#78800 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 16, 2007 11:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] dr han tun, sarah and nina sarahprocter... Dear Manish, (Han & all), You wrote the following comment in #78246. I thought you expressed the point very well. --- vipassana_infonet wrote: > I feel pannatti (concept) may be about conventional truth (sammuti)or > even ultimate realities (paramattha). but, ultimately, a concept is a > concept. one may intellectually understand a puggala in terms of > conventional truth concept - as a puggala OR intellectually understand > a puggala as nama-rupa i.e. paramattha concept - but, even then it > still a concept. vipassana is going beyond concept - going beyond ALL > pannatti and doing actual experiential bhavana of the paramattha > realities of nama-rupa. ... S: As you suggest, whatever the concepts, they are still concepts. In the development of vipassana, actual paramatha realities, i.e namas and rupas are known. .... <...> S: On another point, you wrote: > as far as the bodhisatta being a sotapanna is concerned, I have > already written a lot in my last long and rambling post. just one more > point: the bodhisatta was not a sotapanna or else he could not have > passed through so many births, as mentioned in the jatakas. those who > take a strong vow - do not become an ariya - till their target is > reached - till they fulfill their paramis. ... S: I agree with your comment and you made other good points in your other long post. If he had become a sotapanna (or developed stages of insight even), he would have become a savaka of another Buddha, not a samma-sambuddha. Here are some good comments you wrote there: Manish: "3) in the dhammachakka pavattana sutta, the NEW buddha declared that "pubbe anansuttesu dhammesu...." now had he been a sotapanna he would not have discovered the dhamma unheard before - he would have already known it before hand. again, the buddha's are like lamps in darkness. but, had siddhartha already been a sotapanna - he would not have discovered anything new afresh when he became a buddha - he would have just finished the unfinished work. siddhartha was not a sotapanna when he was sumedha or when he went to alara kalama / uddaka ramaputta or even before he sat down under the bodhi tree. when he sat down under the bodhi tree he was one who had perfected all the 8 samatha jhanas (lokiya jhanas). when he became the buddha - he mastered the lokuttara fields completely (parijanati). 4) a samma-sambuddha is one who re-discovers the dhamma within himself (thus,a sam-buddha) and teaches the world. he starts as a puthujjana on the bodhi seat and when he gets up - he is an anant-jina - a BUDDHA who beats the drum of deathlessness for one and all - those who have ears hear Him.we must be grateful to the buddha for He suffered so long as an anariyo for us - to teach us. all must think: deep saddha must arise in me - because HE suffered so much just for me!" **** S: Thank you for yor helpful explanations. Like Nina, I'll look forward to hearing more of your comments, questions or answers! Metta, Sarah p.s I hope you saw my further response to our brief discussion on sanna. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/77839 ============ #78801 From: Ken O Date: Fri Nov 16, 2007 11:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: vipaka. Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) ashkenn2k Hi Han > I accept that accumulation of kusala and akusala is of > a very great consequence, but I find it difficult to > accept that vipaakas are very brief and > inconsequential. KO: Vipaka means result of kamma. A result of kamma cannot at the same time be accumulating kamma because this would mean it is an endless cycle. For eg when we speak ill words, the kamma could be akusala vipaka, if this aksuala vipaka accumulates kamma, it would again prouduced akuslala vipaka kamma. There would be no end to it. This is what Buddha said about our actions now is the result of our past actions is wrong and incorrect. Hence they are inconsequential in that sense. Cheers Ken O #78802 From: Ken O Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 12:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: KenH's Thoughts on Self and No Self # 34782 ashkenn2k Hi Elaine the raft is not "self" because it is self we are discarding. To me it is very clear in the sutta when Buddha keep emphasising on not me, not I and not myself. Also in the depedent origination, it is clearly about causes and conditions. Suffering originates due to the craving of the enjoying of this and that and also craving for being. If we use this self and have a believe we need this self for development then we are only keep inclining to it, that would result in strengthening the taints. Non arisen craving arise and arising craving increases and become strong In many instances, Buddha indeed mentioned monks train on this, it is for your benefit. Would one who understand that self is the root of our problem, emphasis on self? And in many instances, Buddha said when eye object and eye, eye consciouness arise. He never said eye arise due to we cause it to arise. It is due to causes and conditions. Would one understand causes and conditons believe there is self to develop? This is not easy to understand, it takes a lot of patience, investigation and reflecting on our six senses. Then one would realise why in DSG we keep insisting that right understanding is important. The understanding of realities, its causes and conditions. Cheers Ken O #78803 From: "reverendaggacitto" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 12:36 am Subject: For T.G/A discussion concerning "essence" reverendagga... Hi T.G! Thank you so mutch for butting in... in a less elegant way. In doing so you bring this sort of discussion to it's practical level where it really belongs. "Metaphorically phenomena are essentially hollow echoes of other conditions which are essentially hollow echoes etc.etc." "How the mind categorizes or differentiates phenomena is just a subjective