would playfully jump onto the back of one's neck and dig her claws in! LOL!) ----------------------------------------------------- I was thinking about a comparison of Right View with the fifth stage of insight described in the Vism. "Purification by Knowledge and Vision of What Is and What Is Not Path". Right View relates to knowing what is and what is not path- on a mundane and a supermundane level. Perhaps a deeper analysis of what the Vism. states could help to better understand Right View. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: It sure couldn't hurt! BTW, I'm glad that you, a meditator and non-Abhidhammika, have embarked upon a good study of the Vism. That is, and will be, I believe, helpful to all of us. As for "knowledge and vision of what is and what is not path," it occurs to me that perhaps this pertains to distinguishing lesser auspicious events (jhanas, insights, etc) from actual awakenings. I'm eager to read what you have to say about this when you are ready. -------------------------------------------------------- Anyway, I will post more on my thoughts later, when things settle down. Just thought I would pop in for a sec. Metta, James ============================ With metta, Howard #76856 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions, Ch 14, no 1. jhaana-condition. nilovg Dear Sarah, The commentaries are not linguistic studies, they use word associations to convey meanings. That is why two meanings are suggested. Both of them tell us something about jhaana. There is nothing wrong about the meaning of burning, not in the context of samatha. Thus we should see her remark just in that context. But now in my conditions I write about jhaana-condition, jhaana- paccaya, according to the Patthana. This is in another context. The meaning of thinking closely of an object helps us to understand jhaana-condition, taken jhaana in its widest sense. Thus also in the case of akusala citta. The evildoer who is going to steal thinks closely of an object, he needs jhaana-condition. As to the second meaning in the kusala sense, namely in the context of vipassana, you remember Jim's post about nijjhaana or upanijjhaana, often translated as meditation? The Papa~ncasuudanii, Atthk to the Sallekhasutta (M.N. I,8): Jhaayathaa ti. aaramma.nuupanijjhaanena a.t.thati.msaaramma.naahi (thirtyeight objects of samatha), lakkha.nuupanijjhaanena ca aniccaadito (beginning with aniccaa) khandhaayatanaadiini upanijjhaayatha. Samatha~n ca vipassana~ca va.d.dhetaa(develop) ti vutta.m hoti. Maa pamaadatthaati maapamajjittha. Nijjhaayati is the same in meaning as upanijjhaayati Here in the Co it seems to me that in both cases the meaning of contemplation is used, but the objects are different in samatha and in vipassana. Nina. Op 28-sep-2007, om 13:12 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > The word > > jhåna has been explained as being derived from “jhåyati”, to > > contemplate, or to think closely of an object. Or else “jhåyati” can > > mean to burn (Vis. IV, 119) [1], since the jhåna-factors which are > > developed burn the “hindrances” (akusala cetasikas) away. > ... > S: I'm wondering if KS actually gave this definition before on her > talks > on jhana paccaya in the Paccaya series? I recall this definition is > given > in the PTS dictionary, but whenever I've ever referred to these two > meanings/derivations of jhana, KS has adamantly said that jhaana only > means the second one, i.e 'to burn' and then 'to burn sensuous > objects' > (rather than the hindrances, as I recall). She's said that the > meaning of > 'to contemplate' can refer to upacara samadhi only and this is why > some > objects which need contemplation can only be developed as objects of > samatha up to upacara, such as Buddhanussati. > > Pls let me know if I've misunderstood anything. #76857 From: Dieter Möller Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 7:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. moellerdieter Hi Nina, you wrote: 'We should not try to be aware of breath, because it is very subtle. It is tangible object, conditioned by citta, but it is already very difficult to be aware of other kinds of tangible objects such as hardness of the different objects we touch, and therefore, why should we try to be aware of breath which is so subtle? snip The sutta and the commentary which I mentioned can remind us that it is difficult to properly develop "Mindfulness of Breath" and that this subject is not suitable for everybody.' Nina, statements like this leave me speechless.. with Metta Dieter #76858 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 7:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. nilovg Hi Dieter, I know that there are different opinions and there have been many discussions on dsg about this subject. See archives about mindfulness of breath. Nina. Op 28-sep-2007, om 16:52 heeft Dieter Möller het volgende geschreven: > 'We should not try to be aware of breath, because it is very subtle. > It is tangible object, conditioned by citta, but it is already very > difficult to be aware of other kinds of tangible objects such as > hardness of the different objects we touch, and therefore, why > should we try to be aware of breath which is so subtle? snip > > The sutta and the commentary which I mentioned can remind us that > it is difficult to > properly develop "Mindfulness of Breath" and that this subject is > not suitable for everybody.' > > Nina, statements like this leave me speechless.. #76859 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 4:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter (and Nina) - In a message dated 9/28/2007 10:49:54 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Nina, you wrote: 'We should not try to be aware of breath, because it is very subtle. It is tangible object, conditioned by citta, but it is already very difficult to be aware of other kinds of tangible objects such as hardness of the different objects we touch, and therefore, why should we try to be aware of breath which is so subtle? snip The sutta and the commentary which I mentioned can remind us that it is difficult to properly develop "Mindfulness of Breath" and that this subject is not suitable for everybody.' Nina, statements like this leave me speechless.. ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Happily, as regards mindfulness of breath the Buddha was not speechless. ;-) For example, there are the following: Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, brings the four frames of reference to their culmination. The four frames of reference, when developed & pursued, bring the seven factors for awakening to their culmination. The seven factors for awakening, when developed & pursued, bring clear knowing & release to their culmination. (From MN 118) and One thing — when developed & pursued — leads solely to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to stilling, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding. Which one thing? Mindfulness of in-and-out breathing... (From AN 1.293) and "And how is mindfulness immersed in the body developed, how is it pursued, so as to be of great fruit & great benefit? "There is the case where a monk — having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building — sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect and setting mindfulness to the fore. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out. "Breathing in long, he discerns that he is breathing in long; or breathing out long, he discerns that he is breathing out long. Or breathing in short, he discerns that he is breathing in short; or breathing out short, he discerns that he is breathing out short. He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to the entire body and to breathe out sensitive to the entire body. He trains himself to breathe in calming bodily fabrication (the breath) and to breathe out calming bodily fabrication. And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, any memories & resolves related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers & settles inwardly, grows unified & centered. This is how a monk develops mindfulness immersed in the body. (From MN 119) and Please see also the Dipa Sutta (SN 54.8) at _http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn54/sn54.008.than.html_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn54/sn54.008.than.html) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- with Metta Dieter ================================== With metta, Howard #76860 From: Dieter Möller Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 9:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- munbdane right understand/view moellerdieter Dear DC (Howard, James,Tep and ..) you wrote: '5. Now to one other point--Paragraph starting with "First of all,..." , pg. 109, of Buddhist Dictionary, Nyanatiloka. In that paragraph, the following sentence occurs: "In reality,, however, the links 3-5 constituting constituting moral training (sila), are the first three links to be cultivaed...and at last right view..." I have a great difficulty in understanding this--I thought the path starts with right view, and naturally that is the first thing to be developed. Can you reconcile that?' D: Thanks for this useful question and I will try to express what is my understanding so far. I had some difficulties with the Path sequence ( 3-5 5-8 1-2 corresponding to moral, meditation and wisdom ) too , as we all know the 8fold Noble Path starts with right view/understanding. Without a beginning understanding :what is aimed by the path, why should anybody care to enter it? I.E. we should recall that the 8fold Noble Path is the fourth of the Noble Truth. Taking medicine for a sickness not recognised doesn't make sense, does it? Therefore a first understanding of the first three , in particular (anicca) dukkha is fundamental .. but not for those accepting suffering for the price of pleasure as the last truth of existence. In such case the Dhamma will not be of interest. But let us first look at Nyanatiloka's comment: "As many of those who have written about the Eightfold Path have misunderstood its true nature, it is therefore appropriate to add here a few elucidating remarks about it, as this path is fundamental for the understanding and practice of the Buddha's .teaching. First of all, the figurative expression 'path' should not be interpreted to mean that one has to advance step by step in the sequence of the enumeration until, after successively passing through all the eight stages, one finally may reach one's destination, Nibbana. If this really were the case, one should have realized, first of all, right view and penetration of the truth, even before one could hope to proceed to the next steps, right thought and right speech; and each preceding stage would be the indispensable foundation and condition for each succeeding stage. In reality, however, the links 3-5 constituting moral training (sila), are the first 3 links to be cultivated, then the links 6-8 constituting mental training (samadhi), and at last right view, etc. constituting wisdom (pañña). It is, however, true that a really unshakable and safe foundation to the path is provided only by right view which, starting from the tiniest germ of faith and knowledge, gradually, step by step, develops into penetrating insight (vipassana) and thus forms the immediate condition for the entrance into the 4 supermundane paths and fruits of holiness, and for the realization of Nibbana. Only with regard to this highest form of supermundane insight, may we indeed say that all the remaining links of the path are nothing but the outcome and the accompaniments of right view." I needed time to understand that we have to approach the path elements for the purpose of training towards the eventual moment ( starting with stream entry) when the first step, right view , naturally results in right thinking ,right speech ,right bodily action etc.. , i.e. when right view ( samma ditthi ) indeed becomes the forerunner of all path elements (super/supramundane /holy noble path). Before I had the nerve with friends and even monks to claim a misinterpretation of the teaching. A statement I found in a book by Agnew Spiro ( the path sequence of 3-5 etc. isn't of canoncical origin but an interpretation by Ven. Buddhagosa) came very wellcome to make my point. However, as I learned , the sila, samadhi , panna training is mentioned in numerous suttas and the sequence is indeed canonical though I only found one sutta , in which the Buddha confirmed it ( such speech of a Bhikkhuni).The elements of the path are interrelated.. the approach relative to one's status, therefore perhaps the Buddha did not emphasize the 3-5 etc. sequence. Nevertheless the concept makes a lot of sense: we need discipline (moral/sila -wholesome action) to tame the monkey nature of mind in order to establish a base for concentration(meditation/samadhi) and by that develop insight -wisdom. Is above 'reconcile that'? with Metta Dieter #76861 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 10:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions, Ch 15, no 9. dcwijeratna Dear Nina, You wrote: Paññå of the noble eightfold Path develops very gradually. When it is more developed different stages of insight can arise. The first stage of insight is knowing the difference between the characteristic of nåma and of rúpa, and it is at a later stage of insight that their arising and falling away can be realized. DC: I am having trouble understanding the sentence in bold letters. As far as we know pa~n~naa is not a factor of the Noble-Eightfold-Path. Would be grateful for an explanation. With respect to the following I would be grateful for some assistance. Could you also give the Paali term for insight. What is the difference between naama and ruupa? What exactly is meant by arising and falling of naama and ruupa? D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #76862 From: Dieter Möller Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 10:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. moellerdieter Hi Howard( and Nina) , ' Happily, as regards mindfulness of breath the Buddha was not speechless. ;-) D: ;-)) with Metta Dieter #76863 From: Dieter Möller Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 10:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 moellerdieter Hi Tep and Howard, you wrote: ('Howard: The solution lies in detailed spelling out of terminology. It lies in more precision and greater literality of speech rather than less. ) T: I think that solution requires that anyone who does not have the right terminology and skill to express it clearly, should not post a message. Right? D: not necessarily but perhaps consideration of following quotation ( A. Einstein): 'Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius -- and a lot of courage -- to move in the opposite direction.' with Metta Dieter #76864 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 11:59 am Subject: Q. re: Conditions, Ch 15, no 9. nilovg Dear DC, I answer shortly, because of my upcoming trip to India I have to finish some tasks the coming week. You wrote: Paññå of the noble eightfold Path develops very gradually. When it is more developed different stages of insight can arise. The first stage of insight is knowing the difference between the characteristic of nåma and of rúpa, and it is at a later stage of insight that their arising and falling away can be realized. DC: I am having trouble understanding the sentence in bold letters. As far as we know pa~n~naa is not a factor of the Noble-Eightfold- Path. Would be grateful for an explanation. ------- N: Yahoo does not give us bold letters. It gives capitals. Sammaa-di.t.thi is actually pa~n~na. It is translated as right view. You gave before many synonyms of pa~n~naa. It is the opposite of avijjaa. I would say pa~n~na cetasika, but I understand that you are not familiar with Abhidhamma? Cetasika means: meantal factor accompanying citta, but I think you know that. And as I said before, there are many degrees of pa~n~naa. It is not something static that one has, it arises and falls away, is accumulated and arises again and again, and thus it develops. It grows. Someone who studies the dhamma understands first very little and as he listens more and studies more, he understands more. It sinks in what he learnt. ------ DC: With respect to the following I would be grateful for some assistance. Could you also give the Paali term for insight. ------- N: vipassana. Vi is an intensifier. passati: to see. Seeing clearly, seeing from all sides. It sees the physical phenomena, rupa, and mental phenomena, nama, as they really are. At first we are confused and we have a wrong interpretation of them. We see them as lasting, as self. We think we see a person, but seeing only sees colour, as I said before. Person is a concept we think of on account of what is seen. We think: I see, but it is a nama, seeing, that sees. It takes long to get rid of wrong ideas. I know in theory that seeing sees, but I still have an idea of I see, accumulated for so long. ----------- DC: What is the difference between naama and ruupa? ------- N: Nama knows or experiences something, rupa does not experience anything. We hear this, we can say this, but, it has to be directly known by pa~n~na. And that is quite another matter. Hardness does not know anything, feeling experiences something, it feels. --------- DC:What exactly is meant by arising and falling of naama and ruupa? ------ N: Impermanence, anicca, is one of the three general characteristics, lakkha.na, of all conditioned phenomena. For instance, when the rupa hardness appears, it does so because it has arisen. And it falls away immediately, never to come back. But because of our ignorance, we do not see this. It seems that hardness lasts for a while. In reality it has fallen away and it has been replaced by another hardness that impinges again on the bodysense. Feeling arises and falls away immediately within splitseconds. It seems to last for a while, but in reality it does not. Through insight there will be direct understanding of nama and rupa as they appear one at a time. If there is no precise understanding first of nama and rupa, their arising and falling away cannot be directly known. Nina. #76865 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 1:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Views, Ontology, Philosophy of Buddha as it appears to me. truth_aerator Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Please forgive me for this question. What is exact difference between > quality/condition & own being/nature ? > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > As I see it, '(paramattha) dhamma', 'condition', 'phenomenon', and > 'quality' are all pretty much the same in meaning, though 'condition' also carries > the additional sense of serving as partial causal basis for other dhammas. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If I understand correctly, paramatha stands for "highest goal" rather than ultimate phenomenon. >>>>>>>>>>> > It is a fact, I believe that dhammas are distinguishable. No two dhammas are > identical; in fact even to speak of "two" implies that. No two sounds are > identical, and no sound is the same as any sight. There are distinguishable > experiential qualities, not a homogeneous experiential mass/porridge. >>>>>>>>>>>>> In a way it is true in a way it is false. When one is in deep stages of meditation (for example 8th Jhana, neither perception nor non perception or higher) then one is unable to distinguish one type of sensory object from another. So ultimately even the distinguishment of sound from sight, for example, is conventional and relative. Lots of Metta, Alex #76866 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 8:16 am Subject: Re: Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. philofillet Hi Nina > We should not > try to change our character and become a better person with the aim > to develop right understanding. Nina, statements like this leave me non-speechless... :) Please get back to the basics, Nina, back to the suttas! e.g AN VI, 50, which BB entitles "Step by Step" "If there is no self control, O monks, then the basis for virtue is destroyed for one who lacks self control. If there is no virtue, then the basis for right concentration is destroyed for one who lacks virtue. If there is no right concentration, then the basis for knelwedge and visions of things as they really are is destroyed for one who lacaks right concentration." I already know what you will say to this, but I will wisely let the sutta speak for itself in its beautiful non-commentarily muddled clarity. I also point you toward MN 39, but that sutta is so regularly ignored by students of AS when posted it should get a free ticket to Bangkok to meet the teacher in person. No hard feelings, Nina. I am feeling so wonderfully confident about the Dhamma these days, so grateful to the Buddha. I am seeing such good results, which have to do with the first two steps of the above progression, not yet concentration or understanding. Understanding of the true nature of things will come as a result of the gradual training, it is not the first step. But when I exercise self-restrain, control, it is with the knowledge that non-remorse is cited by the buddha as resulting from this, and this allows the mind to settle more easily into concentrated states that bring about understanding. Man oh man! So utterly clear in the suttanta...ah, but I wasn't born in the Buddha's day...sigh... again, said in a friendly way, Nina. Metta, Phil p.s Sukin, hi. Sorry not back to you on those posts yet. Will still be making rare appearances here. p.p.s also welcome to the new member, the woman who posted the nice pictures. You are quite right in thinking that applying oneself to the Buddha's teaching is likely to make us a happier, more peaceful person. And part of that is that we have better understanding of the times that we aren't peaceful and happy, just the winds of the world blowing through the house of our mind. But when keep a warm hearth burning, the hearth of the Dhamma, we always have safe refuge... #76867 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 8:47 am Subject: Typo? philofillet Hi again Post hasn't appeared yet, but I think I wrote "If there is no self control" instead of the correct "if there is no sense control." Typo? Anyways, the first is also true in a way. There is in truth no self, of course, but there is always the phantom self/ego at work in our practice. It might as well be put to good use - then at least we know what it is up to, rather than having it lurking unseen behind our split- second paramattha awareness moments. (I have heard they occur...) Metta, Phil #76868 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 2:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions, Ch 14, no 1. jhaana-condition. sarahprocter... Dear Nina, Thanks for your additional helpful comments. --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > There is nothing wrong about the meaning of burning, not in the > context of samatha. > Thus we should see her remark just in that context. ... S: I thought that was the context of the quote, because it followed the lines "When jhaanacitta arises there are no longer sense impressions and there is temporary freedom from defilements. Jhaanacitta is of a higher level of citta than kaamaavara citta, citta of the sense sphere. The word jhaana......etc" ... > But now in my conditions I write about jhaana-condition, jhaana- > paccaya, according to the Patthana. This is in another context. ... S: Yes, understood. Here, the meaning is quite different as you say. .... > As to the second meaning in the kusala sense, namely in the context > of vipassana, ... S: Yes, here jhaana refers to the burning. of defilements. As you say, the object of the citta is different, but this isn't being referred to in the context. Anyway, it's just a small detail. Mettta, Sarah > > The word > > > jhåna has been explained as being derived from “jhåyati”, to > > > contemplate, or to think closely of an object. Or else “jhåyati” can > > > mean to burn (Vis. IV, 119) [1], since the jhåna-factors which are > > > developed burn the “hindrances” (akusala cetasikas) away. #76869 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 11:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Views, Ontology, Philosophy of Buddha as it appears to me. upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 9/28/2007 4:16:22 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Please forgive me for this question. What is exact difference between > quality/condition & own being/nature ? > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > As I see it, '(paramattha) dhamma', 'condition', 'phenomenon', and > 'quality' are all pretty much the same in meaning, though 'condition' also carries > the additional sense of serving as partial causal basis for other dhammas. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If I understand correctly, paramatha stands for "highest goal" rather than ultimate phenomenon. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: It can mean that, but I believe it also can mean "ultimate sense/meaning" or "highest sense/meaning", and I think that is what 'paramattha' means when modifying 'dhamma - so, 'paramattha dhamma' would mean "phenomenon in the highest or ultimate sense". ------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>>> > It is a fact, I believe that dhammas are distinguishable. No two dhammas are > identical; in fact even to speak of "two" implies that. No two sounds are > identical, and no sound is the same as any sight. There are distinguishable > experiential qualities, not a homogeneous experiential mass/porridge. >>>>>>>>>>>>> In a way it is true in a way it is false. When one is in deep stages of meditation (for example 8th Jhana, neither perception nor non perception or higher) then one is unable to distinguish one type of sensory object from another. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: What objects are there at all in that state? At most one, I would presume, and so there would be no dhammas to distinguish. ------------------------------------------------ So ultimately even the distinguishment of sound from sight, for example, is conventional and relative. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Sights are not always present. In the jhanas, in particular, I believe there are no objects other than mind-door objects, though I do believe there is much more to mind than is usually considered to be the case. In any event, I think it is so that in all states of consciousness, no more than one dhamma is object of consciousness. At any instant during the experiencing of hardness, that hardness is all that is known. Likewise for sights, sounds, tastes, smells, and so on. Of course, the change-over pace is typically very fast, and, moreover, not all that comes under the eye of vi~n~nana really registers. In that regard, think of the times that you have been driving somewhere, lost in thought, and suddenly you find yourself pulling into your driveway with no recollection of anything experienced during the trip except for your thoughts. Much in the way of sights and sounds was known and reacted to - it had to have been, quite expertly in fact, but close to nothing consciously registered. ----------------------------------------------- Lots of Metta, Alex ========================== With metta Howard #76870 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 4:06 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, James (and Tep & Dieter) - > > In a message dated 9/28/2007 7:13:28 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > buddhatrue@... writes: > > Hi Howard, Tep, Dieter and others, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Dieter Möller > wrote: > > > > Hi Howard, Tep ( James and others), > > > > you wrote: > > > > ' My opinion: A very worthwhile topic! :-) ' > > > > D: I assume that you have in mind to exchange views on > Nyanatiloka's definition of 'magga' first ... as a base to comment > at opportunity the series of introduction James announced? > > > Sorry I haven't contributed to this thread for a few days, even > though it was addressed to me. There was a Moon Festival holiday; I > got a cold; and I have a new Siamese kitten who is very high > maintenance :-) When things settle down a bit I will post my views. > ----------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Sorry about the cold, but pleased about the kitten. :-) Is s/he > beautiful? By "high maintenance", do you refer to kittens' sometimes pesky > playfulness? (My son had adopted a stray kitten, very young, who would playfully jump > onto the back of one's neck and dig her claws in! LOL!) James: Yes, it is a very beautiful kitten, and very friendly. So far he doesn't dig his claws into my neck, thank goodness!! ;-)) He just plays a lot and whenever I get on the laptop he wants to get right on top of the keys. :-) > ----------------------------------------------------- > > > > I was thinking about a comparison of Right View with the fifth stage > of insight described in the Vism. "Purification by Knowledge and > Vision of What Is and What Is Not Path". Right View relates to > knowing what is and what is not path- on a mundane and a > supermundane level. Perhaps a deeper analysis of what the Vism. > states could help to better understand Right View. > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > It sure couldn't hurt! BTW, I'm glad that you, a meditator and > non-Abhidhammika, have embarked upon a good study of the Vism. James: I haven't really embarked upon a "good study of the Vism.", I would like to, however, just can't find the time. Now it has been hit and miss. That is, and will be, > I believe, helpful to all of us. > As for "knowledge and vision of what is and what is not path," it occurs > to me that perhaps this pertains to distinguishing lesser auspicious events > (jhanas, insights, etc) from actual awakenings. I'm eager to read what you > have to say about this when you are ready. James: Yes, it relates to that. It also relates to running into roadblocks when one doesn't know what is path and what isn't path. Everyday we have to make hundreds, thousands of decisions and actions, how is one to know which ones are path and which ones are not? However, right now, I think that this may be too ambitious a topic so i won't pursue it after all (depends on how I feel after I see a doctor for this cold! ;-)) > -------------------------------------------------------- > Anyway, I will post more on my thoughts later, when things settle > down. Just thought I would pop in for a sec. > > Metta, > James > ============================ > With metta, > Howard Metta, James #76871 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 4:26 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,195 Vism.XVII,196 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 195. Or because sound is not regularly present since it is only sometimes manifested, subtracting it therefore as twofold [being temperature-originated and consciousness-originated], there are these ninety-seven states to be understood as 'mentality-materiality with consciousness as condition' in all beings, according as it happens to be produced. For whether these beings are sleeping or idling or eating or drinking, these states keep on occurring in them day and night with consciousness as condition. And we shall explain later how they have consciousness as their condition (see par. 200ff.). 196. Now although this kamma-born materiality is the first to find a footing in the several kinds of becoming, generation, destiny, station of consciousness, and abode of beings, it is nevertheless unable to carry on without being consolidated by the former. But when they thus give consolidating support to each other, they can stand up without falling, like sheaves of reeds propped together on all four sides, even though battered by the wind, and like [boats with] broken floats37 that have found a support, even though battered by waves somewhere in mid-ocean, and they can last one year, two years ... a hundred years, until those beings' life span or their merit is exhausted. This is how the exposition should be understood here 'by occurrence in becoming et cetera'. ------------------------ Note 37. Vaahanika--'having a float': not in P.T.S. Dict. The context suggests a catamaran, universal in Indian waters. ********************** 195. yasmaa vaa saddo aniyato kadaacideva paatubhaavato, tasmaa duvidhampi ta.m apanetvaa ime sattanavuti dhammaa yathaasambhava.m sabbasattaana.m vi~n~naa.napaccayaa naamaruupanti veditabba.m. tesa.m hi suttaanampi pamattaanampi khaadantaanampi pivantaanampi divaa ca ratti~nca ete vi~n~naa.napaccayaa pavattanti. ta~nca nesa.m vi~n~naa.napaccayabhaava.m parato va.n.nayissaama. 196. yampanetamettha kammajaruupa.m, ta.m bhavayonigati.thitisattaavaasesu sabbapa.thama.m pati.t.thahantampi tisamu.t.thaanikaruupena anupatthaddha.m na sakkoti sa.n.thaatu.m, naapi tisamu.t.thaanika.m tena anupatthaddha.m. atha kho vaatabbhaahataapi catuddisaa vavatthaapitaa na.lakalaapiyo viya, uumivegabbhaahataapi mahaasamudde katthaci laddhapati.t.thaa bhinnavaahanikaa viya ca a~n~nama~n~nupatthaddhaanevetaani apatamaanaani sa.n.thahitvaa ekampi vassa.m dvepi vassaani...pe0... vassasatampi yaava tesa.m sattaana.m aayukkhayo vaa pu~n~nakkhayo vaa, taava pavattantiiti. eva.m bhavaadiisu pavattitopettha vi~n~naatabbo vinicchayo. #76872 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 4:47 pm Subject: Re: Citta indriyabala Dear Scott, - I was asking what "corruptions" meant (in 2. Citta is accumulated by kamma and the corruptions.). And your Pali reference helps me see the answer : it is the 'kammakilesa'. Scott: The Pali is: "Vipaaka.m kammakilesehi citanti citta.m." I'm not sure but we seem to be dealing with vipaaka-citta ('the resultant') in this case. To me this refers to the way in which citta now arises due to kamma condition, among others. Each moment of consciousness arises due to conditions and kamma-condition is one of these. ........ T: I understand the meanings of a 'condition' such as the kamma that causes a 'resultant consciousness'. At the end of your message you explained that corruptions meant "lobha, dosa, moha, maana, di.t.thi, vicikiccaa, thiina, uddhacca, ahirika, and anottappa - the kilesas". Thanks. ......... T: Then you gave an interpretation for "Cinaati...to heap up, to collect, to accumulate..." as follows: Scott: This is for 'accumulates'. I think it refers to kamma-paccaya and vipaaka-paccaya. Here I'd appreciate correction. There is often mention of 'accumulations' ("Anusaya...Bent, bias, proclivity, the persistence of a dormant or latent disposition, predisposition, tendency"). I think the sense of 'accumulate' in Dhs. is meant differently, although may be related to the sense of 'anusaya', perhaps as a description of how things carry over as latencies or potentials and arise with each citta. T: I do not know much about either the Pali or the accumulation concept. Therefore I am not able to offer any "correction". But I can only say that it makes sense to me that a citta can accumulate or absorb resultant of a kamma(like a sponge absorbs water). With this conceptual model it is easy to understand how a 'kilesa' is "carried over" from one citta to the next, after the current citta falls away. I hope it sounds allright to you. Thank you very much. Tep === #76873 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:12 pm Subject: Re: "there is no ‘person’" - "The controversy on ‘person’ is ended" indriyabala Hi Sarah, I was surprised that you "dug up" an older message for re-discussion. > T: I have a good reason to believe that when the dhamma (mentality- materiality) in the ultimate sense is the main concern, "not a being, not a person" is the right perspective of the ariyans who do not identify with mentality-materiality, since they do not have attanuditthi or attavaadupaadaana. ..... S: True! .... >T: Similarly, in the ultimate sense no being or no person can be found in the dhamma. This is analogous to seeing only molecules and atoms that make up the body of a being/person. It is the matter of perspective/view. S: Or could we say it is a matter of understanding of realities? .... T: Yes, we could say it is the same thing. ........... (VisA. 298): "Here when the categories are not fully known, there is naming (abhidhaana) of them and of the consciousness as 'self,' that is, the physical body or alternatively the five categories... (it is) presence (sabbhaava) as a mere description in the case of what is called a 'being' (bhaata), though in the ultimate sense the 'being' is non-existent (avijjamaana)" . S: This is an interesting and difficult passage. What are your comments on it? Presumably, 'categories' is a translation of khandhas here? ... T: (The Vis. A. 298 quote was yours; I only reposted it.) Yes, I understand it the same way you do. >Tep: Of course, when the "categories" are "fully known" to someone, s/he then becomes an ariya whose perspective changes to the ultimate realities because attanuditthi has been terminated. In the ultimate dhamma world 'the being' is non-existent -- but it is just the consequence of a completely new perspective. .... S: or understanding. Such understanding has to develop in order for the right 'perspective' to fully develop so that attanuditthi is eradicated. The 'ultimate dhamma world' is now as we speak. 'The being' is 'non- existent' now as we speak. However, as you stress, because of the old perspective and strong clinging to attanuditthi, we continue to take such beings for realities, for dhammas even. ... T: I have to be very careful, because I might be tricked into accepting your stance that beings in the present moment are non- existent. ;-) Tep === #76874 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:23 pm Subject: Re: Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. kenhowardau Hi Phil, I wonder if you have tried Christianity. It has a "Golden Rule" which seems to be what you are looking for. It provides an apparently easy set of steps leading to salvation. Buddhism (as found in the original texts) is quite different, but you can't accept that. I don't know why. You are entitled to follow a bastardised version of the Dhamma that more or less echoes Christianity if that is what you want. But we don't have to agree with you, do we? Those of us who prefer the Dhamma that is found in the ancient texts are perfectly entitled to study and understand that Dhamma. Ken H <.....