reference point." "Seeing "own characteristics"(or essence)in phenomena is the act of delusion in progress." It is not a coinsidence that in discussing your point of view you find that it behoves you to use a derivitive of the word essence. (after all,this is essentially what you do!)Why? it is simple really,it is because even a hollow echoe for that moment that it arises has its own characteristics or else you would not be able to identify it as a hollow echoe weather as a metaphor or not. The moment we give the description or identify something as anything, including the Buddha Dhamma itself we admit to its attributes or"characteristics". A"delusion"i ask? Lets just say that "metaphorically" you're walking down a dark alley some night and someone hops out and beats you over the head and takes your money!You've not been robbed!YOU JUST THINK YOU HAVE! Why its just a "subjective reference point" that is causing your "delusion"!Of course you'll have a bit of trouble convincing Mr.bus driver that you don't REALLY not have change because you were robbed,to the "unenlightened" of course,it just SEEMS that way! As well then,there is no need for the Buddha Dhamma because there is no "suffering " or "incomplete" nature of samsara! Why,we just "believe" that there is a need for the Buddha Dhamma! We just don't realize the non existent need for the Ven. Gotamas teaching!Vipassina,(roadmap)Jhana,(vehicle)heck!who needs it! Its all just a "delusion" Our "subjective reference point"! In other words i understand the reality of "ULTIMATE DHAMMA" but lets not get carried away!CONVENTIONAL DHAMMA has its proper place also! As well,so does the "essence"of things. May the Buddha's,Deva,and Angel's bless ALL of you! bhikkhu aggacitto/aka reverend aggacitto #78804 From: Ken O Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 12:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Quick Question on Conditionality ashkenn2k Hi Phil "natural decisive support condition?" it is a something for one who kamma is not eradicated. At times for eg when we see a movie, we like it. We keep wanting to see it. this is an analogy of natural decisive support in which it supported the taints to arise. It keeps our want coming again and again which means it keep supporting the taints again anad again It is aggravated by the fact it is decisive, means it is a solid support. That is why taints are so difficult to erdicate. Cheers Ken O #78805 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:07 am Subject: Re: A Quick Question on Conditionality philofillet Hi Ken (ps to Scott, Matt) Hey, that's really clear, Ken - thanks. So the "repetitive" aspect is there - and I guess the recency and intensity that Rob M mentionned would also play into it. Thanks. Metta, Phil p.s Scott and Matt, I'm really happy and grateful about setting up a discussion with you, nice and easy, nothing confrontational. I'll be back to you in a few days. #78806 From: "reverendaggacitto" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:14 am Subject: For T.G/A discussion concerning "essence" reverendagga... Hi T.G! Guess What! The "champion" spelling bee master that i am,i just looked up "behove" at the Merriam Websters online and found out that it is the British derivative of "behoove"! HA! i lucked out on THAT one! Blessings to you ALL! bhikkhu aggacitto/aka reverend aggacitto #78807 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:19 am Subject: Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) philofillet Hi Mike and all How's it going? Yes, these impediments should be talked about more often, I think. I think they're far more meangingful than talking about "clinging to rules and rituals" (I forget the Pali) or clinging to self involved in formal meditation, etc. I haven't come across any mention of those in the samadhi section of Vism, not yet anyways. Irregardless of these impediments, I personally feel that there are very important benefits to samatha even short of jhanas - very important. Perhaps it's not samatha, technically speaking - probably just clinging to calm. Perhpas nothing more than the well known non- Dhamma benefits of "take ten deep breaths." But as for what it does in aiding me to abstain from bad deeds of body, speech and mind, it's very real. So yes, let's note the impediments to fulfillment of samatha, but I don't think this means writing off the benefits even for beginners. More later! :) Metta, Phil . It is said that > nine of > > the ten impediments are hindrances only for samatha. They distract one > > from its cultivation. "" > > Robert > > Thanks for re-posting these, Rob. The implications would be hard to > over-stress I think--at least if one takes Buddhaghosa's advice from > twenty centuries ago at least as seriously as that of twentieth > century innovators. > > mike > #78808 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:40 am Subject: Buddhist Boomers - free of fun? sarahprocter... Hi Howard, Phil & all, I came across this article a couple of days ago in the Asian Wall Street Journal. Nothing of significance, but I thought of you both while I was reading it, so you may enjoy taking a look as I see it's on-line: http://www.opinionjournal.com/taste/?id=110010842 It's titled "Buddhist Boomers" and this was the line that made me think of Phil" "....Unfortunately, it is also free of folk tales, family and--dare I say it--fun." Anyway, I thought the article was quite fun. See what you think! Metta, Sarah ========= #78809 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:42 am Subject: More on dana (Was [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma Q. to Elaine. philofillet Hi Elaine > Thank you for your e-m. I'd like to present my understanding of dana, generosity. Thanks. I took the liberty of re-titling the thread. Dana is a confusing area for me because of living in Japan, I think. Buddhism in Japan is so very much about shelling out money to temples to obtain specific benefits, usually posthumous. I mean, it's so explicitly wrong its not even funny. As a result, the average Japanese has little interest in the teachings, and has a bemused attitude towards Buddhism. (Robert K has seen a different side of things, I think, and perhaps Nina did during her time here.) It makes me sad sometimes, used to make me angry, because I know how the Dhamma can help unhappy people let go of the stupid worldly concerns that drag them through daily hells. Anyways, that's why I am dana-challenged when it comes to donating money to temples. (Nice excuse.) So I go for the non-monetary forms of dana, and one of them of course is sharing the Dhamma to the full extent of one's ability, so we are so lucky to have DSG. > > Dana is a central Buddhist teaching and its importance has been under-estimated. > > Why is dana important? It is because the understanding of mundane anatta begins with understanding the importance and significance of dana. The real supra-mundane understanding of anatta begins with namarupa pariccheda nana (knowledge that distinguish mental and physical states). Ph: The first "tender insight" - you will be discussing this one a lot with Nina, I think, because A. Sujin stresses how people take it for granted. > > Why does the mundane understanding of anatta begin from dana? It is because mundane anatta means understanding and letting go of the sense of `me?Eand `mine?E If we can't even begin to let go and share some of our material goods with others, how can we let go of our sense of `self?E Ph: Hmmm.........ok. I find it hard to believe, personally, that it is possible to perform dana in a formal sense without having a sense of wellbeing at the notion of being a person who is doing dana. But I'm sure it is possible. Beyond me, though. > Ajahn Thanissaro's teacher, Ajahn Lee once said, the Buddha taught us only one thing through out his teachings- he taught us generosity. By learning how to be generous, by letting go of the material goods that we have, we will slowly, and eventually learn to let go of the sense of `self?E and the attachment to `self?E Ph: OK. Stress on the "slowly"in my case. BTW, off topic, but today I was thinking that the Buddha taught, above all, harmlessness. Everything comes down to avihimsa, harmlessness. OK back to topic. > > And this non-attachment to self Is the mundane not-self, it is anatta, and that is why by doing dana, we have already begun to learn and know a little bit about anatta. This is all I know about Buddhism, that doing dana is the first step towards understanding anatta. Ph: Thank you, Elain. I feel kind of priviliged to be hearing about dana from someone who grew up doing dana, learning about doing dana in a natural way, through daily life, visits to the temple, etc. Didn't you ever have to deal with weird dana issues like "if we donate to this temple Elain will pass her university entrance exams" and stuff like that? That goes on all the time in Japan, though more often with shinto shrines. > I truly believe that Christians who do not know about anatta, but who are generous will have a good rebirth in deva realms. > > There is a story about Sakka, the King of Devas. A long, long time ago, Sakka was a born as man named Magha. At that time, there were no Buddha sasana on earth. Magha was a very generous man, he built roads and rest houses for tired travelers and he helped his villagers with the irrigation of the fields and etc. etc. Because of his generosity, when he died, he was reborn as the King of Devas and he lived many, many aeons in the Deva realm. Magha didn't know about anatta then because there was no Buddha sasana. With his genuine generosity, he got a good rebirth, as the King of the Devas. Ph: Yes, very clear suttas on this topic. People who perform dana and sila "but do not meditate" (ie bhavana, which must be in line with Dhamma) can have Deva-realm rebirth. It's in AN. But in subsequent lives they can fall into hell realms, in fact the sutta in question words it that they "will" fall into hell realms. (Commentarial note says this is a possibility rather than a sure thing.) > > So, I really do believe that Christians, Musslims, Hindus, Taoists will go to heavenly realms if they do lots of dana. Anatta is not a pre-requisite to do dana. Every time a dana is done, there is already wholesome thoughts in the mind. Ph: Ok, so the dana I refer to above, having a sense of wellbeing about being a person who does dana is still dana - just not a perfection, I guess. A Buddhist's kusala citta and a non-Buddhist's kusala citta are the same. Kusala citta and kusala kamma does not discriminate between religions. Ph: right. > > There are also many people who do dana, just to show off their wealth, they want to make sure they have their names announced if they donate money to charities and this becomes akusala. Ph: I see. > There is another story about a Deva who didn't get to enjoy his heavenly palace because he once did dana with some unwholesome thoughts. But because he did actually do the act of giving, he was reborn in heaven but he cannot enjoy the heavenly pleasures there. I cannot provide the sutta or commentary for this because it is a dhamma talk that I heard a long time ago. > > Sorry for this long post. I hope it is not too preachy. > Thank you. > Thank you, Elaine. Very interesting. If you have any anecdotes about the way dana is practiced in Malaysia (or Toronto!) I'd like to hear them. Metta, Phil #78810 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:48 am Subject: Re: Buddhist Boomers - free of fun? philofillet Hi Sarah Thanks for the link. Don't have time to read it now, but just wanted to point out that the "spice goes out" I'm referring to can' be seen on the surface. The people we're with might not, probably don't even know it has gone out for us. I think a lot about this when the weather is fantastically gorgeous as it is this time of year in Japan. There is never the thought "what a beautiful day" anymore for me - not really, not lastingly. There is always reflection on how the pleasant sense objects are "village raiding daicots" just as the unpleasant ones are. (I love those daicots!) I can say "beautiful day!" to Naomi, and enjoy it with her in a full way, outwardly, but always, always, reflection on those daicots. The days of inwardly celebrating the beauty of the world are gone...except in my stories. (They are stories for children, and I can appreciate the importance of celebrating life for them.) OK, I will be writing to Matt about that in a few days, probably, so I'll leave off there. Just had to have a little go at it. :) Metta, Phil #78811 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Nov 16, 2007 9:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] For T.G/A discussion concerning "essence" TGrand458@... Hi bhikkhu aggacitto/aka reverend aggacitto Thanks for your response. In a message dated 11/17/2007 1:37:14 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, reverendaggacitto@... writes: Hi T.G! Thank you so mutch for butting in... in a less elegant way. In doing so you bring this sort of discussion to it's practical level where it really belongs. "Metaphorically phenomena are essentially hollow echoes of other conditions which are essentially hollow echoes etc.etc." "How the mind categorizes or differentiates phenomena is just a subjective reference point." "Seeing "own characteristics""Seeing "own characteristics"(or essen delusion in progress." It is not a coinsidence that in discussing your point of view you find that it behoves you to use a derivitive of the word essence. (after all,this is essentially what you do!) TG: Hummm....the one reference I made to phenomena as ... "essentially" hollow of essence ... is somehow an affirmation of phenomena having essence? (I had a nice joke here but decided to leave it out.) Why? it is simple really,it is because even a hollow echoe for that moment that it arises has its own characteristics or else you would not be able to identify it as a hollow echoe weather as a metaphor or not. TG: Conditions arise that "appear" as something or another. The "something or other" is NOT what "it" appears to be, but is rather a conglomeration of conditions. Therefore..."its own characteristic or essence" is exactly what it has not and is not. To view "things" as having "their own characteristic" is the "quint-essential delusion" that needs to be overcome. Oops, I've done it again. The moment we give the description or identify something as anything, including the Buddha Dhamma itself we admit to its attributes or"characteristics"o A"delusion"i ask? Lets just say that "metaphorically" you're walking down a dark alley some night and someone hops out and beats you over the head and takes your money!You've not been robbed!YOU JUST THINK YOU HAVE! Why its just a "subjective reference point" that is causing your "delusion"!Of course you'll have a bit of trouble convincing Mr.bus driver that you don't REALLY not have change because you were robbed,to the "unenlightened" of course,it just SEEMS that way! As well then,there is no need for the Buddha Dhamma because there is no "suffering " or "incomplete" nature of samsara! Why,we just "believe" that there is a need for the Buddha Dhamma! We just don't realize the non existent need for the Ven. Gotamas teaching!Vipassina,teaching!teaching!Vipassteaching!Vipassina, Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 3:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: vipaka. Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) hantun1 Dear Ken O (Sarah), Thank you very much for your comments. > > Sarah: What is experienced through the senses, the kusala and akusala vipaka is so very brief and inconsequential on account of its impermanence. (Message #78717) > Han: Thus akusala vipaaka and kusala vipaaka may be short-lived but it is not inconsequential. (Message #78780) -------------------------------- Han: You have kindly supported Sarah, vide your Message #78801, by saying that “Hence they are inconsequential in that sense.” With my limited knowledge, I cannot say anything to refute your statement. I can only present my case why I said that akusala vipaaka and kusala vipaaka may be short-lived but it is not inconsequential. From the outset, it is to be understood that by saying “akusala vipaaka and kusala vipaaka” Sarah is referring to the following cittas. [Sarah, please correct me if I am wrong.] Akusala vipaka cittas (unwholesome resultant consciousness) Upekkha-sahagatam cakkhuvinnanam (eye-consciousness accompanied by indifference) Upekkha-sahagatam sotavinnanam (ear-consciousness accompanied by indifference) Upekkha-sahagatam ghanavinnanam (nose-consciousness accompanied by indifference) Upekkha-sahagatam jivhavinnanam (tongue-consciousness accompanied by indifference) Dukkha-sahagatam kayavinnanam (body-consciousness accompanied by painful feeling) Ahetuka Kusala Vipaka Cittas (rootless, resultant, moral consciousness) Upekkha-sahagatam cakkhuvinnanam (eye-consciousness accompanied by indifference) Upekkha-sahagatam sotavinnanam (ear-consciousness accompanied by indifference) Upekkha-sahagatam ghanavinnanam (nose-consciousness accompanied by indifference) Upekkha-sahagatam jivhavinnanam (tongue-consciousness accompanied by indifference) Sukha-sahagatam kayavinnanam (body-consciousness accompanied by pleasant feeling) ------------------------------ Han: Having said that, I will present how these consciousness are consequential. SN 27.3: Viññana Sutta — Consciousness At Savatthi. "Monks, any desire-passion with regard to eye-consciousness is a defilement of the mind. Any desire-passion with regard to ear-consciousness... nose-consciousness... tongue-consciousness... body-consciousness... intellect-consciousness is a defilement of the mind. When, with regard to these six bases, the defilements of awareness are abandoned, then the mind is inclined to renunciation. The mind fostered by renunciation feels malleable for the direct knowing of those qualities worth realizing." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn27/sn27.001-010.than.html#sn27.003 Han: In the above sutta the Buddha clearly said that any desire-passion with regard to any of these consciousness is a defilement of the mind. If these consciousness are inconsequential, the Buddha would not have said that. -------------------------- Han: I will bring up another sutta. Consciousness 56. Saying, "Good, friend," the bhikkhus delighted and rejoiced in the Venerable Sariputta's words. Then they asked him a further question: "But, friend, might there be another way in which a noble disciple is one of right view... and has arrived at this true Dhamma?" — "There might be, friends. 57. "When, friends, a noble disciple understands consciousness, the origin of consciousness, the cessation of consciousness, and the way leading to the cessation of consciousness, in that way he is one of right view... and has arrived at this true Dhamma. 58. "And what is consciousness, what is the origin of consciousness, what is the cessation of consciousness, what is the way leading to the cessation of consciousness? There are these six classes of consciousness: eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, mind-consciousness. With the arising of formations there is the arising of consciousness. With the cessation of formations there is the cessation of consciousness. The way leading to the cessation of consciousness is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view... right concentration. 59. "When a noble disciple has thus understood consciousness, the origin of consciousness, the cessation of consciousness, and the way leading to the cessation of consciousness... he here and now makes an end of suffering. In that way too a noble disciple is one of right view... and has arrived at this true Dhamma." MN 9 Sammaditthi Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.009.ntbb.html#vinnana Han: In the above sutta, the importance of consciousness is self-explanatory. I need not add anything more. In view of the above, I said that these consciousness may be short-lived, but they are consequential. Respectfully, Han #78814 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 4:45 am Subject: Perfections Corner (37) nichiconn Dear All, This is the continuation of Chapter 7: The Perfection of Truthfulness, 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 may not know thoroughly and in all details what the right practice is. We should reflect on the Bodhisatta's practice before he attained Buddhahood and then we shall know that he gave an example of the right practice of kusala, kusala that was very subtle and refined. We can follow his example in our daily life. The perfection of pa~n~naa should be developed together with the other perfections. We cannot forego any of the perfections, because each perfection is a necessary support for the others. Truthfulness, sacca, for example, is necessary for the performing of generosity, daana. Without truthfulness generosity cannot reach fulfilment. Without truthfulness the observance of siila cannot reach accomplishment. Thus, truthfulness is essential for the fulfilment of the other perfections. We read about the meaning of truthfulness in the "Paramattha Jotikaa", the Commentary to the "Sutta Nipaata", The Group of Discourses, I, The Snake Chapter 10, Aa.lavaka: "The term sacca has several meanings: it can mean truthfulness in speech (vaacaa sacca), or it can mean truthfulness in abstaining (virati sacca). It is steadfastness in the truth, in the abstention from akusala kamma. It can mean truthfulness of view (di.t.thi sacca), truthfulness as to right view. Sacca can also refer to brahmana sacca (brahmin truths {*}), paramattha sacca (ultimate truth) and ariya sacca (noble Truths). The term 'saccena' (by truthfulness), means, someone acquires a good reputation, because he speaks the truth, because of sincerity. The Buddhas, Pacceka Buddhas and the ariyan disciples have a high reputation because of ultimate truth, paramattha sacca {**}." {*} Truthfulness with regard to the holy life, the life of someone who develops the eightfold Path leading to the eradication of defilements. {**} They have realized the true nature of the paramattha dhammas of citta, cetasika, ruupa and nibbaana. to be continued, connie #78815 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 5:32 am Subject: Fwd: Re: Standing A Young Woman Up .... In My Dream This Morning abhidhammika --- In BuddhistWellnessGroup@yahoogroups.com, "abhidhammika" wrote: Dear David Bingell, Dr Des, Regine Wong, and all How are you? David asked: "Were you born to Buddhism, or come it it later in life?" I was born to Buddhism in Myanmar, and as my parents are Dhamma enthusiasts, I have been regularly exposed to Buddha Dhamma discussions in my family home until I went to university and then migrated to Australia. David also wrote: "If born to it; i see the rubbish and sand as meaningless information that you are being asked to get rid of." As a side issue, I am not sure about what you mean by meaningless information. Could you elaborate it? At this stage, shall we settle for unnecessary information? Thank you for offering interpretation of sand and rubbish as information. Also interpretation of shopping center as being tied to material objects sounds plausible. With regards, Suan --- In BuddhistWellnessGroup@yahoogroups.com, David Bingell wrote: Dear Suan, I have no knowledge of who you are, so please be patient with me. Were you born to Buddhism, or come it it later in life? If born to it; i see the rubbish and sand as meaningless information that you are being asked to get rid of. If you came to Buddhism later in life, i can see that this could represent all sorts of misconceptions about Buddhism and about your own essential being. The woman is Kwan Yin/Avalokiteswara/Chenzerig. Being in the center for shopping could represent as many things as there are inhabitant on the planet, you'll have to make a decision for yourself. I see it as being tied to material objects, and even this can be seen in two ways or more; being attached, or th complete opposit - detached and innured to their state of being. When you think of it, what better way to demonstrate that? Dreams are so culturally specific, and