> > Nina, statements like this leave me non-speechless... :) > > Please get back to the basics, Nina, back to the suttas! > > e.g AN VI, 50, which BB entitles "Step by Step" > > <. . .> > > I already know what you will say to this, but I will wisely let > the sutta speak for itself in its beautiful non-commentarily muddled > clarity. #76875 From: "Sukinder" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:47 pm Subject: Re: Views, Ontology, Philosophy of Buddha as it appears to me. sukinderpal Dear D.C., =========== D.C.: One word about the Dhammapada verse. There dhamma-daana is not teaching-and learning but it referes to actually getting somebody established in Dhamma. I mention this because I spent almost one hour explaining this difference at the temple. S: Is this interpretation only with reference to the particular Dhammapada verse or is this the general meaning. I've hardly ever thought about this particular aspect of Dana, but it would seem to me that it being a form of Dana / kusala is determined by the quality of the intention, no? In this case the further qualification might be perhaps that the moment is accompanied by Right Understanding, and whether this is in turn understood by the student should make little or no difference, no? I must be missing something and perhaps you should share some of your above mentioned lecture with me here? Or someone else may have brought this up and you already answered in a subsequent post, in which case I'll come to it (as you can see, I'm way behind in my reading). Thanks in advance. Metta, Sukin #76876 From: "Sukinder" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. sukinderpal Hi Dieter and Nina, I just saw this and Nina's response while cutting and pasting to Word for print out, and want to respond. --------------------------- Dieter quotes Nina: 'We should not try to be aware of breath, because it is very subtle. It is tangible object, conditioned by citta, but it is already very difficult to be aware of other kinds of tangible objects such as hardness of the different objects we touch, and therefore, why should we try to be aware of breath which is so subtle? snip The sutta and the commentary which I mentioned can remind us that it is difficult to properly develop "Mindfulness of Breath" and that this subject is not suitable for everybody.' Dieter: Nina, statements like this leave me speechless.. Sukin: Perhaps you did not understand what Nina has in mind. What I think Nina means is that even the hardness which we "naturally" experience all day, such as when we touch, pick up things, feel the ground under our feet or bump into people, even these have not been occasion for any sati and panna to arise to know the *reality* of hardness, heat, motion etc. How much more unlikely would it be that right mindfulness and right view arise when obscured by an "idea to observe" and that too, such a subtle object as the breath. The difference in view is what is causing the misunderstanding. In yours and most people's view, the practice is about intending to "note", and since this is something "you can do", then Nina's statement comes as a surprise, and sure you completely disagree with it. Nina on the other hand is always warning against taking for mindfulness that which in fact is not. And she stresses that Right Mindfulness, which is completely different from what we experience during those times that we `note', arise only by conditions beyond control. On the other hand, "noting" which *everyone* is able to do (from the conventional pov), is so because one is happy to think conventionally in terms of `doings' and no one is concerned about what in fact the quality of the citta might be. So yes, as in the conventional daily life experiences in which `you' can decide to note, so can this happen with breath! Hence you're being speechless, but I hope now you will not be so surprised even if you disagree. Metta, Sukin #76877 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:13 pm Subject: Re: Conditions, Ch 15, no 9. indriyabala Dear Nina (and DC, and other friends), - The noble eightfold Path is in the heart of the Sutta-Pitaka, where the conventional language is used. For example, see the MN 141, Saccavibhanga Sutta -- a discourse of the Arahant Sariputta, and MN 117 : Maha-cattarisaka Sutta. In the message # 76853 it seems to me that you are trying to explain how the "paññå of the noble eightfold Path" may be developed using the language of ultimate realities. I have not read anything like this before; therefore, please kindly allow me to ask a few questions. ......... (1) N: Paññå of the noble eightfold Path develops very gradually. When it is more developed different stages of insight can arise. The first stage of insight is knowing the difference between the characteristic of nåma and of rúpa, and it is at a later stage of insight that their arising and falling away can be realized. We may think of the stages of insight but when desire for them arises paññå will not develop. Instead of thinking of the stages of insight we should consider realities which appear now, at this very moment, so that we can have more understanding of them. T: I wonder if the "paññå of the noble eightfold Path" means the ariyan's clear understanding of the eight Path factors (samma- ditthi, ..., samma-samaadhi). I do not understand how I may practically "consider the ralities which appear now". Neither do I see why such understanding of the present-moment realities (six sense-objects) is the same as the "paññå of the noble eightfold Path", nor do I see how this understanding is related to the eight Path factors. .............. (2) N: When we consider realities which appear in daily life and begin to be mindful of them, right understanding of the eightfold Path develops. It develops because of conditions, we do not have to think of progress or worry about the lack of progress. By the development of the noble eightfold Path enlightenment can be attained and defilements can be eradicated stage by stage. T: If you instead say : "When we consider realities which appear in daily life and begin to be mindful of them, right understanding of nåma and of rúpa develops", then I would follow you without much difficulty. But the development of the noble eightfold Path, that is explained clearly in MN 117: Maha-cattarisaka Sutta, does not seem to be the same as what you are talking about. Looking forward to your kind elaboration, Tep === #76878 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:31 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 indriyabala Hi Dieter, Howard - I like this discussion that somehow found its way to Einstein. > ('Howard: The solution lies in detailed spelling out of terminology. It lies in more precision and greater literality of speech rather than less. ) > > T: I think that solution requires that anyone who does not have the right terminology and skill to express it clearly, should not post a message. Right? > > D: not necessarily but perhaps consideration of following quotation ( A. Einstein): > 'Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius -- and a lot of courage -- to move in the opposite direction.' > T: Does a genious always make things smaller and smaller, more and more simple, and peaceful? The Theory of Relativity is elegant, complex, and it was used to make an atomic bomb that killed a lot of innocent people. Tep === #76879 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:37 pm Subject: Re: Vism.XVII,195 Vism.XVII,196 nichiconn Path of Purity, p.672: Because sound is inconstant, making its appearance at any time, therefore its two kinds being left out, the ninety-seven states should fittingly be understood in the case of all beings as "name and form conditioned by consciousnes." For in beings both when asleep and when negligent, when eating and drinking, these ninety-seven states proceed day and night as conditioned by consciousness. We shall explain later their state as so conditioned. That which is karma-born matter, though it is established in the existences, places of birth, courses, durations, sentient abodes, cannot stand without the support of matter set up by three things {i.e. caloric order, consciousness, material food}, nor can the latter stand without its support. Like bundles of reeds fixed together in the four directions though smitten by wind, like a collection of broken boats {vaahanikaa, not in the PTS Dictionary} which have found shelter somewhere in the great ocean, though smitten by the fury of the waves, these states of matter, each giving support to the other do not fall down but stand together for one year, two years - even a hundred years so long as the terms of life of the beings, or the merit acquired by them lasts. Thus is decision to be understood by way of "procedure in existence and so forth." #76880 From: han tun Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:47 pm Subject: Perfections Corner (20) 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. ------------------------------ We read further on in the Commentary: ---------- “He thought, ‘I shall accumulate the practice of supreme patience, enduring derisive speech from others. I shall develop the perfection of equanimity to the highest degree.’ He left his home, dressed only in the clothing he was wearing; he practised the elimination of defilements to the utmost. When he was without strength, he behaved as if he had strength. Though not dumb, he behaved as if he was dumb, while he was ridiculed by others because of his appearance that seemed to be of a fool. He wandered in villages, cities and the capital, and he stayed in each place for only one night. Wherever he was much ridiculed, he stayed for a longer time. When his clothing became worn out and unsightly, he did not accept another piece of clothing from someone else; he wandered about with clothing that served only to cover the private parts. While he wandered about in that way he came to a house in the village.” ---------- This is the perfection of equanimity to the highest degree, which is most difficult to develop. He had many possessions, but he did not cling to them. He wanted to accumulate the perfection of equanimity: he endured derisive speech from others, and he went outside covered only by a piece of cloth. When he was without strength, he behaved as if he had strength, he was not downhearted and he had patience. Though not dumb, he behaved as someone who is dumb, he was not disturbed by anything. No matter what someone else said, no matter whether others ridiculed him because of his outward appearance which seemed to be that of a fool, he was unaffected. ------------------------------ To be continued. Metta, Han #76881 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 7:11 pm Subject: Re: Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. scottduncan2 Dear Phil and Nina, This is interesting: AN VI, 50, which BB entitles "Step by Step" "If there is no self control, O monks, then the basis for virtue is destroyed for one who lacks self control. If there is no virtue, then the basis for right concentration is destroyed for one who lacks virtue. If there is no right concentration, then the basis for knowledge and visions of things as they really are is destroyed for one who lacks right concentration." Scott: Here's the Pali: (Indriyasa.mvarasutta.m) (Saavatthi nidaana.m) 50. Indriyasa.mvare bhikkhave asati indriyasa.mvaravipannassa hatuupanisa.m hoti siila.m. Siile asati siilavipannassa hatuupaniso hoti sammaasamaadhi. Sammaasamaadhimhi asati sammaasamaadhivipannassa hatuupanisa.m hoti yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassana.m. Yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassane asati yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassanavipannassa hatuupaniso hoti nibbidaaviraago. Nibbidaaviraage asati nibbidaaviraagavipannassa hatuupanisa.m hoti vimutti~naa.nadassana.m. Scott: I see that the word 'asati' ("not thinking of, forgetfulness", PTS PED) is in the first phrase. The faculty of mindfulness (satindriya.m) "is recollecting, calling back to mind; the mindfulness which is remembering, bearing in mind, the opposite of superficiality and of obliviousness; mindfulness as faculty, mindfulness as power, right mindfulness...,{Dhammasa"nga.ni, p.14). "Indriyasa.mvara is, I think, something like 'restraint of the senses'. Isn't it clear that sati performs the function of 'restraint' when it arises? I fail entirely to see how either the title of the sutta (Indriyasa.mvarasutta.m) or the term indriyasa.mvara were given 'step-by-step' or 'self-control' in translation. Can any of the above be clarified? Sincerely, Scott. #76882 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 7:40 pm Subject: Re: Citta scottduncan2 Dear Tep, Thanks for the reply: T: "I do not know much about either the Pali or the accumulation concept. Therefore I am not able to offer any "correction". But I can only say that it makes sense to me that a citta can accumulate or absorb resultant of a kamma(like a sponge absorbs water). With this conceptual model it is easy to understand how a 'kilesa' is "carried over" from one citta to the next, after the current citta falls away. I hope it sounds allright to you." Thank you very much." Scott: You're welcome. I think kamma is cetanaa cetasika and the way in which actions cause result is very complex. I don't claim to understand it. I think the phrase 'citta can accumulate or absorb resultant of a kamma' is a bit imprecise. Cetanaa arises with each and every citta. This can be for another discussion, perhaps, because it will take us far afield. I'll come back to your earlier points when I get a bit more time. Sincerely, Scott. #76883 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 7:36 pm Subject: Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 nichiconn Dear Tep, T: Does a genious always make things smaller and smaller, more and more simple, and peaceful? The Theory of Relativity is elegant, complex, and it was used to make an atomic bomb that killed a lot of innocent people. C: What is or who might be "an innocent"? I understand what you mean in the everyday way people generally talk and think, but when it comes right down to it, that's all it is, isn't it -- misguided & misleading understanding? "O, the poor, undeserving things!" when we haven't a clue as to the past kammas involved. peace, connie #76884 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 28, 2007 9:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "there is no ‘person’" - "The controversy on ‘person’ is ended" sarahprocter... Hi Tep, (Phil - no need to respond - in passing) --- Tep Sastri wrote: > > Hi Sarah, > > I was surprised that you "dug up" an older message for re-discussion. ... S: I have dozens of older messages ear-marked for replies at any time! I used to have a systematic system of replying to posts in chronological order, but Phil, two or three years ago, advised me to take a more artistic approach (something like that anyway) and take a break from my rather organised, robotic accumulations. So that's what I've been doing ever since - just responding in a random, haphazard fashion (I mean, 'artistic') to whatever is on top of the pile at the time I sit at the computer! That's a long ramble to say, 'expect more surprises' before we leave on our trip in just over a week! Blame Phil if you prefered the systematic approach of the old days! .... > (VisA. 298): "Here when the categories are not fully known, there is > naming (abhidhaana) of them and of the consciousness as 'self,' that > is, the physical body or alternatively the five categories... (it is) > presence (sabbhaava) as a mere description in the case of what is > called a 'being' (bhaata), though in the ultimate sense the 'being' > is non-existent (avijjamaana)" . > > S: This is an interesting and difficult passage. What are your > comments on it? Presumably, 'categories' is a translation of khandhas > here? > ... > > T: (The Vis. A. 298 quote was yours; I only reposted it.) Yes, I > understand it the same way you do. .... S: Could you give me a link or reference to where I gave this quote? I just did a search with some of the key words here on the list and nothing apart from your message showed up. How do I understand it? :-). .... > T: I have to be very careful, because I might be tricked into > accepting your stance that beings in the present moment are non- > existent. ;-) .... S: I assure you that I have no intention to trick you in anyway:-). I'm just curious where the quote came from and if I did give it, what the context was. Metta, Sarah ========== #76885 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 12:03 am Subject: As Trifling as Dust! bhikkhu0 Friends: Breakthrough to the Truths eliminates a Mountain of Suffering! The Blessed Gotama Buddha once explained: Bhikkhus & friends, see this little dust, I have taken up upon the nail of my little-finger, what do you think is most: This tiny dust or this great planet Earth? The Bhikkhus then responded: Venerable Sir, this great planet Earth is much more, incomparable more... The minute speck of dust is trifling, microscopic, negligible in comparison. The Blessed Gotama Buddha then pointed out: Similarly and exactly so too, Bhikkhus & friends, is that Suffering, which remains for a Noble Disciple trifling, microscopic, negligible in comparison. For such Noble One, who is consummated in view, who has broken through to understanding the 4 Noble Truths, the accumulated mass of Suffering, that has been shattered & irreversibly eliminated is incomparable more... The Suffering that remains to be experienced for such a Noble person, is trifling, microscopic, & negligible in comparison, since there remains only a maximum of 7 more lives for such a Noble One, as he is one who actually understands all this as it really, truly, essentially and assuredly indeed is: <...> Comment: Seeing the Truths is thus equivalent to a saving release from gigantic pain! Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta NikÄ?ya. [V:459-60] section 56: Saccasamyutta. Thread 51: The Fingernail ... Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka * <...> #76886 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 4:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views jonoabb Hi Tep Tep Sastri wrote: > Hi Jon (and Scott), - > > This message is written with Scott in mind; he is a friend of yours > who has similar ideas concerning the ultimate realities and concepts. > > Jon: Many thanks for expressing this view. I'm glad to have the > chance to address the question further. > > T: I appreciate your open-minded attitude and gentlemanliness. > ...... > And I appreciate your carefully thought-out and detailed comments. They really make me question what I think and why. > > > T: Thank you very much for the careful reply that shows your > intention to avoid ambiguity. > > I know that your concern was to make a clarification of the previous > reply to Swee. But since I made the inquiry, I have an obligation to > give some comments. Please bear with me. I do not require that you > respond to them. :-) Well there's no need to hesitate to comment. I welcome it, and I'm very happy to respond, as I find the discussion useful. > 1. There are "things" in the suttas that are not in the ultimate > sense, such as the eight ariya-puggalas (noble disciples), devas, > Mara, householders, monks, other beings (in other worlds, e.g. > hells), iddhi (supernormal powers, e.g. recollection of previous > lives), attapa.tilabha (DN 9), attabhaava (AN 3.125, DN 33), > anapanasati, kasinas, external khandhas in the past & future, far or > near, etc. > Yes, the language used in the suttas is both conventional language and the language of paramattha dhammas. But regardless of the language used, it is the teaching about dhammas that is the essence of the teaching (since these are the exclusive knowledge of Buddhas and their followers). So even the conventional language parts of the suttas are to be understood in terms of 'dhammas'. For example: - the eight ariya-puggalas are a conventional language way of referring to the magga and phala cittas of the 4 levels of enlightenment; - anapanasati is a conventional term for a particular kind of either samatha consciousness or vipassana consciousness (depending on the context); - kasina is a conventional term for the concept that is object of certain kinds of samatha consciousness; and so on. Unless the suttas are understood in terms of paramattha dhammas, the essential message of the Buddha cannot be appreciated, in my view. > 2. Aeroplane, chariot and a person are formations that show the > impermanent nature too. Don't they? Yes, in conventional terms aeroplane, chariot and person are impermanent. But this is not the impermanence spoken of by the Buddha when describing, say, visible object as having the characteristic of impermanence. The impermanence of a conventional object is a piece of information about the object that can be deduced from general experience in life, and something that is apparent to all. The impermanence of a dhamma is a characteristic of the dhamma that is directly observable at the time the dhamma is experienced by consciousness, but only by developed panna. As far as the 3 objects you mention being 'formations' is concerned, 'formations' is sometimes used as the translation for sankhara khandha. However, none of the 3 objects are formations in that sense of the word. > 3. The world of dhammas is in the mind of a person(puggala) who eats, > walks, sleeps, etc. in the real world. Yes, the two worlds are > different, but they are not separated. > I would prefer to put it the other way around, and say that citta that is not free of wrong view sees the world only in conventional terms, and thinks that's as real as it gets; whereas the citta that is free of wrong view sees dhammas and also sees the conventional world, but is not taken in by it. > 4. Part of your idea in 4. contradicts with 5. > As regards my statement that "to the extent that Jon's landing in Fiji is real, so must be the plane that took him there", I believe I went on to say that 'Jon' and 'Fiji' were just as conceptual as 'aeroplane', and that hence there was no contradiction. Does that address the point? Thanks again for the discussion. Let's keep it going as long as we find it useful ;-)) Jon T: Your reply to Swee has the following key points. ... 4. J: As explained above, my understanding of the teachings is that in terms of dhammas and the direct experience of them, 'aeroplane' is a thought or idea only. There is no dhamma that is aeroplane. 'Aeroplane' has no existence in the ultimate sense. Conventionally, of course, there is an aeroplane, and the arahant does not deny the conventional world. However, he is no longer taken in by it. 5. J: I agree that to the extent that Jon's landing in Fiji is real, then so must be the plane that took him there. .................... #76887 From: "colette" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 4:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Controversy? ksheri3 Good Morning Sarah, I HAVE ALWAYS GOTTEN, RECEIVED, THE SENSE, FEELING, INTUITION, THAT THE MEMBERS OF THIS GROUP ARE HIGHLY SKIDDISH OF REALITY. This being the case, at some point in the developement of this group there must have come about an advocacy for non-action, doing nothing as an action, indecision, riding the fence between two oposing sides, sitting on your hands. I can't explain it. Next time the sensation appears I'll try to document it. <...> BTW, thanx for clearing up discrepencies I have with kamma! toodles, colette > S: I don't know where you get the idea of 'the vast majority of Theravadan > followers here are extremely against any and all actions'. What we refer > to as 'actions' in daily language are determined by many, many different > intentions. <....> #76888 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 5:21 am Subject: Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 indriyabala Dear Connie, - I always appreciate your dhamma perspective. Thank you for the message about kamma vipaka. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "L G SAGE" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > T: Does a genious always make things smaller and smaller, more and more simple, and peaceful? The Theory of Relativity is elegant, complex, and it was used to make an atomic bomb that killed a lot of > innocent people. > > C: What is or who might be "an innocent"? I understand what you mean in the everyday way people generally talk and think, but when it comes right down to it, that's all it is, isn't it -- misguided & misleading understanding? "O, the poor, undeserving things!" when we haven't a clue as to the past kammas involved. > > peace, > connie > The law of kamma (cetana is kamma) and kamma-vipaka are often overlooked (maybe under-emphasized?) in most DSG Dhamma discussions. So I thank you for the shrp observation. But shouldn't the thinking like you suggested come after the metta & karuna contemplation ? If not, then the mind may become cold and indifferent to the sufferings in the world? Tep === #76889 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 5:34 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (67) nichiconn Dear Friends, Rohiniitheriigaathaava.n.nanaa The commentary on the verses of Theri Rohinii part 10 verse: 280. "Bahussutaa dhammadharaa, ariyaa dhammajiivino; ekaggacittaa satimanto, tena me sama.naa piyaa. 280. Having great learning, expert in the Doctrine, noble, living in accordance with the Doctrine, with concentrated minds, [they are] possessed of mindfulness. Therefore, ascetics are dear to me. Cy: Ekaggacittaati samaahitacittaa. Satimantoti upa.t.thitasatino. Pruitt: 280. With concentrated minds (ek'-agga-cittaa) means: with composed minds (samaahita-cittaaa). [They are] possessed of mindfulness (satimanto) means: they have established mindfulness (upa.t.hita-satino). verse: 281. "Duura"ngamaa satimanto, mantabhaa.nii anuddhataa; dukkhassanta.m pajaananti, tena me sama.naa piyaa. 281. Travelling far, possessed of mindfulness, speaking in moderation, not conceited, they comprehend the end of pain. Therefore, ascetics are dear to me. txt: Duura"ngamaati ara~n~nagataa, manussuupacaara.m mu~ncitvaa duura.m gacchantaa, iddhaanubhaavena vaa yathaarucita.m duura.m .thaana.m gacchantiiti duura"ngamaa. Mantaa vuccati pa~n~naa, taaya bha.nanasiilataaya mantabhaa.nii. Na uddhataati anuddhataa, uddhaccarahitaa vuupasantacittaa. Dukkhassanta.m pajaanantiiti va.t.tadukkhassa pariyantabhuuta.m nibbaana.m pa.tivijjhanti. 281. Travelling far (duura"n-gamaa) means: they go to the forest, giving up the vicinity of men, they go far (duura.m gacchantaa). Or, they go (gacchanti) by means of supernormal power to far away (duura.m) places as they please, thus travelling far. The word mantaa means wisdom*, [and] because of the nature of their speech (bha.nana-siilataaya), [they are] speaking in moderation (manta-bhaa.nii). Not conceited (na uddhataa), thus not conceited (anuddhataa), free from [mental] restlessness (uddhacca-rahitaa), with minds that are calmed. They comprehend the end of pain (dukkhass') means: they penetrate quenching, which is the end of the pain of continued existence (va.t.ta-dukkhassa). *A longer explantion of manta-bhaa.nii that begins as here is found in Th-a I 33 (quoted in EV I, p.117 ad v2). verse: 282. "Yasmaa gaamaa pakkamanti, na vilokenti ki~ncana.m; anapekkhaava gacchanti, tena me sama.naa piyaa. 282. If they go from any village, they do not look back [longingly] at anything. They go without longing indeed. Therefore, ascetics are dear to me. txt: Na vilokenti ki~ncananti yato gaamato pakkamanti, tasmi.m gaame ka~nci satta.m vaa sa"nkhaara.m vaa apekkhaavasena na olokenti, atha kho pana anapekkhaava gacchanti pakkamanti. 282. They do not look back (na vilokenti) [longingly] means: whatever village they set out from, they do not look (na olokenti) with longing at any being or formation whatsoever in that village. On the contrary, they go, they set out without longing. verse: 283. "Na te sa.m ko.t.the openti, na kumbhi.m na kha.lopiya.m; parini.t.thitamesaanaa, tena me sama.naa piyaa. 283. They do not deposit their property in a storeroom, nor in a pot, nor in a basket, [rather] seeking that which is prepared. Therefore, ascetics are dear to me. txt: Na te sa.m ko.t.the opentiiti te sama.naa sa.m attano santaka.m saapateyya.m ko.t.the na openti na pa.tisaametvaa .thapenti taadisassa pariggahassa abhaavato. Kumbhinti kumbhiya.m. Kha.lopiyanti pacchiya.m. Parini.t.thitamesaanaati parakulesu paresa.m atthaaya siddhameva ghaasa.m pariyesantaa. 283. They do not deposit their property in a storeroom means: those ascetics do not deposit, do not arrange or place their own property, belongings or wealth, in a storeroom, because of the non-existence of such possessions.* In a pot (kumbhi.m) means: in a pot (kumbhiya.m). In a basket (ka.lopiya.m) means: in a basket (pacchi-ya.m). Seeking (esaana) that which is prepared (parini.t.thitam) means: searching (pariyesantaa) among other families (para-kulesu) for food that is cooked for the sake of others (paresa.m). *Thii v. 283a = S I 236, line 17, Ja V 252, line 20; and the rest of the verse is similar to the verse in S I 236 (See KS I 302, n.3) === tbc, connie #76890 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 5:43 am Subject: Re: Citta indriyabala Dear Scott (and Connie), - I think I like the way you chop a long discussion in to pieces and selectively and quickly answer one or two pieces at a time. Neat ! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > Thanks for the reply: > > T: "I do not know much about either the Pali or the accumulation > concept. Therefore I am not able to offer any "correction". But I can > only say that it makes sense to me that a citta can accumulate or > absorb resultant of a kamma(like a sponge absorbs water). With this > conceptual model it is easy to understand how a 'kilesa' is "carried > over" from one citta to the next, after the current citta falls away. > I hope it sounds allright to you." > > Thank you very much." > > Scott: You're welcome. I think kamma is cetanaa cetasika and the way > in which actions cause result is very complex. I don't claim to > understand it. I think the phrase 'citta can accumulate or absorb > resultant of a kamma' is a bit imprecise. Cetanaa arises with each > and every citta. This can be for another discussion, perhaps, because > it will take us far afield. I'll come back to your earlier points > when I get a bit more time. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > T: I recall reading the Vism. that says, "Cetana is kamma". I also remember seeing a sutta that states the same. The term 'cetasika' in the Sutta-pitaka includes vedana, sañña, and sankhara. In your opinion, what does 'cetana cetasika' mean in lights of the Sutta- pitaka's definition ? I agree that kamma(action) and its result(vipaka) are "very complex". And I also think it is a good idea to postpone such a complex issue to another day. However, Connie "the Sage" has initiated a discussion on this sbject in another thread; perhaps, you may be interested in joining with her there? Tep === #76891 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 6:39 am Subject: [dsg] Re: "there is no ‘person’" - "The controversy on ‘person’ is ended" indriyabala Hi Sarah, - Realizing that you have about one week before leaving to India (again), I am going to answer only your question about VismA.298 quote. > > (VisA. 298): "Here when the categories are not fully known, there is naming (abhidhaana) of them and of the consciousness as 'self,' that is, the physical body or alternatively the five categories... (it is) presence (sabbhaava) as a mere description in the case of what is called a 'being' (bhaata), though in the ultimate sense the 'being' is non-existent (avijjamaana)" . > > > > S: This is an interesting and difficult passage. What are your > > comments on it? Presumably, 'categories' is a translation of khandhas > > here? > > ... > > > > T: (The Vis. A. 298 quote was yours; I only reposted it.) Yes, I > > understand it the same way you do. > .... > S: Could you give me a link or reference to where I gave this quote? I just did a search with some of the key words here on the list and nothing apart from your message showed up. How do I understand it? :-). > .... T: I apologize for assuming that this Vism quote was yours. In fact I found it myself in the following article (that was used to write "Some Findings About Self and Self Views"). "Anatta According to Theravaada" by Ñanamoli Thera. You can find the article at the ATI Web site. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/various/wheel202.html Tep === #76892 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 6:41 am Subject: Re: Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. philofillet Hi Ken > You are entitled to follow a bastardised version of the Dhammathat > more or less echoes Christianity if that is what you want. I don't know about this. Christianity is all about turning yourself over to a higher power. Dhamma is not about that as you know. Our liberation is in our own hands. My bastardization of Dhamma, when it occurs, lies more in new-ageizing it. Dr. Philling it? I don't know. YOu certainly watch that guy a lot, you keep mentioning him! But we > don't have to agree with you, do we? Those of us who prefer the > Dhamma that is found in the ancient texts are perfectly entitled to > study and understand that Dhamma. Absolutely. And I count myself in that group. Good in the beginning, good in the middle, good in the end. The suttas that inspire me are often phrased in conventional terms and can only by an absurd stretch of the imagination be reduced to the paramattha. For example, the one in AN that urges husband and wife to live with virtue in tune. The husband speaks of how he has lived in tune with his wife, in deeds and thoughts, since the day they met, and she speaks the same. Now, if the commentary reduces that to paramattha dhammas rather than seeing the motivating aspect of the conventional narrative (a condition, of course) than I will ignore that commentary. And the commentary that reduces "I am of the nature to grow sick, grow old and die, all that I love will be taken from me" etc to dhammas getting old, getting sick, and dying????!!!! You are welcome to that ancient text. You're right, we're unlikely to agree on practice, and that's fine. These days I'm launched on a study in Vism. of my main interest, the ayatanas, and that is something we'll be able to discuss with some concurrence I imagine - I don't deny the importance of studying paramattha dhammas, and don't doubt that liberation lies through understanding them. But to say that "every word in the tipitaka is about understanding present realities" as I think I have heard AS say is absurd, I think. It has to be appreciated how reflection on single lifetimes and the conventional truths that are revealed within them can motivate the development of conditions for deeper understanding.This is utterly clear in the suttas I referred to and in many others. The AS approach fails to appreciate that, and would therefore close the door of Dhamma in the face of all those who are not paramattha prone. Fortunately, that door can't be closed by AS! But oh yes, it's all about the Buddha's true teaching disappearing, etc....that means that only AS hold the grail, and the rest of the Buddhist world has dropped it, because she is alone in her approach. And I am still holding on to the possibility that she is the one who is right. Anyways, I want to move on to an ayatanas study corner when I'm back for good. That is something I can discuss without yet more wrong speech against AS. I really can't prevent that. I guess there's a kind of zeal involved. I'll definitely be a zealot about Dhamma. I refuse to deny the basic healing (calling Dr. Phil!) benefits that Dhamma brings into people's lives right from the beginning, whether they later develop deeper understanding or not. Metta, Phil #76893 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 7:05 am Subject: Re: Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 nichiconn But shouldn't the thinking like you suggested come after the metta & karuna contemplation ? If not, then the mind may become cold and indifferent to the sufferings in the world? Tep === Dear Tep, How can I say "we shouldn't have any shoulds" without laughing? We can talk about taking steps in order but there is no climbing without the rest of the ladder (however rickety it may be). The cold indifference would be rot in the equanimity rung but rot in any rung is still the whole ladder's rot. Or we might say it's the same with the perfections or the standard virtue-concentration-understanding order of soup where any single ingredient takes on the flavours from the others while adding its own taste to the mix. peace, connie #76894 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 7:39 am Subject: Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views indriyabala Hi Jon, - Of course, even if we lived to be 100+, we still would have a lot to discuss, agree, and disagree. >Tep: 1. There are "things" in the suttas that are not in the ultimate > sense, such as the eight ariya-puggalas (noble disciples), devas, Jon: Yes, the language used in the suttas is both conventional language and the language of paramattha dhammas. But regardless of the language used, it is the teaching about dhammas that is the essence of the teaching (since these are the exclusive knowledge of Buddhas and their followers). So even the conventional language parts of the suttas are to be understood in terms of 'dhammas'. For example: - the eight ariya-puggalas are a conventional language way of referring to the magga and phala cittas of the 4 levels of enlightenment; ... T: Not exactly, Jon. The PTS Dictionary for example says that the eight ariya-puggalas are persons in the real sense, i.e. they live, eat foods, get sick, get old, and die. Even buddha, petas and animals are included this category of 'puggala'. "Puggala [cp. Class. Sk. pudgala, etym. connected with puŋs, although the fantastic expln of native Commentators refers it to puŋ "a hell" and gal; so at Vism 310: "pun ti vuccati nirayo, tasmim galantii ti puggalaa"] 1. an individual, as opposed to a group (sangha or parisaa), person, man; in later philosophical (Abhidhamma) literature=character, soul (=attan). <-> D i.176; M iii.58; S i.93 sq.; iii.25; A i.8, 197; ii.126 sq.; Sn 544, 685; Dh 344; Ps i.180 sq.; ii.1 sq., 52; Pv ii.325 (cp. PvA 88); ii.97; PvA 40, 132. -- pl. puggalaa people VvA 86 (=sattaa), 149. -- para -- puggala another man D i.213; S ii.121; v.265; Vism 409. -- purisa -- puggala individual man, being, person S ii.206; iv.307; A i.173=M ii.217. Characterised as an individual in var. ways, e. g. as agga˚ Sdhp 92, 558; abhabba˚ J i.106; ariya˚ Vin v.117; asura -- parivaara˚ A ii.91; kodhagaru˚ A ii.46; guutha˚, puppha˚ madhubhaaii˚ A i.128; dakkhineyya˚ VvA 5; ditthisampanna˚ A i.26 sq.; iii.439 sq.; iv.136; nibbiriya kusiita˚ J iv.131; paasaanalekh' ûpama˚ etc. A i.283; valaahak' ûpama A ii.102 sq.; saddha, asaddha Ps i.121; ii.33; sivaathik' upama A iii.268; suppameyya etc. A i.266 sq. [a]sevitabba A iv.365; v.102, 247, 281; hiina majjhima paniita S ii.154. -- Groups of characters: (2) A i.76, 87; (3) gilaan' ûpama etc. A i.121 sq.; avutthika -- sama padesa -- vassin, sabbatth' âbhivassin It 64 sq.; satthar, saavaka, sekha It 78; sekha asekha n' eva -- sekha -- naasekha D iii.218; (4) D iii.232, 233; S i.93; J iv.131; (5) Nett 191; (6) raaga -- carita, dosa˚, moha˚, saddhaa˚, buddha˚, vitakka˚ Vism 102; (7) ubhato -- bhaaga -- vimutta, paññaavimutta etc. D iii.105; (8) A iii.212; S v.343 (19) Nett 190; (26) Nett 189, 190. -- See also patipuggala. <-> 2. (in general) being, creature Miln 310 (including Petas & animals). -- ñuu knowing individuals D iii.252, 283. -- paññatti descriptions of persons, classification of individuals D iii.105 (cp. Dial. iii.101); also N. of one of the canonical books of the Abhidhamma -- pitaka. -- vemattataa difference between individuals S ii.21; v.200; Sn p. 102 (=˚naanatta SnA 436). [endquote] ............. > Tep: 2. Aeroplane, chariot and a person are formations that show the > impermanent nature too. Don't they? Jon: Yes, in conventional terms aeroplane, chariot and person are impermanent. But this is not the impermanence spoken of by the Buddha when describing, say, visible object as having the characteristic of impermanence T: Not exactly, Jon. External objects that are "concept" can exhibit inconstant/impermanent characteristic the same way as paramattha dhammas. Hence these objects can be used (one at a time, of course) as the citta's objects for meditative purposes. Read the following sutta quote, please. "Just as when the root of a great, standing tree — possessed of heartwood — is inconstant & subject to change, its trunk is inconstant & subject to change, its branches & foliage are inconstant & subject to change, its shadow is inconstant & subject to change. If someone were to say, 'The root of that great, standing tree — possessed of heartwood — is inconstant & subject to change, its trunk is inconstant & subject to change, its branches & foliage are inconstant & subject to change, but as for its shadow, that is constant, everlasting, eternal, & not subject to change': would he be speaking rightly?" "No, venerable sir. Why is that? Because the root of that great, standing tree — possessed of heartwood — is inconstant & subject to change, its trunk is inconstant & subject to change, its branches & foliage are inconstant & subject to change, so how much more should its shadow be inconstant & subject to change." [MN 146 : Nandakovada Sutta.] Jon: Unless the suttas are understood in terms of paramattha dhammas, the essential message of the Buddha cannot be appreciated, in my view. T: Not exactly, Jon. By the end of this lecture (ovada) in MN 146, several bhikkhunis became Sotapanna-puggala. "Then not long after the nuns' departure the Blessed One addressed the monks: "Monks, just as on the uposatha day of the fifteenth, people at large are not doubtful or perplexed as to whether the moon is lacking or full, for it is clearly full; in the same way, the nuns are gratified with Nandaka's Dhamma-teaching, and their resolves have been fulfilled. Of these 500 nuns, the most backward is a stream- winner, not destined for the planes of deprivation, headed to self- awakening for sure." .............. This is getting too long, so I think I should stop now. Tep === > #76895 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 7:58 am Subject: Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views indriyabala Hi Jon, - Please correct an error that was made in the previous post. >T: Not exactly, Jon. By the end of this lecture (ovada) in MN 146, >several bhikkhunis became Sotapanna-puggala. Indeed, only one of the 500 bhikkhunis became Sotapanna, the other 499 ranged from Sakadagami to arahant. Tep === #76896 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 8:14 am Subject: Re: Citta scottduncan2 Dear Tep, Slowly on... T: "3. Cittas have a capacity to produce various effects..." Scott: Dhs: "...The meaning of consciousness may also be understood from its capacity of producing a variety of effects..." The Pali (I think - the truly knowledgeable can correct, please): "...Cittakara.naataya cittanti evampettha attho veditabbo..." PTS PED: "Kara.na...1. adj. doing, making, causing, producing...