each image can be interpreted in so many different ways. I simply offer you what I see. Yes, if the woman is indeed Quan Yin, she will always be there waiting for a bag to help you understand the meaning of posessions and attachment. I hope this, if nothing else, provides some mile entertainment. Namaste, David abhidhammika wrote: Dear Dr Des, Regine and all How are you? This morning (16 November 2007) I had a very unusual dream. The scene of location was the City area in Canberra that means a busy shopping centre. I met a young woman whose dress seemed to be in black. She said she needed a shopping bag to carry a mixture of sand and rubbish. So I went up to a nearby Chinese restaurant in which I saw white vapour and many empty seats as it was still too early for lunch. There I requested a staff to give me a spare shopping bag. When he turned and went to get a shopping bag, I woke up and the dream ended. The young woman would still be waiting for my return with an empty shopping bag! Or would she? Did she see me returning to her with an empty bag as she requested and expected? Or would she be very angry as I did not return and stood her up (leaving her waiting forever)? Those were my thoughts after waking up from my dream. How do you feel about the above situation? With regards, Suan www.bodhiology.org #78816 From: han tun Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 5:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (37) hantun1 Dear Connie, Nina, and Sarah, The Text: The term 'saccena' (by truthfulness), means, someone acquires a good reputation, because he speaks the truth, because of sincerity. ------------------------------ Han: I would like to add that the term 'saccena' (by truthfulness) appears several times in Paritta Suttas — Protection Discourses. For example, the words *Etena saccena suvatthi hotu!* *By this truth may there be peace!* appear several times in Ratana Sutta http://www.aimwell.org/Books/Suttas/Paritta/Paritta3/paritta3.html ----------------------------- Han: This kind assertiveness is said to be very powerful. In Angulimaala Sutta, Arahant Angulimaala exclaimed the following assertiveness. http://www.aimwell.org/Books/Suttas/Paritta/Paritta10/paritta10.html Yatoham bhagini ariyaaya jaatiyaa jaato, Naabhijaanaami sa~ncicca paanam jiivitaa voropetaa, Tena saccena sotthi te hotu sotthi gabbhassa Sister, since I was born with the Ariyan birth, I have not knowingly and deliberately taken the life of any living being, by this truth may you be well and may your child be well. ------------------------------ Han: When Arahant Angulimaala exclaimed this assertiveness, even a case of difficult child-birth was said to be easily delivered. Respectfully, Han #78817 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 5:22 am Subject: Final Fundamental Freedom! bhikkhu0 Friends! Complete Detachment by Relinquishing all Clinging: Friends, you should Train yourself in this Way: I will not cling to neither the eye, nor to the ear, nor to the nose, nor to the tongue, nor to the body, nor to the mind... Thus will my consciousness depend neither on awareness of any sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches nor any mental states... Thus will my consciousness depend neither on any visual contact, auditory contact, olfactory contact, gustatory contact, tactile contact, nor any mental contact... Thus will my consciousness neither depend on any feeling aroused from these visual or ... mental contacts... Thus will my consciousness neither depend on any form, emotion, perception, mental construction, nor any naked awareness itself. Thus will my consciousness depend neither on any solidity, fluidity, heat, motion, space nor any sort of mentality whatsoever... Thus will my consciousness neither depend on any infinitude of space, any infinitude of consciousness, any sphere of nothingness, any sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception... Thus will my consciousness neither depend on anything in this world nor anything in any other world beyond this world… Thus will my consciousness be independent of what is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, encountered, searched and examined by the mind... It will be without base, source, object, unconnected, unconstrained, unrelated, autonomous, sovereign, sublime and supreme… This -only this- itself leads to the liberty of final freedom!!! Source: The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha Majjhima Nikaya http://www.pariyatti.com/book.phtml?prod_id=25072X http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/index.html Final Fundamental Freedom! Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka * ..... #78818 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 6:21 am Subject: Re: Conditions, Ch17, no3. ...Some Comments... buddhistmedi... Dear Scott, - Thank you for this reminder. It shows that you are a good doctor. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > I was wondering if you had a reply to my last post to you in this > series. I thought I had met your challenge but then no word from > you... No worries if not. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > T: You are right, Scott. You last reply was satisfactory and you even impressed me with the rare gentleman quality (of admitting an error when there is one). But somehow the tone of the conversation told me that you were wrapping up the discussion. Well, now I know that that was a wrong impression ! Let me re-read it and write you a reply soon. Thanks. Your friend, Tep === #78819 From: "reverendaggacitto" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 6:55 am Subject: For T.G/On Essence... a further concideration reverendagga... Hi T.G! Thank You for the speedy reply! i can agree that things in and of themselves so to speak can't "OWN" a characteristic but theres a big difference in saying that and for one to say or to strongly imply even that "things" can't HAVE their own characteristics even as a combination of other characteristics at a certain moment in time when that