(leading to clear knowledge)" "...veditabba to be understood or known..." from "vedeti: (a) to know...(b) to feel, to experience..." T: "The various kinds of cittas are defined according to the sensed objects." Scott: Dhs: "Moreover, all (four classes) [worldly, moral, immoral, or the great inoperative] are termed 'consciousness' because they are variegated (citra) according to circumstance..." PTS PED: "Citta1 & Citra (adj.)...to shine, to be bright, variegated, manifold, beautiful; tasty, sweet, spiced (of cakes)" "...Different is consciousness with a visible object, with an auditory object, etc.; and in that with visible object, varied is consciousness of a blue-green object, of a yellow object, etc. And the same is the case with the consciousness of auditory objects." I think 'variegated' refers to the accompanying cetasikas, which arise conascently and in various combinations. Citta in the eye-door experiences only visible object, no other. Sincerely, Scott. #76897 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 8:22 am Subject: Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 indriyabala Hi Connie "The Sage" (also Scott, Sarah, Han), - Thank you very much for the lightening-fast reply. > Connie: > How can I say "we shouldn't have any shoulds" without laughing? We can talk about taking steps in order but there is no climbing without the rest of the ladder (however rickety it may be). The cold indifference would be rot in the equanimity rung but rot in any rung is still the whole ladder's rot. Or we might say it's the same with the perfections or the standard virtue-concentration-understanding order of soup where any single ingredient takes on the flavours from the others while adding its own taste to the mix. > T: A severe rot in the metta & karuna rungs probably makes the ladder too weak to support the climber's weight when she tries to directly jump up to the upekkha rung ! Some imaginative climber may even start at the upekkha rung (in her mind), ignoring the ladder's reality in the real world. In the same token, a meditator who starts at the "understanding" level may actually "fall down" from the ivory tower because she lacks the solid support of virtue plus some concentration. Please read the following most-recent post #76881 by Scott. Re: Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. Dear Phil and Nina, This is interesting: AN VI, 50, which BB entitles "Step by Step" "If there is no self control, O monks, then the basis for virtue is destroyed for one who lacks self control. If there is no virtue, then the basis for right concentration is destroyed for one who lacks virtue. If there is no right concentration, then the basis for knowledge and visions of things as they really are is destroyed for one who lacks right concentration." ================== Tep ==== #76898 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 8:36 am Subject: Re: Citta indriyabala Dear Scott, my good man - I enjoy this post very much. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > Slowly on... > > T: "3. Cittas have a capacity to produce various effects..." > > Scott: Dhs: "...The meaning of consciousness may also be understood > from its capacity of producing a variety of effects..." > > The Pali (I think - the truly knowledgeable can correct, please): > > "...Cittakara.naataya cittanti evampettha attho veditabbo..." > > PTS PED: > > "Kara.na...1. adj. doing, making, causing, producing...(leading to > clear knowledge)" > > "...veditabba to be understood or known..." from "vedeti: (a) to > know...(b) to feel, to experience..." > > T: "The various kinds of cittas are defined according to the sensed > objects." > > Scott: Dhs: "Moreover, all (four classes) [worldly, moral, immoral, or > the great inoperative] are termed 'consciousness' because they are > variegated (citra) according to circumstance..." > > PTS PED: "Citta1 & Citra (adj.)...to shine, to be bright, variegated, > manifold, beautiful; tasty, sweet, spiced (of cakes)" > > "...Different is consciousness with a visible object, with an auditory > object, etc.; and in that with visible object, varied is consciousness > of a blue-green object, of a yellow object, etc. And the same is the > case with the consciousness of auditory objects." > > I think 'variegated' refers to the accompanying cetasikas, which arise > conascently and in various combinations. Citta in the eye-door > experiences only visible object, no other. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > T: Good! Scott, you are doing the right thing -- slowly make the foundation very firm before the tower construction may begin. There is a good chance that I might turn into an Abhidhammika at the end. ;-) Tep === #76899 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 8:39 am Subject: Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 scottduncan2 Dear Tep, To clarify: T: "...Please read the following most-recent post #76881 by Scott..." Scott: Phil brought in this reference to "AN VI, 50, which BB entitles 'Step by Step'. I was commenting on it, and I oppose Phil's view. My point was to suggest that the translation of the title of the sutta ("Indriyasa.mvarasutta.m") is very poorly rendered by 'Step by Step'. The translation reflects an opinion or bias of the translator in favour of the view that things go stepwise in a literal, linear fashion and that one can control this in 'practise'. As you know, I consider this to be wrong view. As such, my post cannot be used out of context in this fashion to support any other view. Sincerely, Scott. #76900 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 8:41 am Subject: Re: Citta scottduncan2 Dear Tep, Thank you very much, my good fellow! I'll get to more later. T: "Good! Scott, you are doing the right thing -- slowly make the foundation very firm before the tower construction may begin. There is a good chance that I might turn into an Abhidhammika at the end." Sincerely, Scott. #76901 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 9:36 am Subject: Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 indriyabala Hi Scott (Howard, Larry, James and other DSG members), - I have an advice for you after your "clarification" message below. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > To clarify: > > T: "...Please read the following most-recent post #76881 by Scott..." > > Scott: Phil brought in this reference to "AN VI, 50, which BB entitles 'Step by Step'. I was commenting on it, and I oppose Phil's view. My point was to suggest that the translation of the title of the sutta ("Indriyasa.mvarasutta.m") is very poorly rendered by 'Step by Step'. > > The translation reflects an opinion or bias of the translator in > favour of the view that things go stepwise in a literal, linear > fashion and that one can control this in 'practise'. As you know, I > consider this to be wrong view. As such, my post cannot be used out > of context in this fashion to support any other view. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > T: Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi is one of the finest world-renowned Buddhist monks; he has a great command of both the English and Pali languages. Further, I have zero doubt about his deep understanding of the Sutta- and the Abhidhamma-pitaka. Comparing him to us, he is a mountain and we are mounds. So it does not seem possible that he mistakenly gave a "very poor" translation of the title, Indriyasa.mvarasutta.m ! We also had a long discussion on indriyasa.mvara in AN 10.61 (Avijja Sutta) as part of the sequential process in which the various dhammas arise, one after another, as nutriments for the next one in line, ... There are more suttas like AN 10.61. Mound Scott, you might have too much self confidence to belittle "the Mountain". Why don't you write to ask him for his reason? Tep === #76902 From: Dieter Möller Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 10:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. moellerdieter Hi Sukinder and Nina , thanks for your comment.. I appreciate that you tried to understand my point. you wrote: Sukin: Perhaps you did not understand what Nina has in mind. D: actually it is the first time that I read in a Buddhist list , that ''We should not try to be aware of breath, because it is very subtle.' You may recognised by the reaction of Howard, that the importance of mindfulness of breathing has been stressed by the Buddha in numerous suttas. No canonical advise I remember to be found to say otherwise , not to talk about that we should not try , because it is very subtle. There must be thousands of books , not only of Buddhist origin , written about the usefulness to pay attention to breathing. The relation between emotion ( or more Abhidhammic the quality of the citta) and the rhythmen (long ..short) of breath is a long established scientific fact. Now , Nina writes: 'The sutta and the commentary which I mentioned can remind us that it is difficult to properly develop "Mindfulness of Breath" and that this subject is not suitable for everybody.' ' Can remind us' , appears to me reading something into it ..from a point of view from those, having difficulties to develop it. But regardless of the question about the hindrance , would that kind of 'weakness' justify to recommend others not to try? Sukin , sometimes I wonder whether the intellectual approach of the Abhidhamma is not a kind of alibi for the problem seemingly not being able to be silent , without intention.., without 'the habitual tendencies' in order to get the monkey nature of mind to a rest (the attention to one's in- and outbreathing a tool towards it) . If that is so , and you may know it by yourself , you would indeed help me to get a better understanding about your (and Nina's) point of view. with Metta Dieter #76903 From: Dieter Möller Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 10:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 moellerdieter Hi Tep (and Howard), you wrote: T: Does a genious always make things smaller and smaller, more and more simple, and peaceful? The Theory of Relativity is elegant, complex, and it was used to make an atomic bomb that killed a lot of innocent people. D: in context what the quotation was meant for , it is not the point of making things smaller but in a sense 'brevity is the soul of wit ' as opposed to ' complex waffle' .. with Metta Dieter #76904 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Views, Ontology, Philosophy of Buddha as it appears to me. dcwijeratna Dear Sukin, Many thanks for your kind response. Here I quote the relevant portion of your response for easy reference. "S: Is this interpretation only with reference to the particular Dhammapada verse or is this the general meaning. I've hardly ever thought about this particular aspect of Dana, but it would seem to me that it being a form of Dana / kusala is determined by the quality of the intention, no? In this case the further qualification might be perhaps that the moment is accompanied by Right Understanding, and whether this is in turn understood by the student should make little or no difference, no?" Here are my answers (and questions): 1. How else can one give dhamma daana. Is giving some free dhamma books as gifts dhamma daana? I am sure you would agree that Buddha would not designate that as the greatest gift. [The provocation for my talk was an incident like that. Somebody distributing some books on dhamma being described as dhammadaana.] 2. How do you give dhamma? Is it a tangible thing to give? 3. There are many meanings to dhamma: "deanaa, gu.na, hetu etc.] Only the first two meanings can make any sense in the context of dhamma-daana. You can preach dhamma, but if the hearer does not establish himself in the dhamma, then can we say whether the gift has been given? No I think, it is wasted. It is this kind of thinking that led me to say what I said. The full gaathaa is as follows: "The gift of Truth excels all gifts; the flavour of Truth excels all flavours; the delight in Truth excels all delights; the Craving-freed overcomes all suffering." Dhamma is here translated as the Truths. You can easily see that the meaning I have given is in consonance with the gaathaa. 4. Daana/kusala -- Daana and kusala are two different things. Daana is the act of giving and kusala is something that lead you towards nibbaana. Daana is a meritorious deed (pu~n~naa). Are you familiar with this distinction? 5. >sukin: "it being a form of Dana / kusala is determined by the quality of the intention, no?" DC: How do you interpret quality of intention. If you give something expecting something in return then there is a reduction of quality. But can you establish somebody in Dhamma, for example, in the five precepts. What can you expect back. Really can any body do a thing like that with a bad intention. ["Desetha bhikkave dhamma.m, bahujanhitaaya, bahujansukhaaya, lokaanukampaaya"] You do it out of mettaa or karunna or for the benefit of the many and happiness of the many. 6. >Sukin: "In this case the further qualification might be perhaps that the moment is accompanied by Right Understanding, and whether this is in turn understood by the student should make little or no difference, no?" DC: I refer to the word "moment" above. It is not relevant here. That is abhidhammic analysis. The Buddha did not teach in the language of "Abhidhamma". He taught in a language that could be understood by mere mortals like you and me. So we will have to understand it that way. If you glance through the Kaalaama sutta you will understand what I mean. One word about Abhidhamma or (more accurately, Abhidhamm Pi.taka.) It is a later development and part of sectarian Buddhism. Each early school, out of the 18 mentioned in the Cullavagga, I think, is supposed to have had its own Abhidhamma Pi.taka. Only three are extant now: Theravaada, Sarvastivaada and Saariputra Abhidharma Sastra. They are different from one another. So how can we decide which one is true? Kaalena dhamma saakacchaa eta.m man.gala muttama.m' With mettaa, D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #76905 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:13 am Subject: Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 scottduncan2 Dear Tep, Thanks for the reply: T: "...We also had a long discussion on indriyasa.mvara in AN 10.61 (Avijja Sutta) as part of the sequential process in which the various dhammas arise, one after another, as nutriments for the next one in line, ... There are more suttas like AN 10.61..." Scott: I'd be interested in learning more of this. I'll seek the discussion in U.P. Sincerely, Scott. #76906 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. nilovg Dear Scott, Just back from a day walk, and it is late. But asati means: when there is not. `i frequently see this in my Vis. Tiika. See Warder. `no time to explain more. Nina. Op 29-sep-2007, om 4:11 heeft Scott Duncan het volgende geschreven: > Scott: I see that the word 'asati' ("not thinking of, forgetfulness", > PTS PED) is in the first phrase. #76907 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. nilovg Hi Phil, Op 29-sep-2007, om 15:41 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > But to say that "every word in the tipitaka is > about understanding present realities" as I think I have heard AS say > is absurd, I think. ------- N: I am convinced of this. quote me a sutta and I will try. Nina. #76908 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:44 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Thanks for the help: N: "Just back from a day walk, and it is late. But asati means: when there is not. `i frequently see this in my Vis. Tiika. See Warder. `no time to explain more." Scott: I'll go to Warder. I hope your walk was a pleasant one. Sincerely, Scott. #76909 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. nilovg Dear Dieter, Op 29-sep-2007, om 19:18 heeft Dieter Möller het volgende geschreven: > D: actually it is the first time that I read in a Buddhist list , > that ''We should not try to be aware of breath, because it is very > subtle.' -------- N. I was sparse in my answer to you who were speechless. It was late and today I was out. Read it this way: *We* should not try to be aware of breath. First I explained that when there are conditions for being aware of it it can be an object of vipassana. Then I meant: Trying with an idea of self, a self who tries so hard. I very well see your point of view and tomorrow or after I will say some more. Sukin also explained to you about this subtle subject. Nina. #76910 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. nilovg Dear Phil, Thank you for your kind posts. I have to limit myself, soon going to India. As you know, I like your rambling. Nina. Op 28-sep-2007, om 17:16 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > again, said in a friendly way, Nina. #76911 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 12:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the Bodhisatta's insight development. to Sarah. nilovg Dear Sarah, thank you for the trouble answering my posts, also the post about jhaana. Op 28-sep-2007, om 12:54 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > That's what the Ghatikara Sutta and comy (MN 81)is usually read to say > and I think you and Ven Dhammanando referred to this sometime. ------ N: I did not take a stand on this, was just following the posts. I dislike to speculate on this, but found what I heard on audio clear. Jon also added remarks on this, I heard. Nina. #76912 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 1:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the Bodhisatta's insight development. to Sarah. sarahprocter... Dear Nina, --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Sarah, > thank you for the trouble answering my posts, also the post about > jhaana. > > Op 28-sep-2007, om 12:54 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > > > That's what the Ghatikara Sutta and comy (MN 81)is usually read to say > > and I think you and Ven Dhammanando referred to this sometime. > ------ > N: I did not take a stand on this, was just following the posts. .... S: Perhaps I misunderstood. I was thinking of one or two comments you had made earlier about Jotipala and sankharupekkha nana, for example: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/46546 It was these comments of Ven D's and your added ones which had prompted me to pursue the whole issue as I couldn't see how it was possible. Even if the texts seem to say something like this, we have to consider very carefully, as I know you agree. Metta, Sarah ========= #76913 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 3:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views jonoabb Hi Howard upasaka@... wrote: > > > Hi, Jon - > > In a message dated 9/27/2007 9:50:26 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > jonabbott@... writes: > > As I see it, the only sense in which pannatti can be said to exist is > the conventional. > > ========================== > The only way that hardness can be said to exist as a self-existent > entity also is conventional. As for pa~n~natti, trees and cars and human bodies > exist in the sense that the interrelated dhammas underlying them are not > imagined. The word 'exist' is multiple in meaning. Rainbows exist but unicorns do > not. Yet, even unicorns exist in a very low-level, limited sense. > Thanks for these further thoughts. I don't have much to say on the question of 'existence', as I don't really see it as an issue that the teachings concern themselves with. Not in the same league as, say, the characteristics of dhammas that can be directly experienced; somewhat philosophical by comparison to that. > What is important is that in whatever way the three poisons exist, there > is the need to eliminate that existence. > Aye to that! Jon #76914 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 9/29/2007 6:14:07 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Thanks for these further thoughts. I don't have much to say on the question of 'existence', as I don't really see it as an issue that the teachings concern themselves with. Not in the same league as, say, the characteristics of dhammas that can be directly experienced; somewhat philosophical by comparison to that. ============================ The "teachings" do touch on concept versus reality, and that is a matter of existence. :-) With metta, Howard #76915 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 3:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views jonoabb Hi Tep Tep Sastri wrote: > Hi Jon, - > > Of course, even if we lived to be 100+, we still would have a lot to > discuss, agree, and disagree. > Something to look forward to, then ;-)) > Jon: For example: > - the eight ariya-puggalas are a conventional language way of > referring to the magga and phala cittas of the 4 levels of > enlightenment; ... > > T: Not exactly, Jon. The PTS Dictionary for example says that the > eight ariya-puggalas are persons in the real sense, i.e. they live, > eat foods, get sick, get old, and die. Even buddha, petas and animals > are included this category of 'puggala'. I of course agree with that as a dictionary definition, just as I would agree that the word 'chariot' refers to an actual chariot. But I still think, and I think you agree, that the Buddha taught about a world that is to be known in a deeper sense than the world of persons and chariots. In this deeper sense, what distinguishes the ariya-puggala from the rest of the puggalas is the (previous) arising of one or more of the 8 magga and phala cittas (hence the *eight* ariya-puggalas). > Jon: Yes, in conventional terms aeroplane, chariot and person are > impermanent. But this is not the impermanence spoken of by the Buddha > when describing, say, visible object as having the characteristic of > impermanence > > T: Not exactly, Jon. External objects that are "concept" can exhibit > inconstant/impermanent characteristic the same way as paramattha > dhammas. Hence these objects can be used (one at a time, of course) > as the citta's objects for meditative purposes. Read the following > sutta quote, please. > > "Just as when the root of a great, standing tree — possessed of > heartwood — is inconstant & subject to change, its trunk is > inconstant & subject to change, its branches & foliage are inconstant > & subject to change, its shadow is inconstant & subject to change. ..." > [MN 146 : Nandakovada Sutta.] On my reading, this mention of the impermanence of (a) the various parts of a tree and (b) hence necessarily its shadow, is made as a simile for the impermanence of (a) the external ayatanas and (b) hence necessarily the feeling that arises in dependence on them (i.e., not by way of giving the parts of a tree as a meditation subject of any kind). The passage following your quote reads: "In the same way, sisters, if someone were to say, 'My six external media [J: ayatanas] are inconstant, but what I experience based on the six internal [J: BB has 'external' here] media — pleasure, pain, or neither pleasure nor pain [J: vedana] — that is constant, everlasting, eternal, & not subject to change': would he be speaking rightly?" [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.146.than.html] So it is the impermanence of feeling in particular that the Bhikkhunis are being asked to reflect on here. > Jon: Unless the suttas are understood in terms of paramattha dhammas, > the essential message of the Buddha cannot be appreciated, in my view. > > T: Not exactly, Jon. By the end of this lecture (ovada) in MN 146, > several bhikkhunis became Sotapanna-puggala. The Nandakovada Sutta (MN 146) is an interesting sutta. The Bhikkhunis were able to affirm on the basis of their own developed panna, when asked by Ven Nandaka during the course of the talk, that: - each of the six sense bases is impermanent, suffering and not-self; - each of the six objects bases is impermanent, suffering and not-self; - each of the six classes of consciousness is impermanent, suffering and not-self; Likewise when asked in the passage quoted above regarding (the six classes of) feeling, the Bhikkhunis were able to answer on the basis of their own developed panna: "No, venerable sir. Why is that? Because each feeling arises dependent on its corresponding condition. With the cessation of its corresponding condition, it ceases." And Ven Nandaka then affirms their understanding by saying: "Good, good, sisters. That's how it is for a disciple of the noble ones who *has seen it as it actually is with right discernment*. As I read the sutta, it is understanding of dhammas (not conventional objects) that forms the basis for the Bhikkhunis' attainments. (Another point of interest in the sutta is that after Nandaka had delivered the instruction to the group of Bhikkhunis he was instructed by the Buddha to give exactly the same talk to the Bhikkhunis a second time the following day, and it was at the end of the second delivery that the Bhikkhunis attained enlightenment.) Hoping we can find some agreement here. Jon #76916 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 3:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. jonoabb Hi Phil (and Nina) Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Phil, > > Op 29-sep-2007, om 15:41 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > >> But to say that "every word in the tipitaka is >> about understanding present realities" as I think I have heard AS say >> is absurd, I think. > ------- > N: I am convinced of this. quote me a sutta and I will try. > Nina. I'm not going to be as bold as Nina here(!), but I do share her view on this and I'd like to make a comment or two in response to your post. What you have paraphrased AS as saying I would word as follows: "Every word in the Tipitaka is geared towards eventual escape from samsara and thus in one way or another is about understanding present realities". As I see it, when the talk is about sila, to take that as an example, what is being urged is not the sila of someone who has no knowledge of the teachings (even though such a person may have a high level of sila), but the development of sila in conjunction with the development of awareness/right understanding (of course, to the extent possible given one's limited previous development of sila and awareness). This is because, as you will know, sila that is unsupported by satipatthana is sila that is 'affected by taints, partaking of merit, ripening on the side of attachment' (MN 117), and this is not what is being urged upon us, worthy though it may be in being kusala. The danger of it is that it inevitably brings with it a greater idea of self, of someone who 'can do it'. So both sila and satipatthana are to be developed, and neither should be seen in isolation of the other. I think if you look closely when reading your sutta passages on sila you'll find almost invariably some reference also to satipatthana/vipassana/developed understanding, not just 'bare' sila for its own sake. Jon #76917 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 4:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views jonoabb Hi Howard upasaka@... wrote: > > > Hi, Jon - > > In a message dated 9/29/2007 6:14:07 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > jonabbott@... writes: > > Thanks for these further thoughts. I don't have much to say on the > question of 'existence', as I don't really see it as an issue that the > teachings concern themselves with. Not in the same league as, say, the > characteristics of dhammas that can be directly experienced; somewhat > philosophical by comparison to that. > > ============================ > The "teachings" do touch on concept versus reality, and that is a matter > of existence. :-) > I think the 'existence' angle to the dhammas vs. concepts discussion is more an assumed pov than something brought up in the teachings themselves. My pov, anyway ;-)) Jon #76918 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 4:14 pm Subject: Re: Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. kenhowardau Hi Phil, Thanks for this nice reply. I wondered if I'd been a bit short tempered with you, but you seem quite unruffled. --------------------- KH: > > You are entitled to follow a bastardised version of the Dhammathat > more or less echoes Christianity if that is what you want. Ph: > I don't know about this. Christianity is all about turning yourself over to a higher power. Dhamma is not about that as you know. Our liberation is in our own hands. --------------------- It's all or nothing, Phil. If, when you say "it's in our own hands," you mean there is some kind of control then you may as well be a bible thumping creationist. It's all or nothing! --------------------------------------- Ph: > My bastardization of Dhamma, when it occurs, lies more in new-ageizing it. Dr. Philling it? I don't know. You certainly watch that guy a lot, you keep mentioning him! ---------------------------------------- Touché! :-) -------------------------------------------------------- KH: > But we > don't have to agree with you, do we? Those of us who prefer the > Dhamma that is found in the ancient texts are perfectly entitled to > study and understand that Dhamma. Absolutely. And I count myself in that group. Good in the beginning, good in the middle, good in the end. The suttas that inspire me are often phrased in conventional terms and can only by an absurd stretch of the imagination be reduced to the paramattha. -------------------------------------------------------- Once again: it's all or nothing. Either there are only dhammas or there aren't only dhammas. You can't have it both ways. ------------------------------------ Ph: > For example, the one in AN that urges husband and wife to live with virtue in tune. ----------------------------------- There are no examples of sentient (abiding, lasting) entities in the Tipitaka. The wording of some suttas may - to the uninitiated - give the opposite impression, but get over it Phil! You have had it explained in every possible way. Stop clinging to every flimsy possibility that there might be a conventional Buddha teaching a conventional path leading to a conventional goal. --------------------- Ph: > The husband speaks of how he has lived in tune with his wife, in deeds and thoughts, since the day they met, and she speaks the same. Now, if the commentary reduces that to paramattha dhammas rather than seeing the motivating aspect of the conventional narrative (a condition, of course) than I will ignore that commentary. ---------------------- Motivating! There is nothing motivating in conventional reality. Conventional happily married couples live a perilous existence. Mental disease, physical disease, accidental injury, attack by saw- wielding bandits . . the list goes on. There is no end to the ways in which it can all end in tears. Now, if those people could just understand that there were really only dhammas then the way to the deathless would be open to them. Please don't confuse them with stories of a conventional path. ---------------------------------- Ph: > And the commentary that reduces "I am of the nature to grow sick, grow old and die, all that I love will be taken from me" etc to dhammas getting old, getting sick, and dying????!!!! You are welcome to that ancient text. ---------------------------------- Give me the ancient texts any time. What is so nice about sentient beings becoming non-sentient (dead)? It's horrible! The only redeeming factor to that kind of (conventional) story is that it was just a misleading lie to begin with. There were never any sentient beings! --------------------------------------- Ph" > You're right, we're unlikely to agree on practice, and that's fine. These days I'm launched on a study in Vism. of my main interest, the ayatanas, and that is something we'll be able to discuss with some concurrence I imagine - I don't deny the importance of studying paramattha dhammas, and don't doubt that liberation lies through understanding them. ------------------------------------------ I am glad you will still be studying paramattha dhammas. I do think yours is a case of "so near and yet so far," but who cares what I think? :-) --------------------- Ph: > But to say that "every word in the tipitaka is about understanding present realities" as I think I have heard AS say is absurd, I think. ----------------------- It's all or nothing Phil. Have I mentioned that? -------------------------------- Ph: > It has to be appreciated how reflection on single lifetimes and the conventional truths that are revealed within them can motivate the development of conditions for deeper understanding.This is utterly clear in the suttas I referred to and in many others. The AS approach fails to appreciate that, and would therefore close the door of Dhamma in the face of all those who are not paramattha prone. --------------------------------- (Expletive deleted.) ------------------------------------------- Ph: > Fortunately, that door can't be closed by AS! But oh yes, it's all about the Buddha's true teaching disappearing, etc....that means that only AS hold the grail, and the rest of the Buddhist world has dropped it, because she is alone in her approach. And I am still holding on to the possibility that she is the one who is right. Anyways, I want to move on to an ayatanas study corner when I'm back for good. That is something I can discuss without yet more wrong speech against AS. I really can't prevent that. I guess there's a kind of zeal involved. I'll definitely be a zealot about Dhamma. I refuse to deny the basic healing (calling Dr. Phil!) benefits that Dhamma brings into people's lives right from the beginning, whether they later develop deeper understanding or not. -------------------------------------------- I think your new approach is a good one: Get on with your life - earning a living etc - and put aside a little time every now and then for Dhamma study. (Ancient-text-Dhamma study, of course!) If you disagree with some of it that's fine. We all enjoy discussing disagreements. But let's not rewrite the Dhamma into something we think it should be. And let's not deceive other people into thinking our rewrites are the genuine article. Ken H #76919 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 4:49 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views indriyabala Hi Jon, - Eventhough we disagree on some issues, we do agree on more important Dhamma principles. I explain at the end of your post. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi Tep > > Tep Sastri wrote: > > Hi Jon, - .... > > > Jon: For example: > > - the eight ariya-puggalas are a conventional language way of > > referring to the magga and phala cittas of the 4 levels of > > enlightenment; ... > > > > T: Not exactly, Jon. The PTS Dictionary for example says that the > > eight ariya-puggalas are persons in the real sense, i.e. they live, > > eat foods, get sick, get old, and die. Even buddha, petas and animals are included this category of 'puggala'. > > I of course agree with that as a dictionary definition, just as I would > agree that the word 'chariot' refers to an actual chariot. > > But I still think, and I think you agree, that the Buddha taught about a > world that is to be known in a deeper sense than the world of persons > and chariots. > > In this deeper sense, what distinguishes the ariya-puggala from the rest of the puggalas is the (previous) arising of one or more of the 8 magga and phala cittas (hence the *eight* ariya-puggalas). > > > Jon: Yes, in conventional terms aeroplane, chariot and person are > > impermanent. But this is not the impermanence spoken of by the Buddha when describing, say, visible object as having the characteristic of impermanence > > > > T: Not exactly, Jon. External objects that are "concept" can exhibit > > inconstant/impermanent characteristic the same way as paramattha dhammas. Hence these objects can be used (one at a time, of course) as the citta's objects for meditative purposes. Read the following sutta quote, please. > > > > "Just as when the root of a great, standing tree — possessed of > > heartwood — is inconstant & subject to change, its trunk is > > inconstant & subject to change, its branches & foliage are inconstant & subject to change, its shadow is inconstant & subject to change. ..." > > [MN 146 : Nandakovada Sutta.] > > On my reading, this mention of the impermanence of (a) the various parts of a tree and (b) hence necessarily its shadow, is made as a simile for the impermanence of (a) the external ayatanas and (b) hence necessarily the feeling that arises in dependence on them (i.e., not by way of giving the parts of a tree as a meditation subject of any kind). The passage following your quote reads: > > "In the same way, sisters, if someone were to say, 'My six external > media [J: ayatanas] are inconstant, but what I experience based on the six internal [J: BB has 'external' here] media — pleasure, pain, or > neither pleasure nor pain [J: vedana] — that is constant, everlasting, > eternal, & not subject to change': would he be speaking rightly?" > [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.146.than.html] > > So it is the impermanence of feeling in particular that the Bhikkhunis > are being asked to reflect on here. > > > Jon: Unless the suttas are understood in terms of paramattha dhammas, the essential message of the Buddha cannot be appreciated, in my view. > > T: Not exactly, Jon. By the end of this lecture (ovada) in MN 146, > > several bhikkhunis became Sotapanna-puggala. > > The Nandakovada Sutta (MN 146) is an interesting sutta. The Bhikkhunis were able to affirm on the basis of their own developed panna, when asked by Ven Nandaka during the course of the talk, that: > - each of the six sense bases is impermanent, suffering and not-self; > - each of the six objects bases is impermanent, suffering and not-self; > - each of the six classes of consciousness is impermanent, suffering and not-self; > > Likewise when asked in the passage quoted above regarding (the six classes of) feeling, the Bhikkhunis were able to answer on the basis of their own developed panna: > "No, venerable sir. Why is that? Because each feeling arises dependent on its corresponding condition. With the cessation of its corresponding condition, it ceases." > > And Ven Nandaka then affirms their understanding by saying: > "Good, good, sisters. That's how it is for a disciple of the noble ones > who *has seen it as it actually is with right discernment*. > > As I read the sutta, it is understanding of dhammas (not conventional > objects) that forms the basis for the Bhikkhunis' attainments. > > (Another point of interest in the sutta is that after Nandaka had > delivered the instruction to the group of Bhikkhunis he was instructed > by the Buddha to give exactly the same talk to the Bhikkhunis a second time the following day, and it was at the end of the second delivery that the Bhikkhunis attained enlightenment.) > > Hoping we can find some agreement here. > > Jon > ..................... T: Although I have insisted that external objects that are "concepts" are also useful for aniccanupassana, I do agree with you that the main contemplation is on the three characteristics of the clinging aggregates, ayatanas, and dhatus that define the meditator's naama and ruupa in the here & now moment (which is not the zero-duration moment of the single citta). In other words, I do not deny the contemplation of the ultimate realities while trying to persuade you and other Abhidhammikas here to be more flexible and come down from the "Ivory Tower" to face the broader realities in the world of fleeting/impermanent puggalas( recall the milk simile in the Milinda Panha ). By labelling these useful realities as useless "concepts", their viewpoint is not flexible because it contradicts with the real world. A key teaching is to let go of clingings in the khandhas both external and internal, near or far, gross or subtle, past or future, .... Tep ==== #76920 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 5:14 pm Subject: Re: Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. philofillet Hi Nina I have no doubt that you can stretch any sutta to reach the paramattha - and I'm sure there are commentaries that do so - but my meaning is that the overriding purpose, message, impact of some suttas is definitely not paramattha, they have to be appreciated in conventional terms to serve the purpose the Buddha intended for them - the purpose that comes through clearly in them. (We call him the greatest teacher - so why is it that every sutta must be understood only with a commentary? - that doesn't make sense to me.) I would like to mention many, many examples, but I am only here once a week, and you are off to India. One very good example is the one I mentioned, about the husband and wife living in tune. Metta, Phil p.s thanks Ken and Jon, this two day blip will be my last posting for the next 10 days or so. Back to you then. Ad hopefully Sukin > Op 29-sep-2007, om 15:41 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > > > But to say that "every word in the tipitaka is > > about understanding present realities" as I think I have heard AS say > > is absurd, I think. > ------- > N: I am convinced of this. quote me a sutta and I will try. > Nina. > #76921 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 5:41 pm Subject: Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 nichiconn Dear Tep (and Scott), I also fail to see how the phrase "indriyasa.mvara" could be translated as "step by step". My idea is that the venerable bhikkhu was (re)naming rather than translating. Offhand, I couldn't say whether there is a name given in body of the sutta itself but will venture to guess there isn't. I also think the soup image is more apt than the ladder one. More a matter of what's in the bowl, which changes with every spoonful or even just in sitting, than of reaching any heights... crossing the oceans and all, you know. Not much nurishment in ladders anyway. peace, connie #76922 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 5:58 pm Subject: Re: Citta nichiconn Dear Tep and Scott, Tep: ...Connie "the Sage" has initiated a discussion on this sbject in another thread; perhaps, you may be interested in joining with her there? Connie: As far as posts go, I find the long, repetitious, you said, I said, back and forth ones difficult to maintain any real interest in, let alone join. No big deal. Generally speaking, I'd characterize most of my contributions to any discussions as falling into the footnote or tangent category. Please don't be disappointed if you expect me to carry on long conversations or take it personally that I usually don't. Probably the most frequent question I answer on the phone is "Are you still there?" peace, conversational connie #76923 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 10:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 dcwijeratna Dear Tep, This is a rather belated response to your e-m dated 22 Sep. I wish to focus on the following: "T: The story of "the monks who learned the Abhidhamma from the Venerable Sariputta" is also mentioned briefly by Ven. Nanamoli in his article, "The Life of Sariputta". Before I proceed, I must confess that my knowledge of Abhidhamma (pi.taka) is little. But I have some idea of the History of Buddhism, since the Buddha proclaimed his dhamma to the world. 1) First, the story about the origin of Abhidhamma--the Buddha teaching Mahamayadevi in Taavatimsa heaven. Ven. Sariputta learning that from the Buddha at the Anotataa lake. We human beings cannot verify the accuracy of this. If one accepts that story--then it is a belief. Hence to discuss such matters is a waste of a time, according to the Buddha. One example, Mahaayaanist claim that there texts, which says they were preached by the Buddha, were hidden in the Nagaloka. To accept the first and reject this is not very rational you would agree. Historians date Mahaayana texts around the beginning of the Christian era. At present, the attitude to Abhidhamma (pi.taka) is that it is a philosphy. So we have many philosphical schools. And as we know philosphy is mere speculation. Though they ultimately control human behaviour. By the way the Buddha's teaching is not a philosophy. With mettaa, D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #76924 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 10:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (18) dcwijeratna Dear Tep, You wrote (September 23): "Equanimity is the opposite of attachment, aversion and ignorance. We should investigate the characteristics of all ten perfections and see their benefit : they are opposed to akusala dhammas." What I am not sure is the relation of equanimity to ignorance. Equanimity is one of the four "Brahma-viharas". They belong to this world. Hence when you practice equanimity, as a human being, there is ignorance. Now the opposites of attachment, aversion and ignorance are non-attachment ... etc (alobha, adosa, amoha). So only an arahant is capable of this kind of upekkha. Am I making any sense? Further, we cannot discuss the upekkha of the arahant, since we don't know what it is. Unless, one claims that one is an arahant. But the other variety we can--the worldly type. Then there is ignorance it. What do you think of this? D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #76925 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions, Ch 15, no 5. dcwijeratna Dear Nina, In a message dated 24/9 you wrote: The path-factor sammå-ditthi can have many degrees. It can be intellectual understanding of kusala and akusala and their results, or paññå which directly understands kusala as kusala and akusala as akusala, or right understanding of nåma and rúpa as non-self. Only right understanding of the true nature of nåma and rúpa will lead to detachment from the “self” and from all realities, and then there will be freedom from the cycle of birth and death. When the noble eightfold Path which leads to the end of rebirth is being developed the object of paññå is a nåma or rúpa which appears at the present moment. Through mindfulness of realities appearing in our daily life sammå-ditthi of the eightfold Path can come to see them as they are, as non-self. 1. The first sentence of this para is: "The path-factor sammå-ditthi can have many degrees. It can be (1) intellectual understanding of kusala and akusala and their results, (2) or paññå which directly understands kusala as kusala and akusala as akusala, (3) or right understanding of nåma and rúpa as non-self." So you have given three defintions of Pa~n~naa. At least, that is the way I understand your statement. My questions: 1. What is the difference between "intellectual understanding and "pa~n~naa which directly knows"? 2. When you give "pa~n~naa underatands" You attribute to pa~n~naa the nature of a being (attaa.) Compare with "he understands". 3. Number (3), according to the sutta pi.taka is understod by an arahant. (Again my understanding) How can it be a sammaa di.t.thi? If we agree with this definition, then we have the situation of Samma ditthi is equal to arahanthood. That I am sure is not your intention. 4. Without clarifying tthe above, the rest os the paragraph, no sense can be made out of the rest of the paragraph I understand that you are levaing for India. May you collect a lot of merit when you there. May you have a safe and enjoyable trip. With mettaa, D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #76926 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:30 pm Subject: Happy! bhikkhu0 Friends: Mirror Echo Effects! Making others happy, makes oneself happy! Making others unhappy, makes oneself unhappy! When happy, one easily becomes concentrated... When unhappy, one easily becomes distracted... When concentrated, one sees & knows it as it really is! When unconcentrated, one can neither see nor know reality! Seeing & knowing reality makes exact navigation is possible! Neither seeing nor knowing reality makes navigation is impossible! Exact navigation enables perfectly right behaviour... Erroneous navigation disables perfectly right behaviour... When acting only right, one makes no mistakes! When acting always wrong, one only makes mistakes! Making mistakes is painful, both now & later... Making no mistakes is pleasure, both now & later... Happy is the One who Knows! Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net <...> #76927 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 12:02 am Subject: New Photos! sarahprocter... Dear Evie & Elaine (Sobhana), Thank you both very much for uploading your lovely pictures in the 'member album'. It's always nice to see a pic of those we are writing to here. I do hope your efforts may encourage other new members to do the same and also prompt some of the older members who've made half-promises in the past (maybe Tep, if I'm not mistaken, for one!!). Elaine, I'm so glad to see you're still following the list. It seems a long time since we heard from you. Your interest in Dhamma was very keen. How's everything in Canada with your family-in-law? Is there anyone else near you interested in the Dhamma now? How about the elderly lady you mentioned before? Btw, are you pictures taken in K.L.? Evie, thanks for the pic with your husband too. We have another album of 'Significant Others', so don't be surprised if it moves there sometime. Anyone else? Any more 'Significant Others'? James - how about Sebastian and the new kitten to join Simon? If anyone has any difficulty uploading a pic (or wants a touch-up first!), contact James and he'll be happy to oblige, even if it means mailing an old driver's licence pic to him snail-mail! Thx again for your good example, Evie & Elaine! Metta, Sarah p.s Evie, you mentioned you'd be interested to read any other introductions, so I just found Elaine's which refers to some of the detail I was recalling above: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/69966 Feel free to ask anyone else to give you any personal information that you'd like to know as well as their Dhamma reflections!! ========= #76928 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 1:50 am Subject: Q. re Asoka, mindfulness of breath. nilovg Dear Dieter, As I said, I would return to you. I understand that some people (I do not say you) find that knowing when they breathe in and out long or short helps them to become more calm and feel better in body and mind. This is like yogha which can be very helpful. However, they do not see that the Buddha's teaching on mindfulness of breath is different. The aim is not feeling more calm and peaceful but detachment. There has to be understanding that precisely knows when there is citta with attachment and when there is kusala citta with detachment. In the Buddha's time many people understood what he taught. In this time we are bound to have more misunderstandings when reading suttas. Today Jon said that the Buddha did not teach just bare siila for its own sake, that it has to go along with satipatthana. The same can be said about samatha. He taught mindfulness of breath that had to go along with 'the four frames of references', that is, the four Applications of Mindfulness. You recently quoted a text I had given about right concentration: the “Kindred Sayings” (V, Mahå-vagga, XLV, Kindred Sayings on the Way, Ch III, Perversion, § 8, Concentration) that the Buddha, while he was at Såvatthí, said to the monks: I will teach you, monks, the ariyan right concentration, which is associated and equipped. Do you listen to it. And what, monks, is the ariyan right concentration which is associated and equipped? It is (associated with) right view, right thinking, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration. Now, monks, the one-pointedness of mind which is equipped with these seven limbs is called “the ariyan right concentration which is associated, likewise which is equipped.” Thus, this is not conceentration for its own sake. I quote a text and some posts by Jon I got from Rob K's study forum. MN 44 Culavedalla Sutta "Now what is concentration, lady, what qualities are its themes, what qualities are its requisites, and what is its development?" "Singleness of mind is concentration, friend Visakha; the four frames of reference are its themes; the four right exertions are its requisites; and any cultivation, development, & pursuit of these qualities is its development." Quote by Howard: ...The four frames of reference, when developed & pursued, bring the seven factors for awakening to their culmination. The seven factors for awakening, when developed & pursued, bring clear knowing & release to their culmination. (From MN 118) --------- Jon: The 'point' of the sutta on mindfulness of in and out breathing is to illustrate how jhana with breath as object can be a basis for insight. In other words, how those who are advanced in the development of *both* samatha and vipassana can attain to enlightenment that is based on jhana. .. Jon: Note the wording here, "brings the four frames of reference [four arousings of mindfulness] to their culmination". To bring something to its culmination is not the same as developing it from scratch, and I see the emphasis in the sutta as being very much on describing the final stages of development for those ready to achieve enlightenment in that very lifetime. Hence the description of the (hypothetical) monk who has already developed samatha (and satipatthana) to a high degree. Jon: Mindfulness/awareness refers to moments of consciousness that directly experience a dhamma. The direct experience of a dhamma, is the basis for the panna (wisdom, insight) that sees the dhamma as it truly is, that sees the characteristics of the dhamma. It is by seeing dhammas as they truly are that attachment to them and to existence is eventually eradicated. Jon: In the context of 'mindfulness of breathing', this means mindfulness of one of the dhammas that we take for breathing, and the development of insight that arises based on that mindfulness. That insight is, of course, vipassana. However, 'mindfulness of breathing' can also refer to breath as an object of samatha development, and so it can also mean jhana based on breath as object. Now, jhana in and of itself is not something that leads to insight/enlightenment, nor is it even something that makes insight easier or more likely to occur. Yes, it is kusala accompanied by panna, but the panna is not the panna that sees the true nature of dhammas. While vipassana and samatha both involve the development of panna, it is panna of different levels and they lead to different goals. ------- Nina: I would add:the bhikkhus the sutta was addressed to were highly adept, they were arahats or they had accumulations to attain arahatship. We read even after the first tetrad (Of mindfulness of breath) in the Visuddhimagga: QUOTE After he has thus reached the four noble paths in due succession and has become established in the fruition of arahatship, he at last attains to the nineteen kinds of ³Reviewing Knowledge², and he becomes fit to receive the highest gifts from the world with its deities. the Visuddhimagga Viii QUOTE Vis. VIII< 211: "Although any meditation subject, no matter what, is successful only in one who is mindful and fully aware, yet any meditation subject other than this one gets more evident as he goes on giving it his attention. But this mindfulness of breathing is difficult, difficult to develop, a field in which only the minds of Buddhas, paccekabuddhas and Buddhas sons are at home. It is no trivial matter, nor can it be cultivated by trivial persons.." --------- Nina. #76929 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 2:07 am Subject: Pali grammar , to Scott. nilovg Dear Scott, Warder is too short for this form of sati: Ch 21, p. 196. It is from sant, being, and it is the locative. Like: gacchant, gacchati. This locative can be a locativus absolutus, just as in the case of genitivus absolutus. (Warder p. 58 and p. 103) We read sometimes: eva.m sati: this being so... Thus when you see: sati, it can be from sant, being. Nina. #76930 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 2:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Controversy? sarahprocter... Dear DC, --- DC Wijeratna wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > You wrote: > " > To be precise, however, kamma refers to the kusala (wholesome) cetana > > (intention) or the akusala (unwholesome) cetana. It is this cetana which > > motivates good or bad deeds and can produce results later on." > > DC: > > Our understanding is that kamma is distinct from cetana. .... S: Just out of inteterest, who is 'we' here and below? ... >We understand > it this way because "I declare, O Bhikkhus, that volition (cetanaa) is > Kamma. Having willed one acts by body , speech and thought." (AN iii) > [cetanaaha.m bhikkhave vadaami kamma.m, cetayitvaa karoti kamma.m > kaayena, vvacaaya manasaa] .... S: I would have thought this supported my comment above. See also, under 'Karma' in Nyantiloka's dictionary, (widely-used in Sri Lanka for several decades now:-)) and tell me if you disagree with it: "karma (Sanskrit), Paali: kamma 'action', correctly speaking denotes the wholesome and unwholesome volitions (kusala- and akusala-cetanaa) and their concomitant mental factors, causing rebirth and shaping the destiny of beings. These karmical volitions (kamma cetanaa) become manifest as wholesome or unwholesome actions by * body (kaaya-kamma) * speech (vacii-kamma) * mind (mano-kamma) Thus the Buddhist term 'karma' by no means signifies the result of actions, and quite certainly not the fate of man, or perhaps even of whole nations (the so-called wholesale or mass-karma), misconceptions which, through the influence of theosophy, have become widely spread in the West. "Volition (cetanaa), o monks, is what I call action (cetanaaham bhikkhave kammam vadaami), for through volition one performs the action by body, speech or mind. . There is karma (action), o monks, that ripens in hell.... Karma that ripens in the animal world.. Karma that ripens in the world of men.... Karma that ripens in the heavenly world.... Threefold, however, is the fruit of karma: ripening during the life-time (dittha-dhamma-vedaniiya-kamma), ripening in the next birth (upapajja-vedaniiya-kamma), ripening in later births (aparaapariya-vedaniiya kamma) ...." (A.VI.63)....." ... > Moreover, the first verse of Dhammapada, the famous "mano pubba.mgamaa > dhamma" says that mind is the forerunner... It is absolutely necessary > to distinguish between kamma and cetanaa. One has to do with the > "naama" aspect of "naama-ruupa" and the other to "ruupa". .... S: In the Dhp verse, when it says mano (mind, i.e citta) is the forerunner, it is referring to how citta/mano is the 'chief' which leads the accompanying cetasikas. One of these cetasikas is cetanaa. The Dhp. verse is not referring to rupas at all and neither is cetanaa/kamma. When kusala/akusala cetanaa is of sufficient strength, however, with the necessary factors in place, there may be then kamma-patha, with action through body, speech or mind. Clearly, with regard to action through body or speech, as you suggest, rupas conditioned by the mind and cetanaa are involved. ..... >Action and > "vedanaa" Two separate and distinct dimensions of naama-ruupa. I hope I > have made myself clear. .... S: I'm sorry, but you'd have to clarify what the nama is here and what the rupa. Again, I'd be glad to know of the source and where the idea comes from. ... > We would say that it is not cetana that produce results later but kamma. > So many times I think of robbing banks. I never do rob. Is there kamma? ..... S: Again, I wonder about the 'we'. There is kamma, i.e cetanaa, but not kamma-patha. Again, pls see Nyantiloka's dictionary under 'kamma-patha': "kamma-patha 'course of action', is a name for the group of 10 kinds of either unwholesome or wholesome actions, viz. I. The tenfold unwholesome courses of action (akusala-kamma-patha): 3 bodily actions: killing, stealing, unlawful sexual intercourse; 4 verbal actions: lying, slandering, rude speech, foolish babble; 3 mental actions: covetousness, ill-will, evil views. Unwholesome mental courses of action comprise only extreme forms of defiled thought: the greedy wish to appropriate others' property, the hateful thought of harming others, and pernicious views. Milder forms of mental defilement are also unwholesome, but do not constitute 'courses of action'. II. The tenfold wholesome course of action (kusala-kamma-patha): 3 bodily actions: avoidance of killing, stealing, unlawful sexual intercourse; 4 verbal actions: avoidance of lying, slandering, rude speech, foolish babble; i.e. true, conciliatory, mild, and wise speech; 3 mental actions: unselfishness, good-will, right views. Both lists occur repeatedly, e.g. in A.X.28, 176; M.9; they are explained in detail in M.114, and in Com. to M.9 (R. Und., p. 14), Atthasaalini Tr. I, 126ff." ..... > Is there any result. It is the action that matters not cetanana. .... S: Also, see under 'Cetanaa' in the dictionary: "With regard to karmical volition (i.e. wholesome or unwholesome karma) it is said in A. VI, 13: "Volition is action (karma), thus I say, o monks; for as soon as volition arises, one does the action, be it by body, speech or mind." For details, s. paticca-samuppâda (10), karma." .... >Even the words "later on" is quite ambigous. In the Buddha-word, there is no > such thing as later on. It's result are from the moment the kamma is > committed. .... S: The results may occur in that life-time, the next life-time or many, many aeons of lifetimes later. ..... > This is how we look at this issue. And it is purely based on the > Buddha-vacana. .... S: I've written posts with quotes on the meaning of 'Buddha-vacana' and references to the origins of the Abhidhamma. I can add many quotes from the Abhidhamma and commentaries which give very precise detail on kamma, but I know you may not be interested in them, which is why I've quoted from the suttas Nyantiloka refers to. Now, I'd like to see your sources which indicate: a) that Buddha-vacana only refers to the Sutta Pitaka (and Vinaya?) b) which texts 'we' are referring to exactly with precise references. You mentioned the understandings of modern scholars or historians before, but exactly what are their sources? Often, it seems, the sources are just the works of other scholars and historians, with occasional cherry-picking from the ancient commentaries, just when it suits. ... > Sarah, one thing, I am not writing these things for the sake of > argument. I hope you'll understand that. ... S: I perfectly understand and appreciate your keen interest in the teachings. In fact it is in Sri Lanka, as you know, that the Tipitaka and ancient commentaries have been so carefully preserved. So it surprises me, if it's true, that these important texts and teachings are rejected today even in universities, such as the one you attend, where there is such knowledge of Paali. My impression before when I spent time in Sri Lanka, was that there was keen interest in texts such as the Visuddhimagga. This was the support for the translation work too. This is why I'm asking for your clarifications on 'we', as you use it. DC, please don't get any wrong impression. I greatly appreciate your contributions here, like all your helpful comments on Daana and Caaga, for example. I also appreciate you interest to share ideas and discuss further. Metta, Sarah =========== #76931 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 2:21 am Subject: Conditions, Ch. 16, no 1. Three Pairs of Conditions. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 16 Three Pairs of Conditions There are six conditions which form three pairs and of each pair the two conditions have characteristics opposite to each other. These conditions are in part similar to previously mentioned conditions, but they each manifest a different aspect. The three pairs are the following: association-condition, sampayutta-paccaya dissociation-condition, vippayutta-paccaya presence-condition, atthi-paccaya absence-condition, natthi-paccaya disappearance-condition, vigata-paccaya non-disappearance-condition, avigata-paccaya With regard to association-condition, we read in the “Patthåna” (II, Analytical Exposition of Conditions, 19): The four immaterial aggregates (nåma-kkhandhas) are mutually related to one another by association-condition. Association-condition, sampayutta-paccaya, only pertains to nåma, to citta and its accompanying cetasikas. We read in the “Visuddhimagga” (XVII, 94) about this condition: Immaterial states (nåma dhammas) that assist by the kind of association consisting in having the same physical basis (vatthu), the same object, the same arising, the same cessation, are association-conditions, according as it is said, “The four immaterial khandhas are a condition, as association-condition, for each other” (Patthåna, I, 6). Seeing, for example, arises together with the associated cetasikas at the same vatthu, the eye-base; seeing and the associated cetasikas experience visible object through the eye-door and then they fall away together. Citta and cetasikas condition one another by way of association-condition, but they each perform their own funcion. Seeing-consciousness cognizes visible object, it is the “chief” in knowing the object. Feeling experiences the “flavour” of the object, saññå marks or recognizes the object, and the other “universals” [1] perform their own functions. The eyesense which is the base, the physical place of origin (vatthu) for seeing, is also doorway (dvåra), that is, the means through which citta and cetasikas experience the object. Only in the case of the five pairs of sense- cognitions (seeing, hearing, etc.) the same rúpas, namely the five senses, are both doorway and base. All the other cittas, apart from the sense-cognitions, arise at the heart-base (hadaya-vatthu). Each citta and its accompanying cetasikas arise together at the same base, experience the same object and fall away together. -------------- 1. The seven cetasikas which arise with each citta, namely, contact, feeling, perception (saññå), volition, concentration, life-faculty and attention. ******** Nina. #76932 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 2:25 am Subject: Asoka, Ch 6, no 7. nilovg Dear friends, In the Buddha’s time people who had accumulated great skill for jhåna developed samatha to the degree of jhåna, and also developed vipassanå, so that they could attain enlightenment. However, there were also many people who only developed vipassanå and then attained enlightenment. They are called people who developed “dry insight”, sukkha vipassanå. In the “Designation of Human Types” (Puggalapaññatti, the fourth Book of the Abhidhamma) individuals with different inclinations have been described. We read in the “Table of Contents” about the “Grouping of Human Types by One”, about “one who is emancipated at times (samayavimutto)” and “one who is emancipated not (only) at times (asamayavimutto)”. The Commentary, the “Pañcappakaraùatthakata” explains that “emancipated at times” applies to those who have attained to the three lower stages of enlightenment. They have not attained the full emancipation of arahatship. The Commentary states that “emancipated not at times” (the opposite of “at times”) applies to arahats who are “sukkhavipassaka”, who only practised dry insight, and did not develop jhåna. We read in chapter I about those who are “emancipated not (only) at times”: ”Indeed, all persons who are ariyans (noble or elect) are so emancipated in matters of the higher emancipation.” One can become enlightened, even to the stage of the arahat without having developed jhåna. We also read about someone who is of “perturbable nature” (kuppadhammo) and someone who is of “imperturbable nature” (akuppadhammo). The person of “perturbable nature” is not steadfast, he has dhammas which can decline. Among this group are those who have attained the different stages of jhåna, but who have no masteries (vasís). They can attain jhåna with difficulty, they cannot enter or emerge as they wish. Their skill in jhåna can decline. Those who are of “imperturbable nature” are anågåmís and arahats who have mastery in jhåna, and moreover, all ariyans are “imperturbable in matters of ariyan emancipation”. Thus, the ariyans of the four stages of enlightenment are included, no matter they have “mastery” in jhåna or not. The ariyan freedom cannot decline, the defilements which have been eradicated cannot return. This reminds us of what is really essential. ********** Nina. #76933 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 3:13 am Subject: Re: New Photos! buddhatrue Hi Sarah, I also enjoyed seeing the photos of Elaine, her cats and husband, and Evie. Tep, where is your picture?? ;-)) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: James - how about Sebastian > and the new kitten to join Simon? Okay, I've uploaded a picture of Sebastian (my bf) with our new kitten, Simon II to Significant Others folder. :-) > > If anyone has any difficulty uploading a pic (or wants a touch-up first!), > contact James and he'll be happy to oblige, even if it means mailing an > old driver's licence pic to him snail-mail! Sure, no problem!! > > Thx again for your good example, Evie & Elaine! > > Metta, > > Sarah Metta, James #76934 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 3:47 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (18) indriyabala Dear DC, - There was a misunderstanding ! You happened to quote Han's message #76567 and thought I wrote it. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, DC Wijeratna wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > You wrote (September 23): > "Equanimity is the opposite of attachment, aversion and ignorance. We should investigate the characteristics of all ten perfections and see their benefit : they are opposed to akusala dhammas." > What I am not sure is the relation of equanimity to ignorance. Equanimity is one of the four "Brahma-viharas". They belong to this world. Hence when you practice equanimity, as a human being, there is ignorance. > > Now the opposites of attachment, aversion and ignorance are non- attachment ... etc (alobha, adosa, amoha). So only an arahant is capable of this kind of upekkha. > > Am I making any sense? > > Further, we cannot discuss the upekkha of the arahant, since we don't know what it is. Unless, one claims that one is an arahant. But the other variety we can--the worldly type. Then there is ignorance it. > > What do you think of this? > > D. G. D. C. Wijeratna > ............ T: Below is a copy of the original message. Tep ==== {Reproduced as copy] Perfections Corner (17) 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. ------------------------------ We read about equanimity: "And equanimity is their opposite by dispelling attraction and repulsion towards desirable and undesirable objects, respectively, and by proceeding evenly under varying circumstances." Equanimity is the opposite of attachment, aversion and ignorance. We should investigate the characteristics of all ten perfections and see their benefit : they are opposed to akusala dhammas. Realities are non-self, they are beyond control. Cittas arise and fall away all the time in succession, and this causes people's lives to be different: they have accumulated different kammas which produce their results accordingly and they also have different inclinations which condition their varied ways of thinking. We read in the Commentary to the "Kindred Sayings" (II, Ch XII, 6, Tree Suttas, § 60, The base, Nidåna Sutta) that the Dhamma taught by the Buddha for the benefit of all beings can be compared to a thousand goods which are laid down on the door-step of each house for the benefit of the family. Some people may open the door and receive all those goods that are piled up on their door-step whereas others do not even open their door. Ignorance is the condition for not seeing the benefit of the Dhamma, whereas paññå is the condition for realizing its benefit. Each moment of listening to the Dhamma is beneficial. There may not always be an opportunity to apply the Dhamma, but when we have listened to it, there are conditions for kusala dhammas to develop and akusala dhammas gradually to decrease. We should have appreciation for someone who explains the Dhamma as taught by the Buddha. As we have seen, the Buddha's teaching can be compared to the laying down of a thousand goods before each house-door. ------------------------------ To be continued. Metta, Han #76935 From: han tun Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 4:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (18) hantun1 Dear DC (Nina, Tep), There are many kinds of upekkhaa. I wish to reproduce below, Nina’s comments on Tep’s remarks quoting Niramisa Sutta, SN 36.31. ------------------------------ Tep: > 2) Niramisa Sutta, SN 36.31 "Now, O monks, what is worldly equanimity? There are these five cords of sensual desire: forms cognizable by the eye... tangibles cognizable by the body that are wished for and desired, agreeable and endearing, associated with sense desire and alluring. It is the equanimity that arises with regard to these five cords of sense desire which is called 'worldly equanimity.' ------- Nina: this is not tatramajjhattataa, but indifferent feeling accompanying attachment. It is akusala. ---------- Tep: > "Now, what is unworldy equanimity? With the abandoning of pleasure and pain, and with the previous disappearance of gladness and sadness, a monk enters upon and abides in the fourth meditative absorption, which has neither pain-nor-pleasure and has purity of mindfulness due to equanimity. This is called 'unworldly equanimity.' -------- Nina: this is the equanimity of the fourth jhaana. Tatramajjhattataa cetasika. ------- Tep: > "And what is the still greater unworldly equanimity? When a taint-free monk looks upon his mind that is freed of greed, freed of hatred and freed of delusion, then there arises equanimity. This is called a 'still greater unworldly equanimity.' -------- Nina: This is the sixfold equanimity of the arahat who has no more defilements. Sixfold, referring to the senses and the mind-door. ------- Tep: I might have missed something important. The first meaning of equanimity as presented in the Perfections Corner do not closely agree with the PTS or the above Sutta. Do you have any suggestion? -------- Nina: There are many different aspects to equanimity, no contradictions. The equanimity that is a perfection is tatramajjhattataa cetasika. Evenmindedness arisies with each kusala citta. But it is a perfection if the gaol is having less defilements, less lobha, dosa and moha. ------------------------------- Han: If you have any difficulty with Nina’s explanations, please let us know. Respectfully, Han #76936 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 4:57 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (67) nichiconn Dear Friends, Part 11, Theri Rohinii. verse: 284. "Na te hira~n~na.m ga.nhanti, na suva.n.na.m na ruupiya.m; paccuppannena yaapenti, tena me sama.naa piyaa. 284. They do not take gold, coined or uncoined, or silver. They live by means of whatever turns up. Therefore, ascetics are dear to me. txt: Hira~n~nanti kahaapa.na.m. Ruupiyanti rajata.m. Paccuppannena yaapentiiti atiita.m ananusocantaa anaagata~nca apaccaasiisantaa paccuppannena yaapenti attabhaava.m pavattenti. Pruitt: 284. Gold [that is] coined means: a [gold] coin (kahaapa.na.m). Silver (ruupiya.m) means: silver (rajata.m). They live by means of whatever turns up (paccuppannena) means: not regretting the past, wanting nothing in return in the future, they live by means of whatever turns up, keeping their bodies going [in the present]. verse: 285. "Naanaakulaa pabbajitaa, naanaajanapadehi ca; a~n~nama~n~na.m pihayanti, tena me sama.naa piyaa. 285. Those who have gone forth are of various families and from various countries. [Nevertheless], they are friendly to one another. Therefore, ascetics are dear to me. txt: A~n~nama~n~na.m pihayantiiti a~n~nama~n~nasmi.m metti.m karonti. "Pihaayanti"pi paa.tho, so eva attho. 285. They are friendly (piyaayanti) to one another (a~n~na-m-a~n~na.m) means: they establish friendship for one another (a~n~na-m-a~n~nasmi.m). "Dwelling in friendship" (piyaasanti) is another reading. The meaning is the same. verse: 286. "Atthaaya vata no bhoti, kule jaataasi rohinii; saddhaa buddhe ca dhamme ca, sa"nghe ca tibbagaaravaa. 286. Truly for our sake, lady, you were born in [our] family, Rohinii. You have faith in the Buddha and the Doctrine and keen reverence for the Order. txt: Eva.m so braahma.no dhiituyaa santike bhikkhuuna.m gu.ne sutvaa pasannamaanaso dhiitara.m pasa.msanto "atthaaya vataa"ti-aadimaaha. 286. So the brahman, having heard about the good qualities of the bhikkhus in his daughter's presence, with his mind favourably disposed towards her, praised his daughter, saying the verse beginning Truly for our sake.* *For "You have faith ... the Order," cf. S I 134 (KS I 48). ===tbc, connie #76937 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 6:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] the Bodhisatta's insight development. to Sarah. nilovg Dear Sarah, thank you for your kind explanation. Sorry, I had forgotten about my earlier post. It must be old age. Nina. Op 29-sep-2007, om 22:43 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > N: I did not take a stand on this, was just following the posts. > .... > S: Perhaps I misunderstood. I was thinking of one or two comments > you had > made earlier about Jotipala and sankharupekkha nana, for example: #76938 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 6:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Puggala pa~n~natti nilovg Dear Tep, Op 28-sep-2007, om 1:31 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > T: Please correct me if you think I misunderstand your statements > above. I think you are saying that "cittas and cetasikas and > tendencies accumulated in the citta" cannot be separated from > individuals (persons). Thus, both the paramattha dhammas and persons > (puggala) exist together in a given moment. How nice! --------- N: First your remark: In so far as accumulations of this or of that individual are not the same. Can we say: there are different streams of cittas? Then you say: The word exist was discussed elsewhere on this list and I could not follow all. I am hesitant about the word 'exist', it can be interpreted differently. Shall we say, if you like, the persons are shadows of the paramattha dhammas? I like the idea of shadow and it is according to the Co. When there can be consideration of the present moment, there need not be so much trouble as to formulations and terms. For this subject I shall pay attention to your other post with your good remarks and questions. Nina. #76939 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:01 am Subject: Re: Pali grammar , to Scott. scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Thanks for this; very helpful: N: "Warder is too short for this form of sati: Ch 21, p. 196. It is from sant, being, and it is the locative. Like: gacchant, gacchati. This locative can be a locativus absolutus, just as in the case of genitivus absolutus. (Warder p. 58 and p. 103) We read sometimes: eva.m sati: this being so... Thus when you see: sati, it can be from sant, 'being.'" Scott: Would the below be a statement about causation? Indriyasa.mvare bhikkhave asati indriyasa.mvaravipannassa hatuupanisa.m hoti siila.m. Without indriyasa.mvara there can be no siila - since 'hoti' is used (bhavati). Then siila is removed or doesn't arise or come to be (hatuupanisa.m hoti) as effect when there is no (asanti) indriyasa.mvara (or sati) to condition it. Is that getting closer? Sincerely, Scott. #76940 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Conditions, Ch 15, no 9. nilovg Dear Tep, Op 29-sep-2007, om 3:13 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > > (2) N: When we consider realities which appear in daily life and > begin to be mindful of them, right understanding of the eightfold > Path develops. It develops because of conditions, we do not have to > think of progress or worry about the lack of progress. By the > development of the noble eightfold Path enlightenment can be attained > and defilements can be eradicated stage by stage. > > T: If you instead say : "When we consider realities which appear in > daily life and begin to be mindful of them, right understanding of > nåma and of rúpa develops", then I would follow you without much > difficulty. But the development of the noble eightfold Path, that is > explained clearly in MN 117: Maha-cattarisaka Sutta, does not seem to > be the same as what you are talking about. ---------- N: We have to consider first the development of the mundane eightfold Path which non-ariyans can begin to develop. There has to be a beginning, otherwise the goal could not be reached. MN 117 speaks about the result of the development of the eightfold Path, about the Path that is lokuttara. When the Path is not lokuttara, usually five factors, sometimes six arise together, depending on whether there is opportunity for abstention of wrong speech, action or livelihood, or whether there is no opportunity for these factors. I am merely thinking of the very beginning, since pa~n~naa is very weak, and so is sati and the other factors. Satipatthana, understanding and mindfulness of nama and rupa is to be developed so that stages of insight can arise. ----------- > T: I wonder if the "paññå of the noble eightfold Path" means the > ariyan's clear understanding of the eight Path factors (samma- > ditthi, ..., samma-samaadhi). I do not understand how I may > practically "consider the ralities which appear now". ------- N: But that has to be the beginning. There are different characteristics of nama and rupa appearing at this moment. We can learn that hardness has its own characteristic. We can give it another name, but the charactreistic of hardness cannot be changed. It is a ruupa appearing now through the bodysense. Seeing is always seeing. We can change the name, but the charactreitsic does not change. If we understand this, we begin to see the difference between conventional realities and paramattha dhammas. That is a first step. We begin to understand what the object of awareness is: not aperson or thing, but a dhamma appearing one at a time through one of the six doors. ------- > T: Neither do I see why such understanding of the present-moment > realities > (six sense-objects) is the same as the "paññå of the noble eightfold > Path", nor do I see how this understanding is related to the eight > Path factors. -------- N: A beginning understanding can develop to become right view of the eightfold Path, but not immediately. It is supported by the other factors, but not all eight arise when the Path is mundane. Thus, when a nama or rupa appears, right thinking touches that object so that understanding of it can develop at that very moment. At the same time, sati is aware, non-forgetful of that object, and concentration focusses on it. There is also right effort, assisting the other factors. I am speaking now of one moment, it is all in one moment and the factors develop together. Nina. #76941 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 3:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re Asoka, mindfulness of breath. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Dieter) - In a message dated 9/30/2007 4:52:06 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear Dieter, As I said, I would return to you. I understand that some people (I do not say you) find that knowing when they breathe in and out long or short helps them to become more calm and feel better in body and mind. This is like yogha which can be very helpful. However, they do not see that the Buddha's teaching on mindfulness of breath is different. The aim is not feeling more calm and peaceful but detachment. There has to be understanding that precisely knows when there is citta with attachment and when there is kusala citta with detachment. ====================== Nina, you write "The aim is not feeling more calm and peaceful but detachment." Actually, the aim is bodily & emotional calm plus clarity & wisdom, together leading to relinquishment and detachment, and the end of suffering. The calm and wisdom are like two wings of the bird. Anapanasati is an in-tandem approach which cultivates both jhanas and insight, developing and strengthening both wings in the baby-bird, enabling it to leave the nest it clings to. With metta, Howard #76942 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pali grammar , to Scott. nilovg Dear Scott, Op 30-sep-2007, om 16:01 heeft Scott Duncan het volgende geschreven: > Scott: Would the below be a statement about causation? > > Indriyasa.mvare bhikkhave asati indriyasa.mvaravipannassa > hatuupanisa.m hoti siila.m. > > Without indriyasa.mvara there can be no siila - since 'hoti' is used > (bhavati). Then siila is removed or doesn't arise or come to be > (hatuupanisa.m hoti) as effect when there is no (asanti) > indriyasa.mvara (or sati) to condition it. > > Is that getting closer? ------ N: Yes. The asati: when there is no indriyasa.mvara.. this gives a causation. It is rather strong, but there are just six doors through which objects are experienced, and on account of these there may be akusala or restraint from akusala. This theme is repeated in many suttas: when there is seeing of visible object there may be unwise attention or wise attention. One may be overcome by objects, or a . Nina. #76943 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re Asoka, mindfulness of breath. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 30-sep-2007, om 16:10 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Nina, you write "The aim is not feeling more calm and peaceful but > detachment." Actually, the aim is bodily & emotional calm plus > clarity & wisdom, > together leading to relinquishment and detachment, and the end of > suffering. > The calm and wisdom are like two wings of the bird. Anapanasati is an > in-tandem approach which cultivates both jhanas and insight, > developing and > strengthening both wings in the baby-bird, enabling it to leave the > nest it clings > to. --------- N: I agree, calm and insight are also called two helpers. But the person who develops both samatha and vipassana has to have strong pa~n~naa and clearly know what type of citta arises at a given moment: kusala citta or akusala citta with clinging, even a very subtle clinging to bliss. If he does not then he is on the wrong way. But you also mention that clinging has to be relinquished. A great difficulty is that Breath is such an exceedingly subtle subject, fit for Mahaapurisas. Fit for people with great capacities who could reach arahatship in that very life with all the high distinctions, including the four patisambhidas, discriminations. Nina. #76944 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:29 am Subject: Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 indriyabala Dear Connie (& Scott), - Yes, it is clear that literally "indriyasa.mvara" does not mean "step by step". But the venerable bhikkhu had made his chose that, I think I understand, implies the sequential practice for developing sense restraint. C: I also think the soup image is more apt than the ladder one. More a matter of what's in the bowl, which changes with every spoonful or even just in sitting, than of reaching any heights... crossing the oceans and all, you know. Not much nurishment in ladders anyway. T: Interesting interpretation ! I also have another interpretation to add. Some persons (as told in the suttas) were knowledgable in the Teachings and the Dhamma-Vinaya. They were excellent teachers and capable of writing scholarly works, and could help their students to enter the Path, but they did not penetrate the Four Noble Truths themselves. As such they may be compared to the soup spoons that hang in there all day long. They transfer soup to nourish people, but they do not know the taste of the soup. Tep === #76945 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:34 am Subject: Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 .. Error Correction .. indriyabala Dear Connie and Scott, - Please delete the word "writing" from the paragraph below. Thanks. T: Interesting interpretation ! I also have another interpretation to add. Some persons (as told in the suttas) were knowledgable in the Teachings and the Dhamma-Vinaya. They were excellent teachers and capable of writing scholarly works, and could help their students to enter the Path, but they did not penetrate the Four Noble Truths themselves. Tep === #76946 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 3:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re Asoka, mindfulness of breath. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 9/30/2007 10:23:35 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: A great difficulty is that Breath is such an exceedingly subtle subject, fit for Mahaapurisas =============================== It appears to work well for this culapurisa (proper Pali for "lesser person"?) also! With metta, Howard #76947 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:14 am Subject: Re: Puggala pa~n~natti indriyabala Dear Nina, - I am contented that our discussions now have become smoother than ever. Thank you for giving the kinder and more flexible consideration to what I wrote. > N: First your remark: in the citta" cannot be separated from individuals (persons).> > In so far as accumulations of this or of that individual are not > the same. Can we say: there are different streams of cittas? T: Well, that doesn't hurt. That is fine as long as we do not completely rule out the (continuously changing) bodies in which the fleeting streams of cittas reside. > N: Then you say: (puggala) exist together in a given moment. How nice!> > The word exist was discussed elsewhere on this list and I could not > follow all. I am hesitant about the word 'exist', it can be > interpreted differently. > Shall we say, if you like, the persons are > shadows of the paramattha dhammas? > I like the idea of shadow and it is according to the Co. > When there can be consideration of the present moment, there need > not be so much trouble as to formulations and terms. For this > subject I shall pay attention to your other post with your good > remarks and questions. T: I must acknowledge that you (so far) are the only true-blue Abhidhamma expert in this group who has begun to partially accept my "different perspective" (somewhat like a Republican President appoints a Democrat senator as his cabinet member). That is a great beginning. The coined word "shadow of the paramattha dhammas" indicates that partial acceptance, which is better than a complete rejection. Indeed, I do not have any "view" to call "mine" anyway. So, why not ! Yes, Nina, you may replace "existing" with "shadow of the paramattha dhammas" if you feel more comfortable with it. Thank you very much for the (kusala) intention to pay attention to my other post. Tep === #76948 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:30 am Subject: Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 scottduncan2 Dear Tep, Thanks for the reply: T: "...Some persons (as told in the suttas) were knowledgeable in the Teachings and the Dhamma-Vinaya. They were excellent teachers and capable of scholarly works, and could help their students to enter the Path, but they did not penetrate the Four Noble Truths themselves. As such they may be compared to the soup spoons that hang in there all day long. They transfer soup to nourish people, but they do not know the taste of the soup." Scott: connie (the wee spud) may have gone underground again , Tep, so you might be stuck with me. The thesis seems to present itself that, somehow, a 'scholarly' approach is antithetical a penetration of the Four Noble Truths. Let's say that studying words expressing the Dhamma is like hearing words expressing the Dhamma. We can't listen to a Buddha now. We can read what a Buddha taught though. But this isn't that simple, it seems to me. Take, for example: "If there is no self control, O monks, then the basis for virtue is destroyed for one who lacks self control..." Scott: If one just reads this particular translation, without study, then what one thinks the Buddha one thinks that the Buddha taught about something called 'self control'. As I said, it is clear that this is actually an editorial via translation, no matter who translates. A little study, (necessary, I would think for us with few accumulations and no living Buddha,) shows otherwise. As Nina was kind enough to assist me, the Pali: "Indriyasa.mvare bhikkhave asati indriyasa.mvaravipannassa hatuupanisa.m hoti siila.m." This can be studied. A little scholarly research. I guess it is an assumption that this is closer to the Buddha's words, but let's make it. Here's my rudimentary attempt at rendering the above: Me: "Without indriyasa.mvara there can be no siila - since 'hoti' is used (bhavati). Then siila is removed or doesn't arise or come to be (hatuupanisa.m hoti) as effect when there is no (asanti) indriyasa.mvara (or sati) to condition it." Scott: Tep, there is no reference to 'self' or 'self control' anywhere in the above. Conditionality - the great and deep teaching of a Buddha - suffuses the statement. And dhammas conditioning other dhammas in different ways. No 'self control'. I can't accept the perspective you offer on this, Tep, but it is not personal (as you must know sooner or later) it is simply a matter of having a different view which is presented in opposition to the one you happen to espouse. No big deal. Sincerely, Scott. #76949 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:32 am Subject: Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 nichiconn Dear Tep, Tep: ...Some persons (as told in the suttas) were knowledgable in the Teachings and the Dhamma-Vinaya. They were excellent teachers and capable of scholarly works, and could help their students to enter the Path, but they did not penetrate the Four Noble Truths themselves. As such they may be compared to the soup spoons that hang in there all day long. They transfer soup to nourish people, but they do not know the taste of the soup. Connie: Your soupspoon reminds me of the two biggest things I remember a couple of things from high school Spanish. Anque la mona se vista de seda, mona se queda. Altho the monkey dresses in silk, it is still a monkey. De la mano a la boca, se pierde la sopa. Between the hand and the mouth, the soup is lost. I guess one should be more concerned about eating from an empty spoon than with how the emperor dresses. peace, connie #76950 From: "nidive" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re Asoka, mindfulness of breath. nidive Hi Nina, > N: I agree, calm and insight are also called two helpers. But the > person who develops both samatha and vipassana has to have strong > pa~n~naa and clearly know what type of citta arises at a given > moment: kusala citta or akusala citta with clinging, even a very > subtle clinging to bliss. If he does not then he is on the wrong > way. I can't make sense of what you are saying. If one develops only vipassana without samatha, does it mean that one doesn't need to have strong panna and doesn't need to clearly know what type of citta is arising at a given moment? Surely not? Is the percentage of "going wrong" higher for one who practises samatha in tandem with vipassana than for one who practises only vipassana? How so? Swee Boon #76951 From: Sobhana Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:45 am Subject: Re: New Photos! :) shennieca Hiya James, I'm glad you enjoyed the photos. :) Please post more photos of DSG grp gatherings! #76952 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:49 am Subject: Re: Conditions, Ch 15, no 9. indriyabala Dear Nina, - While reading your replies to the questions I had asked, I recalled that we had discussed the same issue a few years ago (I cannot recall the message numbers, though). This time I think I have a clear understanding. So, either you explain now better than before, or I have become wiser (or both). So this is what I think I understand you were saying : -- The "paññå of the noble eightfold Path" to be developed here is at the beginning; it is the same as the right view of the noble eightfold Path. The Path has not been entered yet. -- Even at the beginning the right view development must be supported by the other Path factors such as samma-sankappa (right thinking), samma vayama(right effort) and some degree of samma-sati with samma- samaadhi. -- All of the supporting "samma" factors arise at the same instant with the development of this right view. -- The "vehicle" for developing the baby right view is the contemplation(vipassana) or mindfulness of nama and rupa in the present moment. -- The mindfulness of nama and rupa in the present moment must be supported by an "opportunity for abstention of wrong speech, action or livelihood". Is my understanding above acceptably correct? Tep === #76953 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 9:02 am Subject: Re: New Photos! indriyabala >James: > I also enjoyed seeing the photos of Elaine, her cats and husband, > and Evie. Tep, where is your picture?? ;-)) > T: You still remember what we talked about long time ago? That is called 'Sati', James. I took a second look at my home-made photos by a (cheap) Webcam, and I don't like them. They are blurred (the eyes look like I had been crying all night) and only the face is shown. So I like to skip this opportunity and wait till I have another photo made by a professional. Let me know about any specific features the photo should have (e.g. dimensions, resolution, digital or conventional). Thanks, James. Tep === #76954 From: "Evie" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 10:03 am Subject: Re: New Photos! eviebgreen Dear Sarah, Always nice to receive compliments on pictures. I really enjoy being able to introduce myself to people and make new and interesting friends. I consider every one here an online friend or as some may find more appropriate because I have not been here that long, more as an acquaintance. Either way, it is nice to be able to have people to talk to, and a place where my thoughts and ideas are welcomed. Take care and have a great and peaceful rest of your weekend. -Evelyn PS- Photography is one of my all time loves. I really enjoy being able to take photographs and for a long while it was going to be my career. If any one is interested I have my photography site on myspace and here is a link to it. http://www.myspace.com/photography_by_evelyn #76955 From: "Evie" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 10:27 am Subject: Using awareness and being mindful. eviebgreen I have always in my life tried my very best to be aware of my words and my actions. But not always using mindfulness as I should. When I was a teenager I was very blunt and very open with people, and sometimes depending on the person or situation I was hurtful as well when I used my very forward bluntness. The last ten years of my life I have learned so much by my own experiences. Some people that I know do not believe in the laws of karma, but I do because of everything that I have gone through. If I still did not believe in karma then I would be so closed minded and lost, it would so be unfortunate that I would not of learned from my words and actions. Fortunately though, I do understand the laws of karma and because of everything I have experienced in my life I have become a better person. Using awareness and being mindful of others is a great and wonderful thing. It was not until recently this year that I began to pay attention to my actions and the words that I used. I began to pay attention to what is going on in my life and how I approach different situations. I began to try to let go of the anger and hate that was attached to me like glue. I began to bring forgiveness, more love and caring, being more giving and sharing, and happiness into my life. So many people live their lives and do not realize that in a way, they are like children who have never grown up. Not thinking before they talk, not thinking before they act, not thinking before the reflex takes over and does whatever is normal, whatever is regular to them. If you take the time to notice and realize your life around you, you will see the bad habits that you have acquired over the years. It is difficult to break these bad habits and do different things because we are used to doing things a certain way in our lives. But if we recognize our actions and our words then we will have that awareness that we need towards being more mindful of ourselves and others. I have learned so much this last year and especially these last few months. This last month I have learned about where and how Buddhism began. I have learned about the many different countries have have Buddhism and how they are different from others. How in America is it the least recognized "religion" spirituality. Once people obtain this type of lifestyle I believe that Buddhism can make a person happier and healthier. I look forward to reading more of what is written here but know that the best way for myself to learn is to experience every thing first hand myself. I can read about Buddhism for the rest of my life, but if I do not meditate, if I do not practice the ways of being a Buddhist... if I do not do then I am not what I say I am, which is a Buddhist. I have read that in order to experience awareness and mindfulness, in order to experience enlightenment towards nirvana... one must practice meditation. In order to understand these things and experience these things, one must experience it themselves. Having enlightenment is not something that can be written about but something that you must experience yourself. And as I repeat myself there in a few sentences I can see how much different and how much better and happier of a person that I am now in my life. I am living in the moment and being in the now. Seizing the day. It is a difficult thing to do if you have always been the type of person to hold onto the past and look to the future. But if you are doing those things then it is difficult to recognize the present that you are living in. I believe in living in the moment, but I also recognize my future. My future is what ever I shape it to be, my future is open to whatever I make it to be. My future will be good. I will write more later, but for now I will end my writing. Take care every one and have a great and wonderful, peaceful day. -Evelyn #76956 From: Dieter Möller Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re Asoka, mindfulness of breath. moellerdieter Dear Nina ( and Howard), thank you for your feedback. Following my understanding: you wrote: 'As I said, I would return to you. I understand that some people (I do not say you) find that knowing when they breathe in and out long or short helps them to become more calm and feel better in body and mind. This is like yogha which can be very helpful. However, they do not see that the Buddha's teaching on mindfulness of breath is different. ' D: I think the helpfulness of being mindful of one's breathing has been long known before the Buddha and it is applied by other schools of teaching too, but certainly it has refined by him. Breathing in long, he understands: 'I breathe in long'; or breathing out long, he understands: 'I breathe out long.' Breathing in short, he understands: 'I breathe in short'; or breathing out short he understands 'I breathe out short'. stands at the beginning of developing /cultivation mindfulness of breathing. N: The aim is not feeling more calm and peaceful but detachment. There has to be understanding that precisely knows when there is citta with attachment and when there is kusala citta with detachment. D: Nina you mix means and ends: it is the peaceful calm mind and the rapture (detached for this moment,kusala citta) associated with it , that allows us to work with the mind.. Detachment in general and lasting , means liberating from the 10 fetters step by step , a gradual process we achieve by practising the NEP. N: In the Buddha's time many people understood what he taught. In this time we are bound to have more misunderstandings when reading suttas D: talking about my experience: the more I read about commentaries /interpretations of the suttas , misunderstandings /confusion seem to be on the rise, ie. I think that most suttas can be clearly understood , a base understanding of the 4 N.T. assumed . N: Today Jon said that the Buddha did not teach just bare siila for its own sake, that it has to go along with satipatthana. The same can be said about samatha. He taught mindfulness of breath that had to go along with 'the four frames of references', that is, the four Applications of Mindfulness. D: one of the many things I love with Buddhism , is -that unlike other teachings- the why of moral /sila is explained. Sila, (samatha as part of ) Samadhi and Panna are not taught for its own sake , but for the aim of liberation, cessation of suffering, nibbana. The Four Applications of Mindfulness- the 7th step- are part of the (samadhi) path training. N: You recently quoted a text I had given about right concentration: the "Kindred Sayings" (V, Mahå-vagga, XLV, Kindred Sayings on the Way, Ch III, Perversion, § 8, Concentration) D: I took the chance of your quotation to refer to the mundane and super/supra mundane understanding of the Noble Path ( in line with MN 117). The latter the Ariyan, the Holy Noble Path.. N: I quote a text and some posts by Jon I got from Rob K's study forum. MN 44 Culavedalla Sutta "Now what is concentration, lady, what qualities are its themes, what qualities are its requisites, and what is its development?" "Singleness of mind is concentration, friend Visakha; the four frames of reference are its themes; the four right exertions are its.. snip' D: yes.. (?) N: Jon: The 'point' of the sutta on mindfulness of in and out breathing is to illustrate how jhana with breath as object can be a basis for insight. In other words, how those who are advanced in the development of *both* samatha and vipassana can attain to enlightenment that is based on jhana. .. D: no objection.. N: Jon: Note the wording here, "brings the four frames of reference [four arousings of mindfulness] to their culmination". To bring something to its culmination is not the same as developing it from scratch, and I see the emphasis in the sutta as being very much on describing the final stages of development for those ready to achieve enlightenment in that very lifetime. Hence the description of the (hypothetical) monk who has already developed samatha (and satipatthana) to a high degree D: to bring something to its culmination needs a beginning 'from scratch' , doesn't it? The journey of onethousand miles starts with the first step.. we, somewhere between can only do out best to reach that..and if not now , this very lifetime , we have the confidence that our endeavours carry fruits for the next , haven't we? N: Jon: Mindfulness/awareness refers to moments of consciousness that directly experience a dhamma. The direct experience of a dhamma, is the basis for the panna (wisdom, insight) that sees the dhamma as it truly is, that sees the characteristics of the dhamma. It is by seeing dhammas as they truly are that attachment to them and to existence is eventually eradicated. D: the process is described e.g. by S.N. in repect to D.O. : ....birth - suffering - faith - gladness - rapture-calmness -happiness- concentration -knowledhe and insight as they are - disenchantment- dispassion - liberation - destruction of the outflows ( transl. P.A.Payutto)... N: Jon: In the context of 'mindfulness of breathing', this means mindfulness of one of the dhammas that we take for breathing, and the development of insight that arises based on that mindfulness. That insight is, of course, vipassana. However, 'mindfulness of breathing' can also refer to breath as an object of samatha development, and so it can also mean jhana based on breath as object. Now, jhana in and of itself is not something that leads to insight/enlightenment, nor is it even something that makes insight easier or more likely to occur. Yes, it is kusala accompanied by panna, but the panna is not the panna that sees the true nature of dhammas. While vipassana and samatha both involve the development of panna, it is panna of different levels and they lead to different goals. D: in my opinion a bit too complicated ..we cannot separate samatha and vipassana .. both are working as a tandem . The Jhanas ( the 8th Path factor) developed as part of the samadhi training , leads us to the panna part ( the first and second path factor).. I do not see what different levels of panna , which depend on the progress of the training, have to do with different goals.. N: I would add:the bhikkhus the sutta was addressed to were highly adept, they were arahats or they had accumulations to attain arahatship. D: where is that said in the sutta? And even if it were so, what you believe that the Buddha did not intend to address those monks for the purpose of instructing less advanced Bhikkhus? see e.g. : ( 5] The Bhikkhus of the countryside heard: "The Blessed One will wait there at Savatthi for the Komudi full moon of the fourth month." And the Bhikkhus of the countryside left in due course for Savatthi to see the Blessed One. 6] And the elder Bhikkhus still more intensively taught and instructed new Bhikkhus; some elder Bhikkhus taught and instructed ten new Bhikkhus, some elder Bhikkhus taught and instructed twenty. . . thirty. . . forty new Bhikkhus. And the new Bhikkhus, taught and instructed by the elder Bhikkhus, achieved successive stages of high distinction. 7] On that occasion -- the Uposatha day of the fifteenth, the full-moon night of the Komudi full moon of the fourth month -- the Blessed One was seated in the open surrounded by the Sangha of Bhikkhus. Then, surveying the silent Sangha of Bhikkhus, he addressed them thus: snip N:We read even after the first tetrad (Of mindfulness of breath) in the Visuddhimagga: QUOTE After he has thus reached the four noble paths in due succession and has become established in the fruition of arahatship, he at last attains to the nineteen kinds of ³Reviewing Knowledge², and he becomes fit to receive the highest gifts from the world with its deities. the Visuddhimagga Viii QUOTE Vis. VIII< 211: "Although any meditation subject, no matter what, is successful only in one who is mindful and fully aware, yet any meditation subject other than this one gets more evident as he goes on giving it his attention. But this mindfulness of breathing is difficult, difficult to develop, a field in which only the minds of Buddhas, paccekabuddhas and Buddhas sons are at home. It is no trivial matter, nor can it be cultivated by trivial persons.." D: perhaps it is meant that 'culmination ' of the development of mindfulness of breathing is the field Arahats..but even then Buddhagosa's commentary should be treated with caution until canonical sources confirm that . The statement that the practise of mindfulness cannot be cultivated by trivial persons, is questionable until the term 'trivial persons' is defined (see Howard's comment of the lesser people)... And we must not forget : the Maha Satipatthana Sutta starts with mindfulness of breathing .. Nina, please reconsider ..your point of view in respect to the samadhi path training takes some of the credibility you otherwise may deserve for your endeavours to explain the Abhidhamma. with Metta Dieter #76957 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:14 am Subject: Re: An Introduction to Buddhism- 1 indriyabala Dear Scott, - My soup-spoon simile was told to Connie. >Tep: "...Some persons (as told in the suttas) were knowledgeable in the Teachings and the Dhamma-Vinaya. They were excellent teachers and capable of scholarly works, and could help their students to enter the Path, but they did not penetrate the Four Noble Truths themselves. As such they may be compared to the soup spoons that hang in there all day long. They transfer soup to nourish people, but they do not know the taste of the soup." .............. And you wrote: Scott: The thesis seems to present itself that, somehow, a 'scholarly' approach is antithetical a penetration of the Four Noble Truths. Let's say that studying words expressing the Dhamma is like hearing words expressing the Dhamma. We can't listen to a Buddha now. We can read what a Buddha taught though. T: Have you ever stop to think for a moment that maybe you are a little too sensitive and therefore may see words that I did not write? My story about the old-time monk-teachers was not aiming to criticize anyone. Indeed these venerables enjoyed learning and teaching much more than seeking solitude(viveka), dispassion(viraga). and cessation(nirodha). That's their students soon graduated as arahants, but the teachers still were busy teaching new monks years after years. ............ T: In another post for Connie to read I sent your post without any comment on the sutta translation : >Tep: A severe rot in the metta & karuna rungs probably makes the ladder too weak to support the climber's weight when she tries to directly jump up to the upekkha rung ! Some imaginative climber may even start at the upekkha rung (in her mind), ignoring the ladder's reality in the real world. In the same token, a meditator who starts at the "understanding" level may actually "fall down" from the ivory tower because she lacks the solid support of virtue plus some concentration. Please read the following most-recent post #76881 by Scott. ................. Dear Phil and Nina, This is interesting: AN VI, 50, which BB entitles "Step by Step" "If there is no self control, O monks, then the basis for virtue is destroyed for one who lacks self control. If there is no virtue, then the basis for right concentration is destroyed for one who lacks virtue. If there is no right concentration, then the basis for knowledge and visions of things as they really are is destroyed for one who lacks right concentration." ................ T: Self control above is from indriyasa.mvara, and it was translated as "sense restraint" by other translators. Sincerely, I have no idea why you wrote me back about "self control" in the following post. ........................... Scott (#76948): But this isn't that simple, it seems to me. Take, for example: "If there is no self control, O monks, then the basis for virtue is destroyed for one who lacks self control..." Scott: If one just reads this particular translation, without study, then what one thinks the Buddha one thinks that the Buddha taught about something called 'self control'. As I said, it is clear that this is actually an editorial via translation, no matter who translates. A little study, (necessary, I would think for us with few accumulations and no living Buddha,) shows otherwise. As Nina was kind enough to assist me, the Pali: "Indriyasa.mvare bhikkhave asati indriyasa.mvaravipannassa hatuupanisa.m hoti siila.m." This can be studied. A little scholarly research. I guess it is an assumption that this is closer to the Buddha's words, but let's make it. Here's my rudimentary attempt at rendering the above: Me: "Without indriyasa.mvara there can be no siila - since 'hoti' is used (bhavati). Then siila is removed or doesn't arise or come to be (hatuupanisa.m hoti) as effect when there is no (asanti) indriyasa.mvara (or sati) to condition it." Scott: Tep, there is no reference to 'self' or 'self control' anywhere in the above. Conditionality - the great and deep teaching of a Buddha - suffuses the statement. And dhammas conditioning other dhammas in different ways. No 'self control'. I can't accept the perspective you offer on this, Tep, but it is not personal (as you must know sooner or later) it is simply a matter of having a different view which is presented in opposition to the one you happen to espouse. No big deal. ................................... T: It is a good Pali lesson. Thanks. I did not give Connie my view on self control either. I would prefer sense restraint meaning restraint on seeing, hearing, ...., thinking such that there is no way akusala citta may arise through sensing at the six doors. So what perspective you are infering, my good man? Tep === #76958 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Controversy? dcwijeratna Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for your detailed response to my e-m. Below are some responses to some selected issues raised by you. ========== > DC: > > Our understanding is that kamma is distinct from cetana. .... >S: Just out of inteterest, who is 'we' here and below? DC: I am sorry, I used it really to mean 'I' and 'me'. I thought it is more polite to speak that way. May be a Ceylonism. So you can substitute "I" for "we." ========== >Sarah: >We understand > it this way because "I declare, O Bhikkhus, that volition (cetanaa) is > Kamma. Having willed one acts by body , speech and thought." (AN iii) > [cetanaaha.m bhikkhave vadaami kamma.m, cetayitvaa karoti kamma.m > kaayena, vvacaaya manasaa] .... >S: I would have thought this supported my comment above. DC: What I wanted to draw your attention is to the second sentence above: "Having willed one acts ..." This makes "willing" and "action" two different things. First is an action completed prior to the action. It is necessary to use the complete Paali sentence and not a part of it. And nothing should be interpreted out of context. ========= > Sarah: See also, under 'Karma' in Nyantiloka's dictionary, (widely-used in Sri Lanka for several decades now:-)) and tell me if you disagree with it: DC: Ven. Nyanatiloka is a venerable bhikkhu for whom I have the highest respect. Because of reverence to him, I am really not very happy to discuss this issue. Having said that, the answer to your request is: "Yes, I disagree." Given below are some points on which I disagree. >Sarah: 'action', correctly speaking denotes the wholesome and unwholesome volitions (kusala- and akusala-cetanaa) and their concomitant mental factors, causing rebirth and shaping the destiny of beings.[BD] DC: This is an Abhidhammic analysis and has no relevance. The language of the passage under discussion is "vohara." ======== > Sarah: Thus the Buddhist term 'karma' by no means signifies the result of actions, and quite certainly not the fate of man, or perhaps even of whole nations (the so-called wholesale or mass-karma), misconceptions which, through the influence of theosophy, have become widely spread in the West. [BD] DC: What the passage here says is: karma by no means signifies the result of actions. We certainly agree with that--One is kamma and the other is vipaaka or phala. This is clearly explained in the Anguttara passage that you have quoted (A. IV.63). ========= >S: In the Dhp verse, when it says mano (mind, i.e citta) is the forerunner, it is referring to how citta/mano is the 'chief' which leads the accompanying cetasikas. One of these cetasikas is cetanaa. The Dhp. verse is not referring to rupas at all and neither is cetanaa/kamma. When kusala/akusala cetanaa is of sufficient strength, however, with the necessary factors in place, there may be then kamma-patha, with action through body, speech or mind. Clearly, with regard to action through body or speech, as you suggest, rupas conditioned by the mind and cetanaa are involved. DC: I must start with this preface: Citta, cetasika is Abhidhammic analysis and as I mentioned earlier it is not relevant here. But just to show the basis of my comment: mano, citta and vi~n~naa.na are used in the Suttas interchangeably. It is a mere name or a designation. These are terms used in the sutta pi.taka to denote what in English is called the mind. In the pancakkhandha analysis it is divided into, vedanaa, sa~n~naa.. etc. Reference "it is referring to ....cetasikas". This is your own interpretation and cannot be considered a literal translation of the Paali verse. The rest of the statements are more or less the same. ..... > :Sarah Action and > "vedanaa" Two separate and distinct dimensions of naama-ruupa. I hope I > have made myself clear. .... S: I'm sorry, but you'd have to clarify what the nama is here and what the rupa. Again, I'd be glad to know of the source and where the idea comes from. DC: Namaa-ruupa is what is sometimes called psycho-physical-personality. A common example is a human being. It is a composite whole. You cannot separate into further components except for the purposes of understanding. Please see pa.ticca-samuppada. It is what is called dukkhakkhanda or pancuppaadaanakkhandha. In normal English usage naama is the mind and the ruupa is the body and naamaruupa is the mind-body complex. Please note this is one of the most fundamental differences of Buddhism from other religions. For example, all religions (Dhamma is not a religions), postulate, a soul, atma, self or some other abiding entity) but not Buddhism. All this is common knowledge. And I am sure you don't require any references for them. ========== S: Again, I wonder about the 'we'. There is kamma, i.e cetanaa, but not kamma-patha. Again, pls see Nyantiloka's dictionary under 'kamma-patha' : "kamma-patha DC: kamma patha and kamma are obviously two different things and has no relevance to the subject under discussion. ======== S: I've written posts with quotes on the meaning of 'Buddha-vacana' and references to the origins of the Abhidhamma. I can add many quotes from the Abhidhamma and commentaries which give very precise detail on kamma, but I know you may not be interested in them, which is why I've quoted from the suttas Nyantiloka refers to. DC: Here I must admit I made a mistake. What I wanted to convey was the fact I used only information from the First four nikayas and some texts from Khuddhaka Nikaya such as Sutta-Nipata. These texts are now considered to be the oldest and that is the closest we can get to the original teachings of the Buddha. The basic reason for this is the close agreement between the Chinese Agamas and Pali Nikayas. It is part of the general knowledge of Buddhism as taught in universities. So please consider the word Buddha-vacana as withdrawn. >S: You mentioned the understandings of modern scholars or historians before, but exactly what are their sources? Often, it seems, the sources are just the works of other scholars and historians, with occasional cherry-picking from the ancient commentaries, just when it suits. DC: Basically textual comparisons. Compare the Chinese text with the corresponding text. If you wish to contradict that you need to compare them yourself and show that they are wrong. ========== >S: I perfectly understand and appreciate your keen interest in the teachings. In fact it is in Sri Lanka, as you know, that the Tipitaka and ancient commentaries have been so carefully preserved. So it surprises me, if it's true, that these important texts and teachings are rejected today even in universities, such as the one you attend, where there is such knowledge of Paali. My impression before when I spent time in Sri Lanka, was that there was keen interest in texts such as the Visuddhimagga. This was the support for the translation work too. This is why I'm asking for your clarifications on 'we', as you use it. DC: Did I say somewhere that that Tipitaka and commentaries are rejected by Sri Lankan Univerisites? I am extremely sorry if I had given that impression. Let me clearly state that anything I state here is my personal view and does not represent the view of any institution either lay or monstaic in this country. Now having said that let me give my views on the matter. 1. Sutta Pitaka--As mentioned earlier 2. Vinaya Pi.taka--Pa.timokkha are the rules laid down by the Buddha. But in the rest of the texts there are lot of later additions. Parivara a Sri Lankan addition. 3. Abhidhamma--Abhidhamma later. It has no relevance in understanding the teaching of the Buddha--the Noble-Eightfold Path. The Basic reason to leave out Abhidhamma Pi.taka is the fundamental differences between the Sarvastivaada abhidhamma and Pali Abhidhamma pi.taka. 4. Visuddhimagga is still the Bible for the monks and quite a few academics. Please do revert if I have made any more blunders. Metta, Sarah D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #76959 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:43 am Subject: Re: Citta scottduncan2 Dear Tep, I hope you don't mind me dragging this good point back into the discussion on citta: T: "...I would prefer sense restraint meaning restraint on seeing, hearing, ...., thinking such that there is no way akusala citta may arise through sensing at the six doors." Scott: Would it be fair to say that it is citta which is chief in such a moment of consciousness? If so, how would one describe such a moment? What might its constituents be? Sincerely, Scott. #76960 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Puggala pa~n~natti nilovg Dear Tep, Op 30-sep-2007, om 17:14 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > I must acknowledge that you (so far) are the only true-blue > Abhidhamma expert in this group who has begun to partially accept > my "different perspective" (somewhat like a Republican President > appoints a Democrat senator as his cabinet member). That is a great > beginning. > > The coined word "shadow of the paramattha dhammas" indicates that > partial acceptance, which is better than a complete rejection. -------- N: The shadow is from the Co and Sarah also quoted that. And Rob K before. It is nothing new. Just one remark that I must ponder over somewhat: Quote N: Can we say: there are different streams of cittas? T: Well, that doesn't hurt. That is fine as long as we do not completely rule out the (continuously changing) bodies in which the fleeting streams of cittas reside. ------- N: The cittas do not reside in a body. Cittas each have a physical base, seeing has eyesense as physical base. Both the seeing falls away but also the ruupa that is base falls away very soon. All the ruupas of the body, all of them, fall away each moment, there is nothing left of them. They are replaced by new ones all the time, and that is due to kamma, citta, temperature and nutrition which are the factors from which rupas originate. This makes us think that there is a whole body that lasts a while. Cittas from birth to death are like an uninterrupted series, arising and falling away, succeeding one another. Since they succeed one another kusala and akusala can be accumulated. Nina. #76961 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 11:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New Photos! nilovg Dear Tep, you made me have such a good time, laughing. Maybe a friend can take your picture which you can send to James who can embellish it. Nina. Op 30-sep-2007, om 18:02 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > I took a second look at my home-made photos by a (cheap) Webcam, and I > don't like them. They are blurred (the eyes look like I had been > crying > all night) and only the face is shown. So I like to skip this > opportunity and wait till I have another photo made by a professional. > Let me know about any specific features the photo should have (e.g. > dimensions, resolution, digital or conventional). #76962 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 1:15 pm Subject: Re: Citta indriyabala Dear Scott, - Thank you for being cool and collected again. :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > I hope you don't mind me dragging this good point back into the > discussion on citta: > > T: "...I would prefer sense restraint meaning restraint > on seeing, hearing, ...., thinking such that there is no way akusala > citta may arise through sensing at the six doors." > > Scott: Would it be fair to say that it is citta which is chief in such a moment of consciousness? If so, how would one describe such a > moment? What might its constituents be? > T: Yes, absolutely, the "citta" is chief in every moment, no doubt. A moment to me is a 'time duration' in which a sense-door restraint is effective. I hesitate to use "time cross-section" that is defined for a single citta, because it is theoretically zero in duration. Sense restraint is not defined for a single citta, but rather by a stream of consciousness. What do you think? I don't know the answer to "What might its constituents be?" Tep === #76963 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 1:21 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: New Photos! indriyabala Dear Nina, - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Tep, > you made me have such a good time, laughing. > Maybe a friend can take your picture which you can send to James who > can embellish it. > Nina. T: That is a good idea, Nina. Yes, I am going to email the photos to James tonight. Thanks. Tep === #76964 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 1:40 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Puggala pa~n~natti indriyabala Dear Nina, - Thank you for taking time to write messages today. I know you are busy getting ready for a travel. > T: Well, that doesn't hurt. That is fine as long as we do not > completely rule out the (continuously changing) bodies in which the > fleeting streams of cittas reside. > ------- > N: The cittas do not reside in a body. Cittas each have a physical > base, seeing has eyesense as physical base. Both the seeing falls > away but also the ruupa that is base falls away very soon. All the > ruupas of the body, all of them, fall away each moment, there is > nothing left of them. They are replaced by new ones all the time, and that is due to kamma, citta, temperature and nutrition which are the factors from which rupas originate. This makes us think that there is a whole body that lasts a while. > Cittas from birth to death are like an uninterrupted series, arising and falling away, succeeding one another. Since they succeed one another kusala and akusala can be accumulated. T: Thank you this injection of pure Abhidhammic talk. The citta "phenomenon" you just described is not unlike the electron flow generation at a "generator base" inside a power generator of any electric utility. No electrons last while new ones are being rapidly generated, and we have electricity flows in cables to light up a whole city downstream. Tep === #76965 From: "shennieca" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 4:42 pm Subject: Re: New Photos! Hello Sarah shennieca Hello Sarah, How are you doing? I hope you're keeping well. Thank you for making DSG group a comfortable place to come to. The discussions here are thought-provoking and the people are sincere. This is a good place to discuss the Dhamma. :) Thank you for asking about me. I'm slowly getting used to living in Canada, I like it better now than before but I miss the year-long summer in Malaysia. My dear husband and in-laws are fine. I haven't seen my friend's MIL for a long time though. I still do not know how to 'convince' someone about no-creator God. Sometimes, I have some doubt about it myself, I feel that there must be a greater 'Force' that is present. I don't know if a creator God exist or not but I want to keep that option open, just in case there really is one. Do you have the sutta where the Buddha explicitly said that there is no creator God? It is really nice to see the pics of DSG members. :) I'd love to see the photos of your trip to India/Nepal. The photos that I've posted in DSG were taken in Vancouver, B.C, December last year. I'll try to post more recent photos next time. :D With metta, Elaine C Side note: Let's share some metta and karuna with the people of Burma, may there be peace in Burma soon. #76966 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:00 pm Subject: Re: Citta scottduncan2 Dear Tep, Thanks for the reply: T: "Yes, absolutely, the "citta" is chief in every moment, no doubt." Scott: Why do you place the word 'citta' between quotation marks? T: "A moment to me is a 'time duration' in which a sense-door restraint is effective. I hesitate to use "time cross-section" that is defined for a single citta, because it is theoretically zero in duration. Sense restraint is not defined for a single citta, but rather by a stream of consciousness. What do you think?" Scott: From whence comes this 'zero duration' concept? This may be an oxymoron used for some literary purpose but, even then, it is not a useful concept. I think that citta arises with function and effect then falls away. Since citta exists, there is no 'zero', is there? I think that the concept 'stream of consciousness' is being used to mean a whole or an entity. When citta arises with sati (to simplify) this is a moment of 'sense-restraint'. Then this citta with sati ceases. It is dependent on conditions whether the next citta also has sati and functions as 'sense restraint. There is no 'state' of 'sense restraint' that is other than one or a series of separate moments of consciousness consisting of citta with sati arising and ceasing. Sincerely, Scott. #76967 From: "R. K. Wijayaratne" Date: Sun Sep 30, 2007 4:52 pm Subject: One Useful Verse is Better than a Thousand Useless Verses * rwijayaratne Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammâ Sambuddhassa! <...> Taken from The Dhammapada1 Translated by Venerable K. Sri Dhammananda Commentary. Most of the words that are heard at the work place, at home, among friends, etc. fall into the category of useless words, or words of little value (movies, trips, gossip, etc.). To hear a single verse of the Buddha-Dhamma (Lord Buddha's teachings about the way things really are, or more simply, the Truth), which pacifies one's mind is more worthwhile than listening to a barrage of useless words all day long. SAHASSA VAGGA - THOUSANDS : ONE USEFUL VERSE IS BETTER THAN A THOUSAND USELESS VERSES Sahassam api ce gâthâ----- anattha padasamhitâ Ekam gâthâ padam seyyo----- Yam sutvâ upasammati(101) Better than a thousand verses, comprising useless words, is one beneficial single verse, by hearing which one is calmed. (101) Dhammapada, Verse 101 The fastest way to attain Arahanthood (Bâhiya) A group of merchants went out to sea in a boat; their boat was wrecked at sea and all except one died. The only survivor got hold of a plank and eventually came to land at the port of Suppâraka. As he was naked, he tied a piece of bark to his body, and sat in a place where people could see him. Passers-by gave him food; some thought that he was a holy man and paid respects to him. Some brought clothes for him to wear but he refused. fearing that by wearing clothes, people would give him less respect. Besides, because some said that he was an Arahant, he mistakenly came to think that he really was one. Thus, because he was a man of wrong views who was wearing a piece of bark as his clothing, he came to be known as Bâhiya Dârucîriya. At about this time, Maha Brahmâ, who had been his friend in one of his previous existences, saw him going astray and felt that it was his duty to put Bâhiya on the right path. So, Mahâ Brahma came to him in the night and said to him, 'Bâhiya, you are not an Arahant yet, and what is more, you do not have the qualities that make one an Arahant.' Faced with the truth, Bâhiya looked up at Mahâ Brahma and said, 'Yes, I must admit that I am not an Arahant, as you have said. I now realise that I have done a great mistake. But is there anyone in this world now who is an Arahant?' Mahâ Brahma then advised him to go and seek help from the Buddha who was staying in Sâvatthi. Bâhiya, realising the enormity of his guilt, felt very much distressed and travelled all the way to Sâvatthi to see the Buddha. Bâhiya found the Buddha going on an alms round with other bhikkhus and respectfully followed him. He pleaded with the Buddha to teach him the Dhamma, but the Buddha replied that since they were on an alms round it was not yet time for a religious discourse. And again, Bâhiya pleaded, 'Venerable Sir, one cannot know the danger to your life or to my life, so please teach me the Dhamma.' The Buddha knew that Bâhiya's mental faculties were not yet ready to completely realize the Dhamma. The Buddha also knew that Bâhiya's mind was not receptive at that time because he had just made the long journey and also because he was overwhelmed with joy at seeing him. The Enlightened One did not want to expound the Dhamma immediately but wanted him to calm down to enable him to absorb the Dhamma properly. Still, Bâhiya persistently pleaded. So, while standing on the road, the Buddha said to him, 'Bâhiya, when you see an object, be conscious of just the visible object; when you hear a sound, be conscious of just the sound; when you smell or taste or touch something, be conscious of just the smell, the taste or the touch; and when you think of anything, be conscious of just that mind-object.' Bâhiya did as he was told and because of his deep concentration, the accumulated kammic force of his past good deeds became dominant and he attained Arahanthood. He asked permission from the Buddha to join the Order. The Buddha told him to first collect the robes, the bowl and other requisites of a bhikkhu. On his way to get them, he was attacked by an animal and died. When the Buddha and the other bhikkhus came out after having had their meal, they found Bâhiya lying dead on the road. As instructed by the Buddha, the bhikkhus cremated the body of Bâhiya and his ashes were enshrined in a stupa. Back at the Jetava monastery, the Buddha told the bhikkhus that Bâhiya had attained Nibbâna. He also told them that as far as the time factor was concerned in attaining Insight (abhiññâ) Bâhiya was the fastest, the best. The bhikkhus were puzzled by the statement made by the Buddha and they asked him how and when Bâhiya had become an Arahant. To this, the Buddha replied, 'Bâhiya attained Arahanthood while he was listening to my instructions given to him on the road when we were on the alms round.' The bhikkhus wondered how one could attain Arahanthood after listening to just a few words of the Dhamma. So, the Buddha told them that the number of words or the length of a speech does not matter if it was beneficial to someone. Notes 1. Dhammapada verses and stories are especially suitable for children. See an online versions here http://www.geocities.com/ekchew.geo/dhammapada.htm , here http://www.mettanet.org/english/Narada/index.htm and here http://www.buddhanet.net/dhammapada/ <...> #76968 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 1:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Puggala pa~n~natti dcwijeratna Dear Tep, This is with regard to a message that you addressed to Nina. I hope you would excuse my intrusion. Here is the passage I am interested in: "T: Thank you this injection of pure Abhidhammic talk. The citta "phenomenon" you just described is not unlike the electron flow generation at a "generator base" inside a power generator of any electric utility. No electrons last while new ones are being rapidly generated, and we have electricity flows in cables to light up a whole city downstream." I have seen "electrons" and "electricity", if my memory serves me right, in some of your earlier communications. Now, my question is: What is an electron? I'll give my thesis: It is a figment of one's imagination. Reason: There are descriptions of the electron as a particle or as a wave. So what is your reaction? The Abhidhamma is beyond me. But this sort of stuff--electricity and electrons--I have some familiarity. Lots of mettaa, D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #76969 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 2:11 am Subject: Q. Re: [dsg] Conditions, Ch 15, no 5. nilovg Dear DC, Op 30-sep-2007, om 8:15 heeft DC Wijeratna het volgende geschreven: > 1. The first sentence of this para is: "The path-factor sammå- > ditthi can have many degrees. > It can be > (1) intellectual understanding of kusala and akusala and their > results, > > (2) or paññå which directly understands kusala as kusala and > akusala as > akusala, > > (3) or right understanding of nåma and rúpa as non-self." > > So you have given three defintions of Pa~n~naa. At least, that is > the way I understand your statement. ------- N: The path-factor sammaadi.t.thi is dealt with here in the context of magga-paccaya, path-condition. Thus in a wider sense, including not only samma-di.t.thi of the noble eightfold Path. That is why I mentioned different degrees as above. --------- > > My questions: > 1. What is the difference between "intellectual understanding and > "pa~n~naa which directly knows"? --------- N: Before there can be direct understanding of nama and rupa as dhammas, non-self, there has to be understanding of the level of pariyatti. One has to understand that only one dhamma at a time appears through one of the six doors. One has to understand that any reality appearing in daily life can be the object of mindfulness and understanding, no matter how unpleasant it is, no matter how unwholesome it is. Whatever appears does so because it has conditions for its arising. We may read this, ponder over it, but it takes a long time before it sinks in. When understanding of the level of pariyatti matures, there are conditions for direct awareness of realities that appear at this very moment. Then there is pa.tipatti and this can lead to pativedha, the realisation of the truth. ----------- > > DC: 2. When you give "pa~n~naa understands" You attribute to > pa~n~naa the nature of a being (attaa.) Compare with "he understands". --------- N: On the contrary, it is the function of pa~n~naa to understand. Not 'I understand'. However, there must also be awareness of pa~n~naa when it arises, so that it can be understood as a mere dhamma, no self who understands. -------- > > DC: 3 ((3) or right understanding of nåma and rúpa as non-self). > Number (3), according to the sutta pi.taka is understod by an > arahant. (Again my understanding) How can it be a sammaa di.t.thi? > If we agree with this definition, then we have the situation of > Samma ditthi is equal to arahanthood. That I am sure is not your > intention. -------- N: In the course of the development of insight there is a gradual penetration of the three general characteristics of realities: aniccaaa, dukkha and anattaa. Even at the very beginning we learn to see the realities that appear as just a dhamma, and that means: as not a person, not a being, not self. But there cannot be clear understanding of anatta yet. It has to develop, even before enlightenment to the degree of sotaapanna. It is not so that only at the stage of the arahat the truth of anattaa is understood. > ------ > > DC:I understand that you are leaving for India. May you collect a > lot of merit when you there.May you have a safe and enjoyable trip. ------- N: Thank you very much for your good wishes DC, Nina. #76970 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 2:13 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 195, 196 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 195, 196 Intro: Consciousness, vi~n~naa.na, conditions naama and ruupa, and these are cetasikas and ruupas. In the previous section the maximum amount of dhammas (cetasikas and ruupas) conditioned by consciousness has been given, including sound, produced by citta and by temperature. In section 195 it is explained that sound is not always present, thus, citta and temperature do not condition sound all the time. In that case there are less dhammas conditioned by consciousness. In section 196 it is explained that the four factors that produce ruupas of the body support and consolidate one another in doing so. ---------- Text Vis.195: Or because sound is not regularly present since it is only sometimes manifested, subtracting it therefore as twofold [being temperature-originated and consciousness-originated], there are these ninety-seven states to be understood as 'mentality-materiality with consciousness as condition' in all beings, according as it happens to be produced. ------- N: As we have seen (Vis. 194), Kamma produces at most seven decads, and in addition to these seventy ruupas, nutrition can produce an octad, a unit of eight ruupas. Moreover, temperature and citta can also produce each a unit of nine ruupas consisting of the eight inseparable ruupas and sound. Thus, in that case twentysix ruupas are reckoned in addition to the seventy ruupas and these are with the three naama-khandhas (cetasikas) altogether ninety-nine dhammas. When sound is not present, temperature and citta produce octads instead of nonads with sound. In that case sound produced by temperature and sound produced by citta are subtracted and thus there are ninety-seven dhammas in all. --------- Text Vis.: For whether these beings are sleeping or idling or eating or drinking, these states keep on occurring in them day and night with consciousness as condition. And we shall explain later how they have consciousness as their condition (see par. 200ff.). ---------- Text Vis.: 196. Now although this kamma-born materiality is the first to find a footing in the several kinds of becoming, generation, destiny, station of consciousness, and abode of beings, it is nevertheless unable to carry on without being consolidated by the former. ------- N: As we have seen, the three kinds of becoming (bhava) are birth in sensuous planes, birth in ruupa-brahma planes and birth in aruupa- brahma planes. As to the ways of generation (yoni), there are beings who are egg- born, womb-born, putrescence- (moisture-) born, and of apparitional generation (M.i,73). As to destination (gati): birth is fivefold: in the hell planes, the animal world, the realm of the departed (petas or ghosts), the human world and the devaplanes. As to stations of consciousness (vi~n~naa.na.t.thiti) birth is sevenfold: seven variations are mentioned (in the Co. to the ‘Great Discourse on Causation”): There is diversity in body and in perception, and this pertains to humans, some devas (of the six classes which are of the sensesphere), and some spirits in lower realms. Then other variations are mentioned which pertain to different births as a result of different stages of ruupa-jhaana and aruupa-jhaana. As to the “abodes of beings” (sattaavaasa), this is eightfold. The abodes of beings are similar to the stations of consciousness, but as eighth is added: birth as result of the fourth aruupa jhaana: the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception. Ruupa produced by kamma needs the support of the other factors that originate ruupas: citta, temperature and nutrition, as the Tiika explains. The Tiika states that kamma-born ruupa by itself could only for a moment be established, and that it needs the support of the other three factors in order to carry on for a period of time. --------- Text Vis.: But when they thus give consolidating support to each other, they can stand up without falling, like sheaves of reeds propped together on all four sides, even though battered by the wind, and like [boats with] broken floats that have found a support, even though battered by waves somewhere in mid-ocean, and they can last one year, two years ... a hundred years, until those beings' life span or their merit is exhausted. This is how the exposition should be understood here 'by occurrence in becoming et cetera'. ------------------------ N: All ruupas of the body produced by the four factors fall away but if kamma were the only factor that produces ruupa, the body could not function properly. Also the other three factors have to produce ruupas. The four factors that produce ruupas of the body give consolidating support to each other. Ruupas of the body that fall away are replaced by new ruupas until death, when there is the end of a lifespan. It is said that the ruupas of the body carry on until the exhaustion of beings’ merit (pu~n~nakkhayo). Then another kamma will produce the next rebirth. It depends on kamma whether beings are of short life-span or of long life-span. -------------- Conclusion: The Visuddhimagga states with regard to ruupas originating from consciousness: < For whether these beings are sleeping or idling or eating or drinking, these states keep on occurring in them day and night with consciousness as condition. > Later on more details will be given in what way what type of citta conditions ruupas. The ruupas of the body from head to toe originate from kamma, citta, temperature and nutrition. These factors keep on originating ruupas day and night, from birth to death. It seems that we have a body that lasts but in reality all the ruupas that are produced fall away immediately and there is nothing left of them. This happens at each moment, also at this very moment, but we do not notice this. It seems that the body lasts because the ruupas that have fallen away are replaced by new ruupas. By insight the impermanence of dhammas can be clearly realized. ******* Nina. #76971 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 2:20 am Subject: Conditions Ch 16, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, The citta and cetasikas which condition one another by way of association-condition, sampayutta-paccaya, also condition one another by way of conascence, sahajåta. However, association-condition is not identical with conascence-condition. Conascence-condition also pertains to rúpas which arise together and to nåma and rúpa which arise together. Association-condition, in contrast, only pertains to nåmas, citta and cetasikas, which arise together and condition one another. The teaching of association-condition reminds us that nåma and rúpa are completely different from each other. This condition manifests the close association between citta and cetasikas. Although in the planes where there are five khandhas, nåma and rúpa, citta and cetasikas arise together with rúpa, they are not associated with rúpa in the same way as they are with each other. Feeling, for example, is nåma, it is closely associated with citta and the other cetasikas. When lobha-múla-citta accompanied by pleasant feeling enjoys a pleasant sound, the accompanying cetasikas share the same object, and they are all affected by the pleasant feeling, they are conditioned by it by way of association-condition. Citta and the accompanying cetasikas are of great diversity since each of them conditions the other nåma-dhammas by way of association-condition. Kusala citta which is accompanied by sobhana cetasikas is quite different from akusala citta which is accompanied by akusala cetasikas. Some cetasikas can accompany cittas which are kusala, akusala, vipåka or kiriya, but they are of a different quality in each of these cases. Effort or energy (viriya), for example, which is kusala, such as energy for generosity or for awareness at this moment, is quite different from energy which is akusala, such as wrong effort accompanying attachment. Wrong effort arises, for example, when one tries very hard to concentrate on particular objects of awareness in order to attain a quick result of one’s practice. ***** Nina. #76972 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 2:25 am Subject: Asoka, Ch 6, no 8 nilovg Dear friends, We read in the “Kindred Sayings” (III, Khandhå-vagga, Kindred Sayings on Elements, Middle Fifty, Ch 4, § 88, Assaji) about a monk who was too sick to develop Mindfulness of Breathing and attain jhåna. Khun Buth Sawong from Cambodia, who can recite many suttas by heart, drew our attention to this sutta which shows that it is not necessary to develop jhåna in order to be able to attain enlightenment. We read that when the Buddha was staying near Råjagaha, he visited the venerable Assaji who was sick. They had the following conversation: ... “Formerly, lord, I kept trying to calm down my sickness, but I am still much troubled by my breathing. I cannot win balance of mind. But though I cannot win balance of mind, I say to myself:- ‘Yet I do not fall away.’ ” “Those recluses and brahmins, Assaji, who deem balance of mind as all in all, they who reverence balance of mind,-when they cannot win that balance of mind, say to themselves: ‘May we not fall away!’ Now as to this, what do you think, Assaji? Is body permanent or impermanent?” “Impermanent, lord.” “So it is with the other factors, and consciousness... Wherefore he who sees this... knows:’... for life in these conditions there is no hereafter.’ If one feels a pleasant feeling... a painful feeling... a neutral feeling, he knows it is impermanent, he knows it as not clung to, he knows it has no lure for him. If he feels a pleasant feeling... a painful feeling... a neutral feeling, he feels unattached. If he feels a feeling that his bodily powers have reached their end, he knows that he so feels. If he feels a feeling that life has reached its end, he knows that he so feels. He knows that when body breaks up, henceforth, when life has run its course, all that he has felt, all that had a lure for him will grow cold.” Through the development of right understanding of the five khandhas, that is, of all nåma and rúpa within and around ourselves, enlightenment can be attained and eventually arahatship can be reached. There can be awareness of seeing, visible object, feeling or thinking right now, why should we strive to reach jhåna first? ******* Nina. #76973 From: "Sukinder" Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 3:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Asoka, Ch 6, no 6. sukinderpal Hi Dieter and Nina, > thanks for your comment.. I appreciate that you tried to understand my point. S: And thanks for your response. ------------------- > Sukin: Perhaps you did not understand what Nina has in mind. > > D: actually it is the first time that I read in a Buddhist list , that ''We should not try to be aware of breath, because it is very subtle.' S: I think being subtle is secondary to the oft mentioned idea of "no control", "no doings", hence "no trying", and apparently this is even more subtle. ;-) I think you will agree to the more obvious statement expressed by Nina in the same post about the mistake of "trying to be a better / good person etc.". The same principle applies here, the root being "self view". -------------------- > D: You may recognised by the reaction of Howard, that the importance of mindfulness of breathing has been stressed by the Buddha in numerous suttas. S: At the time of writing my post I hadn't read Nina's original yet, but you would have recognized in there, that she in fact highly praises Anapanasati and does not deny that the Buddha did teach it. -------------------- > D: No canonical advise I remember to be found to say otherwise , not to talk about that we should not try , because it is very subtle. S: One fundamental difference between meditators and those of us who do not believe in it, is that the former reads such Suttas as you refer to, as being "prescriptive" whereas we read them as being "descriptive". The reason we or rather I, think this way, is because ultimately there are only dhammas performing their functions. These dhammas arise by conditions beyond control and certainly in imitating any outward action, one can't expect some corresponding state of mind to arise. That we decide to observe, note, be mindful etc. the result is no different from the kind of `noting' we have so far been accustomed to. The mistake is in thinking that this is satipatthana or even kusala as taught by the Buddha. Instead of this, we can understand "conditionality" at the level that any accumulated wisdom will allow. Sometimes there can be `application' at the level of cintamaya panna and here, better understanding of what is and what is not the right practice can grow. And if and when satipatthana or bhavanamaya panna does arise, there is added the knowledge of knowing the difference between sati and that which is not. When we do not take into account the level of wisdom being referred to in the Suttas, but quickly jump to the idea of `doing' similarly, invariably self view is being further encouraged. And the sad story is that while the actual practice, re: the actual dhammas involved, does lead to the desired results, in our case, rather than those same dhammas, wrong view and tanha with its many manifestations, creates the wrong impression that we are getting somewhere when in fact we aren't. And the explanations that revolves around this does not in my view, agree with the Dhamma at all. One example is the idea of Sila -> Samadhi -> Panna progression generally held. People form a very vague idea about the relationship and remain satisfied with it. No one seems to be interested in considering whether at this moment there is any understanding at all; even to know kusala from akusala. Yet they go around trying to have Sila with `self' and engaging in what they consider to be the `practice of concentration' also with `self', happy to believe that all this *is* kusala, not to mention being the development of the Path. What level of panna is actually involved in the practice described in the Suttas, and what is involved before that level is reached; no one seems interested in knowing about. :-/ ----------------------- > D: There must be thousands of books , not only of Buddhist origin , written about the usefulness to pay attention to breathing. The relation between emotion ( or more Abhidhammic the quality of the citta) and the rhythmen (long ..short) of breath is a long established scientific fact. S: All the more reason to be wary about our first, second or for the matter any impression regarding the subject. And I mean not only in theory, but also when engaging in such a practice. That even without the background of Dhamma one sees some value in concentrating on the breath, should give pause to whether we ourselves may have some wrong view about the subject. And btw, what "quality of citta" does the scientist know in relation to breathing? --------------------- > D: Now , Nina writes: 'The sutta and the commentary which I mentioned can remind us that it > is difficult to properly develop "Mindfulness of Breath" and that this subject is not > suitable for everybody.' > > ' Can remind us' , appears to me reading something into it ..from a point of view from those, having difficulties to develop it. But regardless of the question about the hindrance , would that kind of 'weakness' justify to recommend others not to try? S: I don't think Nina will ever say, "Don't try". Her warning about `wrong understanding' is meant as a reminder to develop `right understanding'. That one does not "do it" is a result of such understanding and not any personal experience with the practice. Is this not the direction to be taken rather than jumping on to ideas about this or that `prescribed' practice? And in the end, is this not meant to lead others to follow the *real* ;-) "right practice", which is the understanding of present moment realities? ------------------- > Sukin , sometimes I wonder whether the intellectual approach of the Abhidhamma is not a kind of alibi for the problem seemingly not being able to be silent , without intention.., without 'the habitual tendencies' in order to get the monkey nature of mind to a rest (the attention to one's in- and outbreathing a tool towards it). S: What do you think Nina's response would be when approached by someone who says, "I am so busy with work and everything that I have no time to practice at all"? I think that she would answer to the effect that "the development of understanding can take place at any time, regardless of activity and situation". Would not such a statement be an encouragement of right effort, right thought, right mindfulness, right concentration, right understanding and also any other form of kusala that may be conditioned to arise? And in not limiting time, place and activity for the development of understanding and the other forms of kusala, does not this imply that ideally the development can happen *all* the time? The thing is, concentration of the breath and such on the other hand, as a prescribed practice does *not* involve "right effort" or any of the other rights. In fact as far as I can see, it is not even kusala of any level. And what Dieter, is the kind of citta are you referring to when you "get the monkey nature of mind to a rest"? ------------------ > D: If that is so , and you may know it by yourself , you would indeed help me to get a better understanding about your (and Nina's) point of view. S: To be sure, ours is mostly intellectual understanding, so *all* the akusala are more or less intact. The understanding itself arises rarely as compared to other forms of kusala, and this in comparison to akusala is in turn quite rare. However we do `believe' in facing all these akusala in whatever form, but appreciate the danger particularly of ignorance and of wrong view. It is the latter that we perceive as being behind ideas about "formal practice" and this is why so much is said on this list about this. So it is not at all about personal preference. Hope this has helped you to understand my point of view. Metta, Sukinder #76974 From: "Sukinder" Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 3:14 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Views, Ontology, Philosophy of Buddha as it appears to me. sukinderpal Hi D.C., > Many thanks for your kind response. S: And thank you for yours. =========== D.C.: > Here I quote the relevant portion of your response for easy reference. > "S: Is this interpretation only with reference to the particular > Dhammapada verse or is this the general meaning. I've hardly ever > thought about this particular aspect of Dana, but it would seem to me > that it being a form of Dana / kusala is determined by the quality of the > intention, no? In this case the further qualification might be perhaps that > the moment is accompanied by Right Understanding, and whether this is > in turn understood by the student should make little or no difference, no?" > > Here are my answers (and questions): > > 1. How else can one give dhamma daana. Is giving some free dhamma books as gifts dhamma daana? I am sure you would agree that Buddha would not designate that as the greatest gift. [The provocation for my talk was an incident like that. Somebody distributing some books on dhamma being described as dhammadaana.] > > 2. How do you give dhamma? Is it a tangible thing to give? > > 3. There are many meanings to dhamma: "deanaa, gu.na, hetu etc.] Only the first two meanings can make any sense in the context of dhamma-daana. You can preach dhamma, but if the hearer does not establish himself in the dhamma, then can we say whether the gift has been given? No I think, it is wasted. > > It is this kind of thinking that led me to say what I said. Sukin: As I said, I've not given much attention to this subject, and it appears that this is not as straightforward as giving material goods. In the one, we give away what we believe ourselves to own, but it seems the same can't be said about `Dhamma'…? Giving a book is perhaps material giving, but the Dhamma, no one can own it. Also I understand that when explaining Dhamma or giving a book for the same reason, if the receiver does not understand what is being said, then no Dhamma is received. But I still can't see why this should make a difference to the citta of the giver, having in fact done its job and fallen away. My knowledge of Dhamma is very limited. Maybe according to the Teachings, something to qualify as Dana, one must take into account both the giver and the recipient? In which case if the recipient does not receive what was intended by the giver to give, this will qualify as a form of kusala kamma, but *not* as Dana. Is this what you are trying to tell me? But then this leads me to consider another aspect, prompted by what you quote below: =========================== D.C.: > The full gaathaa is as follows: "The gift of Truth excels all gifts; the flavour of Truth excels all flavours; the delight in Truth excels all delights; the Craving-freed overcomes all suffering." Dhamma is here translated as the Truths. You can easily see that the meaning I have given is in consonance with the gaathaa. Sukin: I see this as being very true. So now if I decide to instead of some material good, give some particular person the Dhamma in the form of a talk, does this in itself not qualify as dhamma dana? Should I wait to see if indeed the person has understood anything of what I said? =========================== D.C.: > 4. Daana/kusala -- Daana and kusala are two different things. Daana is the act of giving and kusala is something that lead you towards nibbaana. Daana is a meritorious deed (pu~n~naa). Are you familiar with this distinction? Sukin: I am not sure now. But surely Dana *is* a form of kusala isn't it? =========================== > 5. >sukin: "it being a form of Dana / kusala is determined by the quality of the intention, no?" > > DC: How do you interpret quality of intention. If you give something expecting something in return then there is a reduction of quality. But can you establish somebody in Dhamma, for example, in the five precepts. What can you expect back. Really can any body do a thing like that with a bad intention. ["Desetha bhikkave dhamma.m, bahujanhitaaya, bahujansukhaaya, lokaanukampaaya"] You do it out of mettaa or karunna or for the benefit of the many and happiness of the many. Sukin: The wording was perhaps misleading, I meant to relate Dana to being itself a form of kusala kamma and didn't mean to use `intention' as an added factor. ========================== > 6. >Sukin: "In this case the further qualification might be perhaps that > the moment is accompanied by Right Understanding, and whether this is > in turn understood by the student should make little or no difference, no?" > > DC: I refer to the word "moment" above. It is not relevant here. That is abhidhammic analysis. Sukin: Yes, the "moment" reference could be misleading, suggesting that dana and panna arises together. What I meant to suggest was that the giver of Dhamma must have Right Understanding to begin with, for the giving to qualify as Dhamma dana. But it seems to me that your own resistance to "moments" is unfounded. And I wonder about what your own "Dhamma Theory" might be in rejecting the Abhidhamma theory of moments. In other words what would your own `Abhidhamma' or whatever you might want to call it is, based on your reading of the other two baskets? ========================== D.C.: The Buddha did not teach in the language of "Abhidhamma". He taught in a language that could be understood by mere mortals like you and me. So we will have to understand it that way. If you glance through the Kaalaama sutta you will understand what I mean. Sukin: Is it really a question of language so much? Of course the Buddha would not confuse his audience by using any language other than the one they were currently using. The Dhamma is however much deeper that we allow for even during our best moments, and this is perhaps one thing to keep in mind when reading the Suttas, even with the help of the Abhidhamma. The real problem is in the misunderstanding of reality, and this is deeply rooted. When this is not seen, then everyday conventional language can be a condition to reinforce the misperceptions/ misunderstandings. The Abhidhamma formulation can be of help, however even this is not so much a matter of language, but of understanding which sees that in fact "This is how Reality is!" The people of Buddha's time had great panna, unlike us; they were not taken in by reference to conventional realities. They *understood* what the Buddha meant. We are not like them, without Abhidhamma we will be lead by self view to interpret the Dhamma wrongly, at least I would. Therefore it seems at least to this mortal here, that the Abhidhamma is more suitable. ;-) I don't understand your reference to the Kalaama Sutta…. =================== D.C.: > One word about Abhidhamma or (more accurately, Abhidhamm Pi.taka.) It is a later development and part of sectarian Buddhism. Each early school, out of the 18 mentioned in the Cullavagga, I think, is supposed to have had its own Abhidhamma Pi.taka. Only three are extant now: Theravaada, Sarvastivaada and Saariputra Abhidharma Sastra. They are different from one another. So how can we decide which one is true? Sukin: Arguments at this level whenever posted by anyone, for or against the Abhidhamma, I never bother with. It is not something I would ever take into consideration. These reasonings seem to be rooted in personal preferences and has nothing to do with the Dhamma itself. How far I take the Abhidhamma as being authoritative is a matter both of understanding and belief. I'd like to encourage the former, but there is not enough awareness and understanding to know what in fact the influence is at any given moment. In general however, I have found the Abhidhamma to be perfect. For one, it has helped me see through wrong interpretations of the Dhamma I otherwise would have not seen. In fact in general, it seems that the interpretations of the Dhamma going around today, the more they deny the Abhidhamma the more misleading they are. The commentaries are commentaries and I won't argue about them being less of an authority as compared to the Suttas and Vinaya. The Abhidhamma is however of a different caliber altogether, this could only have come directly from the Buddha himself, which even the commentators, seem to have consulted. The legends associated I therefore do not doubt about. ;-) Sorry for the length of the post. Metta, Sukin. #76975 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 4:30 am Subject: Re: Citta scottduncan2 Dear Tep, Regarding: T: "A moment to me is a 'time duration' in which a sense-door restraint is effective. I hesitate to use "time cross-section" that is defined for a single citta, because it is theoretically zero in duration." Scott: I found an essay, not necessarily a credible source at all (except as possible answer as to where this notion might be coming from), which contains this idea of 'zero duration'. I post portions to show that the concept has been formulated elsewhere and to bring it in here amounts to an eclectisism which I can't quite manage. It regards Dogen Zenji (1200-1253), the founder of the Soto sect of Zen Buddhism in Japan. The essay compares Dogen and Augustine and their views on time. 'Zero duration' seems related to 'infinite temporal duration', at least as these concepts are considered within this essay. http://www.edinboro.edu/cwis/philos/januadogen.html Scott: Augustine is said to have concluded that "...[a]s for the present, should it always be present and never pass into times past, verily it should not be time but eternity. If then time present, to be time, only comes into existence because it passeth into time past, how can we say that also to be, whose cause of being is, that it shall not be: that we can not, forsooth, affirm that time is, but only because it is tending not to be? (Watts 239)." Dogen is compared, and is quoted as saying: "...when I was climbing a mountain or crossing a river, I was there in that Time. There must have been Time in me. And I actually exist now, so Time could not have departed. If Time does not have the form of leaving and coming, the Time of climbing a mountain is the present as Existence-Time (Nishijima and Cross 111)." Also, Dogen states: "If Time does retain the form of leaving and coming, I have this present moment of Existence-Time, which is just Existence-Time itself... Existence-Time has the virtue of passing in a series of moments (Nishijima and Cross 111-112)." Augustine's argument is summarised as being: "(1) Only the present is experienced. (2) A finite temporal duration cannot exist without future and past. Given these two premises, (3) finite temporal duration cannot be experienced. Therefore, time is experienced as zero or infinite temporal duration." Scott: Does this encapsulate the view espoused in the recent post? Given that the idea of 'zero-duration' is attributable to either Dogen or Augustine, why is it relevant here? Sincerely, Scott. #76976 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 4:57 am Subject: Re: Citta scottduncan2 Dear Tep, Regarding: T: "A moment to me is a 'time duration' in which a sense-door restraint is effective. I hesitate to use "time cross-section" that is defined for a single citta, because it is theoretically zero in duration." Scott: In Abhidhammattha Sangaha, Anuruddha summarises: "Katha.m? Uppaada-.t.thiti-bhanga-vasena kha.nattaya.m ekacitakkha.na.m naama. Taani pana sattarasa cittakkha.naani ruupadhammaanam aayu. Ekacittakkha.naatiitaani va bahucittakkha.naatiitaani vaa .thitippattaan' eva pa~ncaalambanaani pa~ncadvaare aapaatham aagacchanti." The translation is (CMA, Bh. Bodhi, p 154): "How (is the intensity in the presentation of objects determined?) One mind-moment consists of three (sub)-moments - arising, presence, and dissolution. The duration of material phenomena consists of seventeen such mind-moments. The five sense-objects enter the avenue of the five sense-doors at the stage of presence, when one or several mind-moments have passed." Scott: How does this compare or contrast with the above stated view of 'zero-duration'? Sincerely, Scott. #76977 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 5:04 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (67) nichiconn dear friends, 13. Viisatinipaato 2. Rohiniitheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 2. The commentary on the verses of Theri Rohinii part 12 verse: 287. "Tuva~nheta.m pajaanaasi, pu~n~nakkhetta.m anuttara.m; amhampi ete sama.naa, pa.tigga.nhanti dakkhi.na.m. 287. You indeed comprehend this unsurpassed field of merit. These ascetics [will] receive our gift too, for among them an extensive sacrifice will be set up for us. txt: Amhampiiti amhaakampi. Dakkhi.nanti deyyadhamma.m. Etthaati etesu sama.nesu. Ya~n~noti daanadhammo. Vipuloti vipulaphalo. Sesa.m vuttanayameva. 287. Our [gift] too (anham pi) means: our [gift] too (amhaaka.m pi). Gift means: something given.* Among them (ettha) means: among these (etesu) ascetics. Sacrifice (ya~n~no) means: having extensive consequence (vipula-phalo). The meaning of the rest has been explained.** *Deyya-dhamma.m. PED (s.v. deyya) quotes a list found in Nd of fourteen of these gifts to be given to bhikkhus. This is translated as "merit-offering" in PS. ped. **For "comprehend", see the comments on v.281 above (p.275) and Th-a III 16 ad v 714. For an explanation of "field of merit", see Vism 220 (PPf VII 98). {p.239: ...incomparable ...: as a place without equal in the world for growing merit; ...... for growing the whole world's ... various kinds of merit leading to welfare and happiness grow with the Community as their support. Therefore..." Recollect. Apologies for the conibalization,c.} verse: 290. "Upemi sara.na.m buddha.m, dhamma.m sa"ngha~nca taadina.m; samaadiyaami siilaani, ta.m me atthaaya hehiti. 291. "Brahmabandhu pure aasi.m, so idaanimhi braahma.no; tevijjo sottiyo camhi, vedaguu camhi nhaatako"ti.- 290. Formerly I was a kinsman of Brahmaa. Now I am [truly] a brahman. I possess the triple knowledge and am versed in sacred lore and have complete mastery of knowledge. And I am washed clean. {from here on, the verse numbers in the english translations are one off those in the text. like crossing a date line. c.} txt: Eva.m braahma.no sara.nesu siilesu ca pati.t.thito aparabhaage sa~njaatasa.mvego pabbajitvaa vipassana.m va.d.dhetvaa arahatte pati.t.thaaya attano pa.tipatti.m paccavekkhitvaa udaanento "brahmabandhuu"ti gaathamaaha. Tassattho he.t.thaa vuttoyeva. 290. So the brahman was established in virtuous conduct and the refuges. Afterwards a profound stirring arose [in him] and he went forth. He increased his insight and was established in Arahatship, he looked over his attainment, and spoke the verse [beginning] [Formerly] I was a kinsman of a Brahmaa as a solemn utterance. Its meaning has been explained already.* *Pu.n.naa, p.259, Sis45. cy on 251. Rohiniitheriigaathaava.n.nanaa ni.t.thitaa. Here ends the commentary on the verses of Therii Rohinii. ===peace, connnie #76978 From: han tun Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 5:42 am Subject: Perfections Corner (21) 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. ------------------------------ We all have different accumulated inclinations. We are attached to our appearance, to our clothing, to words of approval and praise from others. We like to be dressed beautifully, but the Bodhisatta had in that life great endurance, he was unaffected when others jeered at the way he was dressed. Where he was much derided he stayed longer. Wandering about in that way he came to a house in a village. We read: ---------- “There the children of that family were of a mischievous character, they were prone to violence and liked to beat other people. Some children were relatives or slaves of the royal household. They had a cruel, fierce character, they uttered sarcastic, coarse, insulting speech and they went about mocking all the time. When these children would see old, destitute people, they would take fine dust and scatter it all over their backs. They behaved in an improper, reproachable way, and they jeered at the people who were watching the scene. When the great Being saw those mischievous children going about in the village, he thought, ‘Now I shall use a trick as a means of accumulating the perfection of equanimity, and therefore I shall stay in that place.’ When those mischievous children saw the Great Being, they began to behave in an improper way. The Great Being stood up and pretended that he could not stand this any longer and that he was afraid of those children. When the children followed the Bodhisatta, he went to a cemetery, thinking, ‘Here nobody will interfere with the conduct of those children.’ He took a skeleton as a pillow to support him and he lay down 1. Thereupon the children behaved in an improper way such as spitting upon him and then returned. Every day they behaved in this way. When wise people saw the children’s behaviour, they forbid them to act in that way, saying, ‘This person has great powers, he is an ascetic, a great yoga practitioner.’ Those wise people greatly praised and honoured the Bodhisatta.” ---------- ------------------------------ To be continued. Metta, Han #76979 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 8:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Views, Ontology, Philosophy of Buddha as it appears to me. dcwijeratna Dear Sukin, Thanks for your lengthy post. Actually it was very good of you to have taken the trouble to write such a long post. Well, we started our discussion with the concept of daana. Here is a good reference on Daana: Its BPS publication No. 367/369, Edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi. You may be able to download it from their website or AccesstoInsight. That gives a lot of information about daana. Now to a few points in your post. =========== ============================================ Sukin: As I said, I've not given much attention to this subject, and it appears that this is not as straightforward as giving material goods. In the one, we give away what we believe ourselves to own, but it seems the same can't be said about `Dhamma'…? Giving a book is perhaps material giving, but the Dhamma, no one can own it. Also I understand that when explaining Dhamma or giving a book for the same reason, if the receiver does not understand what is being said, then no Dhamma is received. But I still can't see why this should make a difference to the citta of the giver, having in fact done its job and fallen away. DC: This last sentence is abhidhammic analysis-Cittas arising and falling. Really, this kind of analysis, to my mind, is very difficult. There will be millions of cittas arising and falling within one act of daana. Some of them may not even be kusala cittas. For example, you may get annoyed because somebody is not listening or something. So I would stick to the explanations given in the sutta pitaka. I'll point out another very interesting point with respect to dhammadaana: you may be honestly believing that what you are preaching is dhamma. But what you may be preaching is not dhamma but adhamma. What then? ================================================= Sukin:My knowledge of Dhamma is very limited. Maybe according to the Teachings, something to qualify as Dana, one must take into account both the giver and the recipient? In which case if the recipient does not receive what was intended by the giver to give, this will qualify as a form of kusala kamma, but *not* as Dana. Is this what you are trying to tell me? You say "My knowledge of Dhamma is very limited". I have my strong doubts. What the Buddha said during his 45 year ministry can be summarised thus: sabba paapassa akarana.m kusalassa upasampadaa sacitta priyodapana.m Eta.m Buddhaanasaasana.m I am sure you don't need a translation of that. Yes the quality of a gift is judged by three things: the purity of the giver, the purity of the gift and the purity of the recipient. All these are explained in great detail in the reference I gave above. With regard to "...this will form kusala kamma, but not as daana": Certainly somebody must receive a gift for the act to be complete. Now if you fire a shot at somebody and doesn't kill him, the act of killing is not completed. With regard to the word "kusala kamma", what exactly is your definition (of kusala kamma)? We understand it differently. We think kusala is wholesome and akusala is unwholesome. For example, abstention from killing is wholesome. Abstention implies that there is no act of killing. For details see sammaadi.t.thi sutta MN 9. ====================================================== >Sukin: I see this as being very true. So now if I decide to instead of some material good, give some particular person the Dhamma in the form of a talk, does this in itself not qualify as dhamma dana? Should I wait to see if indeed the person has understood anything of what I said? DC: Of course it is dhamma-dana and it is one of the 10 meritorius deeds. But the level of merit that you accrue is dependent on his acceptance or rejection. You definitely need not wait to see. The results follow according to the law of causality. ============ ========= ====== >: Sukin: I am not sure now. But surely Dana *is* a form of kusala isn't it? DC: This is a difficult question and requires a lengthy reply. Do you agree that there is a difference between the two two words wholesome (kusala) and merit (pu~n~na). Dana is a meritorius deed. But if you practice it with the intention of relinquishing your greed--that is for achieving nibbana then it is kusala. But if you practice it with the hope of beneficial results now or future births, then it is only a meritorius deeds. Just one more hint: daana is not a part of the Noble Eightfold Path. ============ ========= ====== > Sukin: But it seems to me that your own resistance to "moments" is unfounded. And I wonder about what your own "Dhamma Theory" might be in rejecting the Abhidhamma theory of moments. In other words what would your own `Abhidhamma' or whatever you might want to call it is, based on your reading of the other two baskets? DC: With reference to the first sentence it is a view you have formed. That is fine. Second sentence: I have no "Dhamma Theory" of my own. If you mean by the word "Dhamma", the teaching of the Buddha it is not a "theory"? It is the truth which he has realised. Theory is mere speculation. I don't reject the Abhidhamma theory of moments. As you correctly put, it is a theory. I really don't need it to understand the teaching of the Buddha. So I ignore it. You cannot argue against theories. I think I mentioned that earlier. To clarify the meaning, here is an example. How do you verify that there there are 16 mind moments in one rupa-kalaapa arising and ceasing? So I'll leave it alone. Regarding "my Abhidhamma" : I have no abhidhamma. I am only a disciple of the Buddha. So I follow his Dhamma-vinaya. All the dhamma I need are in the: Four Noble Truths, Pa.ticca Samuppada and Anattalakkhana sutta. For Vinaya I use Sigalovada, Vyagghapajjha, Dhammika and similar suttas. ============ ========= ===== Sukin: Is it really a question of language so much? Of course the Buddha would not confuse his audience by using any language other than the one they were currently using. The Dhamma is however much deeper that we allow for even during our best moments, and this is perhaps one thing to keep in mind when reading the Suttas, even with the help of the Abhidhamma. DC: In the above passage I wish to refer to "The Dhamma is however much deeper..." Well you think so? But I think differently. It all depends on what you take dhamma to mean. To me it only means to live righteously--dhammacaarii. For a layman it is the simplest thing in the world: Just observe the five precepts. I am sure people like sopaka, ambapali, angulimaala, etc. understood the dhamma and attained arahanthood. Do you know the story of Culapanthaka? ===================================== >Sukin: The real problem is in the misunderstanding of reality, and this is deeply rooted. DC: What is your definition of reality? What do you mean by misunderstanding. As far as I am conerned, the only reality that I know is what I can perceive through my senses. If there is another one, bad luck for me. I have no way of knowing it. And I don't know anybody who has seen another reality. =========================================== >Sukin: I don't understand your reference to the Kalaama Sutta…. DC: It tells how to follow a moral life without faith or belief. If you have faith or belief, then you are a theist and not a follower of the Buddha. In this sutta buddha rejects the vaada of all the samana-brahamanas. ============ ======= D.C.: Sukin: Arguments at this level whenever posted by anyone, for or against the Abhidhamma, I never bother with. It is not something I would ever take into consideration. These reasonings seem to be rooted in personal preferences and has nothing to do with the Dhamma itself. DC: I did not give an argument. At least it was not meant to be an argument. What I wanted to say was that we cannot find a method to choose between the Abhidhammas of different schools because they all claim to explain the Buddha's teaching. Actually, the above statement of yours is a declaration of faith. I mentioned earlier also that a belief is not capable of proof or diproof. It is therefore not profitable to discuss them. They lead only to debates and quarrels (kalaha-vivaada) according to the Buddha. ========================================================== >Sukin: "The Abhidhamma is however of a different caliber altogether, this could only have come directly from the Buddha himself, which even the commentators, seem to have consulted. The legends associated I therefore do not doubt about. ;-)" I only wish to focus again that the above statement is a pure belief. And it doesn't make sense to discuss that. Hope whatever I have said above would assist you in someway. With mettaa, D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #76980 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 11:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re Asoka, mindfulness of breath. nilovg Dear Swee Boon, Op 30-sep-2007, om 17:37 heeft nidive het volgende geschreven: > I can't make sense of what you are saying. > > If one develops only vipassana without samatha, does it mean that one > doesn't need to have strong panna and doesn't need to clearly know > what type of citta is arising at a given moment? ------- N: Sure. But it is also necessary for samatha, and I said this because some people may think only of feeling calm and forget that they have to scrutinize the cittas. -------- > > SW.: Is the percentage of "going wrong" higher for one who practises > samatha in tandem with vipassana than for one who practises only > vipassana? How so? ------- N: No idea, it depends on the individual. Nina. #76981 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 12:08 pm Subject: Earliest Buddhism truth_aerator Hello all, I found something interesting in Wikipedia: ----------- Some texts, however, have been identified by scholars as being earlier than others; for example, in the Sutta Nipāta, which is a branch of the Khuddhaka Nikāya of the Sutta Piṭaka in the Tipitaka, there are two small collections of suttas, the Aṭṭhakavagga and the Pārāyanavagga, which some scholars regard as being considerably earlier in composition than the bulk of the canon, and as revealing an earlier form of the religion.[2] They are regarded as earlier because of elements of language and composition, their inclusion in very early commentaries, and also because they seem to express versions of certain Buddhist beliefs that are different from, and perhaps prior to, their later codified versions.[3] The Khaggavisānasutta (Rhinoceros Sutra), also in the Sutta Nipāta, similarly seems to reveal an earlier mode of Buddhist monasticism, which emphasized individual wandering monastics, more in keeping with the Indian sannyāsin tradition. Speaking generally, the Aṭṭhakavagga and the Pārāyanavagga tend more strongly to emphasize the negative sides of asceticism (i.e., asceticism as a process of negating desire), and show a strong concern with regulating everyday bodily activities and sexual desires. They also place considerable emphasis on the rejection of all views, and are reluctant to put forward positions of their own regarding basic metaphysical issues. This has caused some commentators (Gomez 1976) to compare them to later Madhyamaka philosophy, which in its Prasaṅgika form especially makes a method of rejecting others views rather than proposing its own. The Aṭṭhakavagga and the Pārāyanavagga also differ in their articulation of Buddhist meditation practices, leaning heavily on what would come to be defined as samatha and showing very little evidence of vipassanā at all, despite the important role played by the balance of these two elements in later Buddhism. This seems to be connected to the rejection of views, for if there is no correct view to gain insight into, meditation would be conceived simply as the practice of cultivating a mental state devoid of views. Thus the ultimate meditative object expressed in these texts, "akiṅcañña", "Not-any-thing-ness" (i.e., total negation), which of course begs comparison to the Madhyamaka ideal of śūnyatā. After Gomez had proposed these texts as a sort of proto-Madhyamaka, a leading Dutch Pali scholar, Tillman Vetter, re-examined the evidence. Although agreeing overall with Gomez' observations, he suggests some refinements on historical and doctrinal grounds. First, he notes that neither of these short collections of suttas are homogeneous and hence are not all amenable to Gomez' proposals. According to Vetter, those suttas which do lend support to Gomez probably originated with a heterodox ascetic group that pre-dated the Buddha, and were integrated into the Buddhist Sangha at an early date, bringing with them some suttas that were already in existence and also composing further suttas in which they tried to combine their own teachings with those of the Buddha. Thus if both Gomez and Vetter are correct, Madhyamaka would represent a continuation of a heterodox strand within Buddhism, rather than either a totally or largely orthodox one, as held by some scholars. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atthakavagga_and_Parayanavagga --------- Also, has anyone read Ajahn Sujato's writings on Early Buddhism? http://santifm1.0.googlepages.com/writings http://santifm1.0.googlepages.com/ItsTime.pdf Any comments? Lots of Metta, Alex #76982 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 12:34 pm Subject: Buddha Gotama, a Once Returner? truth_aerator Hello all. I have heard from Ajahn Brahm that Buddha Gotama was a Sakadagamin. At first I was aversive to the idea… Then I've heard Ven Dhamavudho say the reasons that Buddha Gotama, an Arahant and perfectly enlightened one, was a Sakadagamin when he came to Earth for his last birth. Here are some of the reasons as I understand them. In the 4 Most authentic and reliable (to all schools) Nikayas, there is NO mention of Bodhisatva path, Vows, 10 paramis and all these legends about 4 asankheyyas and 300,000 Mahakappas. In DN#14 Sutta it is mentioned that Buddha Gotama has recollected (with the help of Devas) only 91 aeons and names of 6 Buddhas before Him. Buddha: Vipassi, Sikhi, Vessabhu, kakusandha, Konagamana and Kassapa. In MN#81 Few lives before Gotama became the Buddha, he was Brahmin Jotipala and was VERY insulting to Buddha Kassapa and he refused MANY times to go see him. Eventually he was pulled by his hair by his friend, a lay Anagamin. Ultimately he has received going forth and it is then when he most likely entered the stream and become a stream enterer. If he was a very advanced Bodhisatva who took a vow (not found in most authentic Nikayas), he would NOT behave like that. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/081-ghatikara-e1.htm It is also interesting that Buddha has REFUSED to teach the Dhamma, basically saying that it was too tough, too wearisome for him. Again, this doesn't make sense if we believe the heroics found in Jataka stories (which were most likely written AFTER the Buddha, and in some places they do contradict the suttas). "Enough now with teaching what only with difficulty I reached. This Dhamma is not easily realized by those overcome with aversion & passion. What is abstruse, subtle, deep, hard to see, going against the flow — those delighting in passion, cloaked in the mass of darkness, won't see." - http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn06/sn06.001.than.html Another thing. If Buddha in his final life had to be moved by 4 divine messengers, this begs the question of "WHAT THE HECK DID HE LEARN IN HIS PREVIOUS LIVES?". Also why did he not make himself live longer in Samsara? If he truly worked for his paramis for 4 asankheyya and 300,000 MK – I think he would tolerate another 20-40 years. Why did he had to do 6 years of austerities and running towards various teachers in his final life? Didn't he do all these things during 4 Asankheya Kappa's and 300,000 MK? No wonder there is so much PachekaBuddhas. Gotama was about to become one, but thank you Brahma, for convincing Buddha Gotama to teach. It is interesting how Buddha was enlightened. He reached 4th Jhana and recollected his former lives, including the one where he was a Monk under Buddha Kassapa. Then as he remembered his previous lives (perhaps what he learned under the Buddha as well), he proceeded full on with complete enlightment. Many ascetics of other traditions too can remember their previous lives, but since they have not encountered the Buddha (or had not enough wisdom when they did) and were not ready, they didn't go far enough with liberation. In SN22-058 there are very interesting passages where Buddha, An Arahant (which is how he very often calls himself) answers the difference between him and Liberated Bhikkhus. He was first Arahant, and those who followed him were his student. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.058.than.html So if we carefully look at the earlier suttas we will notice that path to Arahatship for some can end up with Buddhahood. No need for a vow. Just become a once returner in the Tusita Heaven and be reborn as a human being when there isn't any Buddha Sassana. BTW, according to the Tradition, Devadatta is supposed to become a private Buddha after he gets out of Hell… WHAT? Where and would someone like Devadatta take a Vow??? Again, this doesn't make sense. Taking a vow can be a dangerous thing, it is something "craving to exist" wants, an excuse to continue existing in Samsara. Mara wants to keep us in Samsara for as long as possible. The more we are in samsara, the more chances Mara has. Furthermore by being "alive" we are HURTING COUNTLESS BEINGS, infact vegetarians hurt more living beings. One of the Zen Patriarchs (??) said something like "Within a person there are innumerable seeds of possible future rebirths and deaths. I vow to liberate them all". A good and refreshing perspective, isn't it? It reconciles the Arahathood and Buddhahood. One Venerable Bhante teaches how to renounce the Vow. What the vow does is to prevent you from become Sotopanna, it keeps you being an ordinary world ling with all the drawbacks of that and does NOT make you a Buddha. Also the Vow (or belief in 10 paramis WHICH IS NOT BUDDHA TEACHING, may cause one to be too laid back to practice hard enough to achieve Arahatship inn THIS LIFE.) Here is great danger, what happens if you get reborn into a place and time where there isn't Buddha's teaching? In DN#14 it shows that 10, 20+ or more Aeons can separate Buddhas. Without becoming an Arya there is always a risk of falling into Apaya realm. About Arahants being selfish and so on. BULL!!! Buddha was an Arahant. Ananda and Upali were Arahants. Without them the teachings of the Buddha would not come to us. We owe lots of respect to Arahants. Unlike "Bodhisatva" , Arahants are perfect Altruists with no self views. Any comments, suggestions, additions? Lots of Metta, Alex #76983 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 12:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (18) dcwijeratna Dear Han, Thank you very much for your e-m. I would like to make the following remarks. Dear DC (Nina, Tep), >Han: There are many kinds of upekkhaa. First, I think the words used was "degrees of upekkhaa". That is different from kinds of upekkhaa. Again we can talk of a red apple, yellow apple etc. Still the concept of apple is common to all this. I was talking about upekkhaa which is the equivalent of the apple in the above example. Thank you for quoting Nina's comments. I must say before I comment that I am not very familiar with Nina's terminology and language. So I might misunderstand her. Please correct me if that is the case. I @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ > Nina's comment: this is not tatramajjhattataa, but indifferent feeling accompanying attachment. It is akusala. DC: This is the first time I heard that upekkhaa is akusala. The statement (it is akusala) is without justification. It may not be a kusala. I cannot understand how it is an akusala. The Paali is as follows: "ime kaamagune pa.ticca uppajjati upekkhaa aya.m vuccati bhikkhave, saamisaa upekkhaa," Bhikkhu Bodhi translates this as : " The equanamity that arises in dependence on these five cords of sensual pleasure: this is called 'carnal' equanimity." The word "carnal" used here may give the wrong impression. It really refers to the five cords of sensual pleasure. I leave you to judge whether the Comment above has any meaning. ========================================================================== > Nina's comment: this is the equanimity of the fourth jhaana. Tatramajjhattataa cetasika. DC: Agreed. The sutta calls it "niraamisaa upekkhaa". Bhikkhus Bodhi calls it "spiritual equanimity". Other worldly is not correct. It means it is not dependent on the five kaamgunaa. But internally generated. ============================================================================ >Nina's comment: This is the sixfold equanimity of the arahat who has no more defilements. Sixfold, referring to the senses and the mind-door. DC: Yes, it is the equanamity of the arahat. The sutta defines it as: "niraamisaa nirraamisatarra upekkha" Bhikkhu Bodhis calls it: "Equanimity more spiritual than the spiritual." Sixfold is meaningless. It is the nature of the arahants. All objects of perception (rrupa etc.) will produce only upekkhaa in an arahant. ====================================================================== >Nina's comment: There are many different aspects to equanimity, no contradictions. The equanimity that is a perfection is tatramajjhattataa cetasika. Evenmindedness arisies with each kusala citta. But it is a perfection if the gaol is having less defilements, less lobha, dosa and moha. DC: There are no different aspects to equanimity. Difference is in the circustances, according to the sutta--aamisa ,niraamisa etc. The second statement does not accord with the sutta. According to the sutta the perfection of equanimity is that of the arahant. But according to the second statement above it is "tara...cetasika" which is the equanimity of the fourth jhaana. I leave it to you to make your own conclusions. @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ >Han: If you have any difficulty with Nina¢s explanations, please let us know. DC: I have given above my comments. With mettaa, D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #76984 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 2:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views jonoabb Hi Tep Thanks for the summary of your views on the area we've been discussing in this thread. Let me try a summary of my views and see if things are any clearer between us. In the Buddha's teaching, 'insight' (vipassana) refers to insight into the conditioned nature of dhammas and the 3 characteristics of anicca, dukkha and anatta (and of course the Four Noble Truths). The 'dhammas' that are the object of the insight consciousness, whose conditioned nature is to be seen, are those things described in the suttas as khandhas, dhatus, ayatanas, etc. It is these dhammas that have the characteristic of anicca, dukkha and anatta. They are dhammas because they are directly experienced, and they have an identifying characteristic. For example, as you read this message now, there is visible object appearing through the eye-door. Visible object is that which is directly experienced by seeing consciousness; if you like, the raw visible data. On the basis of visible data now being experienced, there comes to be the idea of 'text on a screen'. But there is no 'text' or 'screen' actually *in* the visible object. Likewise, when we hear a song on the radio, what is heard is audible object ('sound') only; there is no 'song' or 'radio' actually *in* the sound. And in terms of direct experience, there never is a (unitary) song or radio or text or screen, because there is never more than one kind of experience happening -- that is to say, never more than one kind of consciousness arising, at its particular doorway -- at any moment. To my understanding, this is the 'world' about which the Buddha is teaching; and this is why it is so important to know about 'dhammas'. 'Dhammas' are to be known in a way that 'the rest' can never be known. Tep Sastri wrote: > Hi Jon, - > > Eventhough we disagree on some issues, we do agree on more > important Dhamma principles. I explain at the end of your post. > > ... > T: Although I have insisted that external objects that are "concepts" are > also useful for aniccanupassana, I do agree with you that the main > contemplation is on the three characteristics of the clinging > aggregates, ayatanas, and dhatus that define the meditator's naama > and ruupa in the here & now moment (which is not the zero-duration > moment of the single citta). In other words, I do not deny the > contemplation of the ultimate realities while trying to persuade you and > other Abhidhammikas here to be more flexible and come down from > the "Ivory Tower" to face the broader realities in the world of > fleeting/impermanent puggalas( recall the milk simile in the Milinda > Panha ). I don't think it's a question of facing/not facing the realities of the world, but of studying closely what the teachings say on the matter. And there's a lot of material in the texts to analyse! If the Buddha taught that conventional objects could be the object of insight, did he say that that was so for all conventional objects or only for some (and if only for some, is there a finite list of such objects; also, what distinguishes the objects on the list from those that are not)? > By labelling these useful realities as useless "concepts", their > viewpoint is not flexible because it contradicts with the real world. I think most people have difficulty with the idea that a person/being could be classified as a 'concept'. Perhaps it is something to do with the term 'concept'. We have to remember that 'concept' here has a very specific and technical meaning, namely, 'not a dhamma', i.e., not one of the khandhas, dhatus or ayatanas etc. That's all. There is nothing judgemental in the term. > A key > teaching is to let go of clingings in the khandhas both external and > internal, near or far, gross or subtle, past or future, .... > To my understanding of the teachings, clinging falls away for good as and when things are seen by developed panna to be as they truly are, that is to say, not worth clinging to. That is the real 'letting go'. But we can only have a vague intellectual appreciation of what this means at this stage. In the meantime we think of 'letting go', but I'm not sure it actually gets us anywhere. What do you think? Jon #76985 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 3:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 195, 196 and Tiika. lbidd2 Hi Nina, "Text Vis.195: Or because sound is not regularly present since it is only sometimes manifested, ..." One thing that may have been overlooked is that as long as there is a living body there is the sound of the heart and lungs, at least. Larry #76986 From: han tun Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 4:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (18) to Nina hantun1 Dear DC and Nina, DC, I appreciate your interest and your comments. But, since the original translator is Nina, I would like to request Nina to respond to your comments. Nina, this has reference to message Message #76983 from DC addressed to me. Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han --- DC Wijeratna wrote: > Dear Han, > > Thank you very much for your e-m. > > I would like to make the following remarks. > #76987 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 1:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views upasaka_howard Hi, Jon (and Tep) - In a message dated 10/1/2007 5:52:32 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Likewise, when we hear a song on the radio, what is heard is audible object ('sound') only; there is no 'song' or 'radio' actually *in* the sound. And in terms of direct experience, there never is a (unitary) song or radio or text or screen, because there is never more than one kind of experience happening -- that is to say, never more than one kind of consciousness arising, at its particular doorway -- at any moment. =============================== IMO, what you say here is true, but more that is true can be said. When we hear a song we hear a sequence of sounds which are interrelated in very particular ways, and it is those interrelationships that make the sequence a song rather than just noise. It is due to the interrelatedness of the heard sounds that enables the perceiving (and conceiving) of the song. And to the extent that there is that interrelatedness, there is a song. The "song" is imputed upon the sounds by thought, and there is no song independent of thought. Thus the song is concept. But it is not baseless concept. It is by by means of our conceptualization that we can know and deal with relations. With metta, Howard #76988 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 6:46 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views indriyabala Hi Howard and Jon, - Each of the two cases below is a good example of mental formations (citta-sankhara). Are they truths, or just concepts of a reality that none of you (or I) know by "direct experience"? >Jon: > Likewise, when we hear a song on the radio, what is heard is audible > object ('sound') only; there is no 'song' or 'radio' actually *in* the > sound. And in terms of direct experience, there never is a (unitary) > song or radio or text or screen, because there is never more than one kind of experience happening -- that is to say, never more than one kind of consciousness arising, at its particular doorway -- at any moment. > =============================== >Howard: > IMO, what you say here is true, but more that is true can be said. > When we hear a song we hear a sequence of sounds which are interrelated in very particular ways, and it is those interrelationships that make the sequence a song rather than just noise. It is due to the interrelatedness of the heard sounds that enables the perceiving (and conceiving) of the song. And to the extent that there is that interrelatedness, there is a song. The "song" is imputed upon the sounds by thought, and there is no song independent of thought. Thus the song is concept. But it is not baseless concept. It is by by means of our conceptualization that we can know and deal with relations. > Tep ==== #76989 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 7:08 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Puggala pa~n~natti indriyabala Dear DC, - You wrote : > This is with regard to a message that you addressed to Nina. I hope you would excuse my intrusion. T: It is always my pleasure, you never intrude.. ;-) DC: Here is the passage I am interested in: > > "T: Thank you for this injection of pure Abhidhammic talk. The > citta "phenomenon" you just described is not unlike the electron flow > generation at a "generator base" inside a power generator of any > electric utility. No electrons last while new ones are being rapidly > generated, and we have electricity flows in cables to light up a > whole city downstream." > > I have seen "electrons" and "electricity", if my memory serves me right, in some of your earlier communications. > > Now, my question is: What is an electron? > I'll give my thesis: It is a figment of one's imagination. Reason: There are descriptions of the electron as a particle or as a wave. > So what is your reaction? > > The Abhidhamma is beyond me. But this sort of stuff--electricity and electrons--I have some familiarity. > T: I have not seen electrons or electricity either, DC. Yet we can tell through sensing an effect (e.g. lights, a spark, electric shock, ...) that is produced by electrons flowing in a conductor. Since you can tell that electricity is real because you see lights (or, if you want to, try to get electrocuted by high-voltage electricity), So I think you agree that electrons are not a fiction. Concerning the particle- or wave-theory being used for explaining the electron behaviors, I agree that they are nothing but mental formations that may or may not be truthful (realistic, verifiable). Well, that's all for my two-penny answer. I am a beginner in the Abhidhamma. Just like you, I started reading the Abhidhamma-Pitaka not long ago. Tep ==== #76990 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 7:30 pm Subject: Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views indriyabala Hi Jon, - Your patience and kindness in writing up a long reply are appreciated. Yes, the basic ideas that are the building blocks of your Abhidhamma views are clearer. You explain that dhatus, for example, are dhammas "because they are directly experienced". Can you elaborate on how you directly experience dhatus without using conceptual thinking like we see in the suttas? One more question, if you don't mind. How do you directly experience consciousness and gain the insight into its characteristic of anicca? Thanking you in advance, . Tep === #76991 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 8:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Puggala pa~n~natti dcwijeratna Dear Tep, Thank you very much for your reply. It is really illuminating. Now, I quote your response fully below: >T: "I have not seen electrons or electricity either, DC. Yet we can tell through sensing an effect (e.g. lights, a spark, electric shock, ...) that is produced by electrons flowing in a conductor. Since you can tell that electricity is real because you see lights (or, if you want to, try to get electrocuted by high-voltage electricity) , So I think you agree that electrons are not a fiction. Concerning the particle- or wave-theory being used for explaining the electron behaviors, I agree that they are nothing but mental formations that may or may not be truthful (realistic, verifiable). Well, that's all for my two-penny answer. I am a beginner in the Abhidhamma. Just like you, I started reading the Abhidhamma-Pitaka not long ago." 1. "So I think you agree that electrons are a fiction" Yes, I agree in a sense. [I used the word fiction with a double meaning] Now, your argument is: Since there are observable effects, it is real. So your knowledge is confined to the observable, or more accurately experienced effect. The word "electron" is only just a sound. You might as well have called this set of observable effect (lights, electrocution and so on) 'negatron' and our physics would be just as fine. There is a very important corollary: Reality has to be observed. By analysing a name such as "electron" you can never arrive at truth. (i prefer the use of the term truth to reality.) This is what the teaching of the Buddha is about: We cannot see the truth because of delusion. Remove delusion, then you will see the truth. How do you remove delusion? By actually travelling the path. This is why the Enlightenment is described as "cakkhu.m udapasdi, aloko udapasdi". This is what is meant by "abhi~n~naa" This is also "saccikatvaa" the meaning of the word is to see with one's own eyes. The usual translation as realized is a vague term leading to confusion. Just one comment about the study of Abhidhamma. Reading abhidhamma pi.taka is an enormous task. May I make a suggestion: Try reading Ven. Nyanaponika's Abhidhamma Studies--really a discussion of Dhammasa.nganii, the first book of the Abhidhamma Pi.taka. That reminds me, Dhammasa.ngani was translated to English by Mrs. Rhys Davids. Anybody who wishes to study Abhidhamma should read her penetrative article on Abhidhamma. I'll get some internet sources and let you know if you wish. Let's agree on some defintions to make sure that we are talking about the same thing. Just one for today. Reality only what is observed. The Buddha's way of describing that is "jaanati, passati" always used in combination. Next would to give a clear meaning to Abhidhamma. Just for two kicks: Can there be two truths? Many regards, With mettaa, D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #76992 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 8:19 pm Subject: Re: Citta indriyabala Dear Scott, - The message you wrote this time is short, but I know how a short message can rapidly expand. > T: "Yes, absolutely, the "citta" is chief in every moment, no doubt." > > Scott: Why do you place the word 'citta' between quotation marks? > T: Good observation! Because I wanted to emphasize the special meaning of 'citta' that is more powerful than the 'single citta'. ........................ > T: "A moment to me is a 'time duration' in which a sense-door restraint > is effective. I hesitate to use "time cross-section" that is defined > for a single citta, because it is theoretically zero in duration. > Sense restraint is not defined for a single citta, but rather by a > stream of consciousness. What do you think?" > > Scott: From whence comes this 'zero duration' concept? This may be an oxymoron > used for some literary purpose but, even then, it is not a > useful concept. I think that citta arises with function and effect > then falls away. Since citta exists, there is no 'zero', is there? > T: The word "zero" means there is "nothing" between two consecutive cittas. I remember seeing several past DSG messages which said :any ultimate reality rises and falls away so fast that there is no time gap between the rise-instant and the fall-instant. ........................... > Scott: I think that the concept 'stream of consciousness' is being used > to mean a whole or an entity. When citta arises with sati (to simplify) > this is a moment of 'sense-restraint'. Then this citta with sati > ceases. It is dependent on conditions whether the next citta also has > sati and functions as 'sense restraint. > > There is no 'state' of 'sense restraint' that is other than one or a > series of separate moments of consciousness consisting of citta with > sati arising and ceasing. > > T: The term 'moment' has to be defined carefully. Is it realistic for a single citta to arise with sati, and the second citta after that rises without sati? And if that is realistic, then how can there be an effect of restraint on the seeing (for example)? Say, you are upset by my question. The moment you know that, you exercise mind restraint to be calm. Can that restraint happen in one moment of a single citta? That's my point. The choice of word, 'state' or 'series of citta', should not be an important issue, I guess. Tep ==== #76993 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 5:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 10/1/2007 9:46:32 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: Hi Howard and Jon, - Each of the two cases below is a good example of mental formations (citta-sankhara). Are they truths, or just concepts of a reality that none of you (or I) know by "direct experience"? >Jon: > Likewise, when we hear a song on the radio, what is heard is audible > object ('sound') only; there is no 'song' or 'radio' actually *in* the > sound. And in terms of direct experience, there never is a (unitary) > song or radio or text or screen, because there is never more than one kind of experience happening -- that is to say, never more than one kind of consciousness arising, at its particular doorway -- at any moment. > =============================== >Howard: > IMO, what you say here is true, but more that is true can be said. > When we hear a song we hear a sequence of sounds which are interrelated in very particular ways, and it is those interrelationships that make the sequence a song rather than just noise. It is due to the interrelatedness of the heard sounds that enables the perceiving (and conceiving) of the song. And to the extent that there is that interrelatedness, there is a song. The "song" is imputed upon the sounds by thought, and there is no song independent of thought. Thus the song is concept. But it is not baseless concept. It is by by means of our conceptualization that we can know and deal with relations. > ======================================== I'm not clear on what you are asking, Tep. Jon made some statements, and I made some statements. I think that what each of us said is true. The statements are, of course, expressions of thinking. All statements are. And the things that are true or false are, always, statements. Dogs are neither true nor false, sights are neither true nor false, sounds are neither5 true nor false. Warmth is neither true nor false. The same for feelings, inclinations, and desires. Only statements, i.e., declarative sentences, are true or false. Statements, of course, are not paramattha dhammas. Is that what you are after? With metta, Howard #76994 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 5:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some Findings About Self and Self Views upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Jon) - In a message dated 10/1/2007 10:31:11 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: Hi Jon, - Your patience and kindness in writing up a long reply are appreciated. Yes, the basic ideas that are the building blocks of your Abhidhamma views are clearer. You explain that dhatus, for example, are dhammas "because they are directly experienced". Can you elaborate on how you directly experience dhatus without using conceptual thinking like we see in the suttas? One more question, if you don't mind. How do you directly experience consciousness and gain the insight into its characteristic of anicca? ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Here, Tep, I think you are asking a very interesting question! Unless I'm very much mistaken, I don't really think Jon (or Sarah or Nina or Khun Sujin) truly believe that consciousness is directly experienced, but they want to think that believe it! From what I have read, they believe that a citta is known as object (right) after it has ceased. They say there is direct knowing of the "just passed" citta. I, however, say that one cannot directly take as object of consciousness what no longer exists, and an already ceased citta *does not exist*. Now, we DO know that we know, but I do not believe that we ever know our present knowing. What I suspect is that we know some object, and then immediately or shortly after, we *recall* that knowing. I call that recollection the having of a "fresh memory". It amounts to the knowing of an excellent facsimile, a near-perfect photo-copy, but not a direct knowing of the original. The original is recalled, but not directly known. ------------------------------------------------------- Thanking you in advance, . Tep ============================= With metta, Howard #76995 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 9:36 pm Subject: Common is Low Rebirth! bhikkhu0 Friends: Breakthrough to the Truths safeguards against Downfall Rebirth! The Blessed Gotama Buddha once explained: Bhikkhus & friends, see this little dust, I have taken up upon the nail of my little-finger, what do you think is most: This tiny dust or this great planet Earth? The Bhikkhus then responded: Venerable Sir, this great planet Earth is much more, incomparable more... The minute speck of dust is trifling, microscopic, negligible in comparison. The Blessed Gotama Buddha then succinctly pointed out: Similarly and exactly so too, Bhikkhus & friends, those beings are few & quite rare, who are reborn among humans or devas! Beings who are reborn elsewhere, lower, as non-humans, in the screaming hell, as scared animals, as hungry ghosts or as mad demons are much more numerous & common... Why is it so? Because, Bhikkhus, they have not seen the 4 Noble Truths! <...> Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta NikÄ?ya. [V:474-5] section 56: Saccasamyutta. Thread 102-5: Elsewhere & etc... Comments: The actions that result in rebirth in the five destinations are described in detail in the work: PañcagatidÄ«panÄ«. Translated by Ann Appleby Hazlewood. in Journal of the PÄ?li Text Society. Vol. XI 1987: http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=132714 <...> Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka * <...> #76996 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 10:09 pm Subject: Is teaching of single rebirth-consciousness from abhidhamma only? philofillet Hi all (ps to Howard) For once a question instead of shooting off my mouth. I came across a sutta, AN IV, 232, which has ""Here someone generates both an afflictive volitional formation of body speech, or mind and an unafflictive volitional formation of body, speech and mind. Having done so, he is reborn in a world that is both afflictive and unafflictive." This doesn't seem to fit with the teaching of a single rebirth consciousness. How could a single patissandhi citta have both afflictive and unafflictive roots? Is there something akin to the patisandhi citta in the suttanta? I know questions about the way khamma works are considerable imponderables but this seems like a big point. Thanks in advance for any feedback. Phil. #76997 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 10:24 pm Subject: Re: Is teaching of single rebirth-consciousness from abhidhamma only? philofillet > Hi all (ps to Howard) > ha. erased the ps. It was about having mentionned this sutta to Howard when he was dealing with termites in his basement and reflecting on the kammic implications of moving them out one way or another. I thought that an akusala kamma patha deed could be tempered if the wellbeing of those who were in our protection (in this case a grandchild) was involved. Metta, Phil #76998 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 11:00 pm Subject: Re: Ready Bodhisattas are Once Returners. bhikkhu0 Hi friend Alex: IMHO are ALL Bodhisattas once-returners in the earthly life just before they go and enjoy their next-last life in the Tusita Heaven… Example: If the next future Buddha Ajita Metteyya is on Earth now, and he next will be reborn in the Tusita Heaven, then his Noble state here on earth will be that of a Once-Returner= He will return here once & then make an end. (SakadÄ?gÄ?mim) http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/me_mu/metteyya.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/a/ariya_puggala.htm Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka * <...> #76999 From: "colette" Date: Mon Oct 1, 2007 11:07 pm Subject: Re: Citta ksheri3 Hi Scott, Love those thoughts of zero time durations. While the first example you gave in a previous post was more a mental yoga this, Abhidharma selection, is VERY FLUID and imparts action which I can visualize quite easily. I'm really concertating now since I've found some unbelievable realities through the practices of Dzogchen and Mahamudra but also a far more richer flavor of the Nyingma, Vajrayana, and my base is the Yogacara (Mind-Only) school so it all kindof fits rather nicely. I cannot be afraid of what I stir in this cosmic condition we all live in but I know, from my past experience with situations like this, that it's gonna be a whopper, a big one. This is the first time in my life, that during a magikal operation of my own, I actually have other people that know of the kinds of things I do, accept my expertise and want to work with it, are actual scholars that realize the true potential of what I'm doing and they appear to me, in my mind's eye visualization, that they are over- joyed to participate by helping get the best material available. I know there are people monitoring my computer use and are giving me many choices to choose from in my study but without them I never would have known such acceptance and honor to be able to work with others that just aren't to knowledgable of what it is I'm up to, for lack of a better term, neophytes in ORDERED societies, beginers. I really like the two posts you gave on this subject of Zero Duration. thank you. toodles, colette