phenomena arises.Otherwise it would be unidentifiable as a phenomena. In better understanding this i believe we can acknowledge both conventional as well as ultimate dhamma at one and the same time the way i believe it was ment to be. "identifying things is not imparting essence." "delusionally speaking, identifying things is imparting essence". WHICH WAY DO YOU WANT IT? Futhermore with ALL due respect, PLEASE do not bother quoting anything but the Pali Canon to me. May the Buddha's ,Deva,and Angels bless ALL of you! bhikkhu aggacitto/aka reverend aggacitto #78820 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (37) nilovg Dear Han, thank you for this example of the 'Assertion of Truth". Op 17-nov-2007, om 14:41 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Sister, since I was born with the Ariyan birth, I have > not knowingly and deliberately taken the life of any > living being, by this truth may you be well and may > your child be well. > ------------------------------ > Han: When Arahant Angulimaala exclaimed this > assertiveness, even a case of difficult child-birth > was said to be easily delivered. Later on in the Ch on Truthfulness another example is given. A boy bitten by a snake recovered by an Assertion of Truth. < As we read in the “Basket of Conduct”, the Bodhisatta highly valued truthfulness. He spoke the truth, saying that he was only for seven days a recluse wholeheartedly, with full confidence in kusala. He expressed his confidence in kusala and in truthfulness by a solemn utterance, an “Assertion of Truth”. This was the condition for the brahman youth to recover. An “Assertion of Truth” is a forceful affirmation of faith in the truth which can create a direct effect on someone else’s condition .> Nina. #78821 From: "reverendaggacitto" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:10 am Subject: For T.G/essence ....further conciderations reverendagga... NEVERMIND that last bit about the Pali Canon... i misread your quote! Thanks! bhikkhu aggacitto/aka reverend aggacitto #78822 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 8:13 am Subject: Re: Conditions, Ch17, no3. ...Some Comments... buddhistmedi... Hi Scott (Nina, Sarah, Dieter, Elaine, etc.), - Let's get back to our serious business of serious dhamma discussion. ;-) >T:"Let me ask you a crucial question before proceeding. Did the Buddha ever talk about concept(pannatti) in the Suttana Teachings?" Scott: Good question. I found this (not a lot of time to look, but its a start. Plus I'm not sure yet about its meaning): SN 62(10) Pathways of Language (Bh. Bodhi, tr.) ... etc. T: SN 62.10 is about the nirutti-patha or pathways of language, i.e. concepts. That answers my question. Thank you, Scott. ........... Scott: I wouldn't mind if anyone has access to further Commentarial elaboration here. Anyway, Tep, do you know of any others? I can keep searching. Why do you ask? T: I have not seen other suttas about nirutti(language). I asked because there are several meanings of concepts and people here are not consistent about what they mean when they talk about concepts. Language is just a part of conventional truth. However, the meaning of sammati/sammuti beyond nirutti is the whole mental formations that are dukkha, the opposite of Nibbana. That may be the reason why concepts are opposite to paramattha dhammas. The ATI Glossary gives a simple yet adequate meaning of concepts as follows: "sammati [sammati]: Conventional reality; convention; relative truth; supposition; anything conjured into being by the mind". To me that the most important meaning of concepts is "anything conjured into being by the mind", which is the same as mental fabrication/concoction that is opposite to the pure dhamma(reality, phenomenon the way it really is BEFORE mental concoctions): it is a creation of kamma. Thus the construction, creation, or formation by the mind is dukkha. The right understanding of the pure dhamma (the way it is) is the opposite : it is the de-construction, separation, or dis-aggregatation of all fomations. When the 'coming-together' is stopped, dukkha is eradicated, kamma ceases, and that is Nibbana. "And what is the cessation of kamma? From the cessation of contact is the cessation of kamma." [Nibbedhika Sutta]. The great Arahant Sariputta also said in the Patisambhidamagga that the arising, occurrence, sign (nimitta), accumulation, and rebirth- linking(patisandhi) are dukkha(the opposite to peace, bliss). He contemplates as suffering Arising, occurrence, and the sign, Accumulation, rebirth-linking And this his knowledge is of danger. He contemplates as bliss no-arising, And no-occurrence, and no-sign, No-accumulation, no rebirth-linking And this his knowledge is of peace. This knowledge about danger has Five sources for its origin; Knowledge of peace has also five Ten knowledges he understands. When skilled in these two kinds of knowledge The various views will shake him not. [Patism. I, 304] T: In this paragraph 304 there are ten knowledges to be understood by the meditator, i.e. 5 knowledges of danger (arising, occurrence, sign, accumulation, and rebirth-linking) and 5 knowledge of bliss (no- arising, no-occurrence, no-sign, no-accumulation, and no rebirth- linking). ........... Scott: I'm wondering whether what you say ("Since an 'idea' is a thought, or a mind object, i.e. 'dhamma'...") is correct. I was going to say a thought is a conceptual object, which it may be, but I'm now not sure - and this may just be an aside - whether an 'idea' is a 'dhamma'. I'll say no for now and suggest that an 'idea', although a 'conceptual object' is pa~n~natti, not paramattha dhamma. But at any rate, I'll tentatively consider a 'thought' or an 'idea' to be a conceptual object. I'm still thinking that sati can't have pa~n~natti as object but I think this is an old matter of speculation here. T: I like it very much when you sound so sincere and non-arrogant. I know, I know, I myself surely sound arrogant to you at times -- people usually do not see their own faults and they keep pointing their bad fingers at each other. ;-)) Based on my discussion above (ATI definition plus the paragraph 304 from Patism), thought is a mental formation and it may or may not be a concept. I believe thought is not concept when it is pure dhamma, i.e. such a "thought" does not lead to arising, occurrence, sign, accumulation, and rebirth-linking. What do you think now? ............ I want to save the rest of your message for a rainy day. Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > Thanks for the reply: > ... .... > > Scott: Well, my wording was poor there for sure. I was recalling that we concur on the lokiya/lokuttara dichotomy. I mean 'lokiya' for > 'mundane'. Sati can arise with lokiya moment of consciousness, if one can put it that way, and have any sort of conditioned dhamma as object or sati can arise with lokuttara moment of consciousness and have Nibbaana as object. Corrections desired. Sorry for the confusion. > > T: "Only Nibbana? Then, is a sati that takes a ruupa (or a naama) as the object an ultimate reality, or is it a mundane reality?" > Scott: No. Two things here. I'm saying that I think sati takes only paramattha dhammas as object. I'm also saying that sati can arise with lokiya moments of consciousness and sati can arise with lokuttara moments of consciousness. In the former case, sati has conditioned ultimate realities as object, in the latter case, sati has Nibbaana as object. > > T: "I think you might have made the simple subject complicated." > > Scott: Although I may be wrong in what I suggest, you seem to have > misunderstood the gist of my argument - the part coming from a > previously agreed to distinction. This is likely due to my imprecise wording. Sorry. > > T: "That reminds me of what Azita said about 'overestimating' a simple principle." > > Scott: Hopefully you can stand easy now. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > #78823 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 8:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Conditions, Ch17, no3. ...Some Comments... dcwijeratna Dear Tep, You might find something about pa~n~natti in MN 3. 68. Mettaa, D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #78824 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 8:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) buddhistmedi... Hi Han and all - How would you explain the presentation format of the Dhammasanga.nii that is also seen in the Patisambhidamagga, i.e. terse, no story telling -- just the dhammas that are easier to memorize than most suttas ? Is it likely that both Dhammasanga.nii and Patisambhidamagga ARE the Abhidhamma? Thanks. Tep === #78825 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 8:39 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Conditions, Ch17, no3. ...Some Comments... buddhistmedi... Hi, DC my friend - > DC:> > You might find something about pa~n~natti in MN 3. 68. > T: There is no online version for either MN 3 or MN 68 or even MN 3.68. So I wonder if you be kind enough to post just the relevant passages from that sutta for me? Thanking you in advance, Tep === #78826 From: Ken O Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 9:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: vipaka. Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) ashkenn2k Hi Han Tun > > Han: > Having said that, I will present how these > consciousness are consequential. > > SN 27.3: Viññana Sutta — Consciousness > At Savatthi. "Monks, any desire-passion with regard to > eye-consciousness is a defilement of the mind. Any > desire-passion with regard to ear-consciousness... > nose-consciousness... tongue-consciousness... > body-consciousness... intellect-consciousness is a > defilement of the mind. When, with regard to these six > bases, the defilements of awareness are abandoned, > then the mind is inclined to renunciation. The mind > fostered by renunciation feels malleable for the > direct knowing of those qualities worth realizing." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn27/sn27.001-010.than.html#sn27.003 > > Han: In the above sutta the Buddha clearly said that > any desire-passion with regard to any of these > consciousness is a defilement of the mind. If these > consciousness are inconsequential, the Buddha would > not have said that. > KO: A good question. In the Abhidhamma, the five sense vipaka citta are bare impression cittas. Only the universal cetasikas arise with them and no other cetasikas. At the moment of their arising, they are weak. There is no mula cetasikas arise with these cittas. No defilement could arise on the onset of vipaka as I said a resultant, cannot accumulate kamma thus this means no mula cetasikas. Defilement are mula cittas only happen in the Javana process according to Abhidhamma. the defilement of mind here is refering to the javana process of the sense process. This also a question raise by another member recently to me that Abhidhamma differs from the sutta on the sense cittas. This is Abhidhamma explanation, it is up to the individual to accept its credibility. the renunciation also in the javana process because it is panna that arise in this process and not in vipaka cittas. this explain both of the sutta quote you have given me Kind regards Ken O #78827 From: Ken O Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 9:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Quick Question on Conditionality ashkenn2k Hi Phil there are still other aspect of natural decisive support, what I say is only part of it. You can look at zolag.co.uk where Nina wrote about conditions. Interesting book there it talk on many aspect of conditions and its influence on the paramatha dhamma. Worth many reads :-) cheers Ken O #78828 From: Dieter Möller Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 9:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: KenH's Thoughts on Self and No Self # 34782 moellerdieter Hi Ken H , (Tep and ..) you wrote: 'Perhaps that was where the confusion lay. Was that why you referred me to MN 22? Was it to show me that the simile was not BT's original idea? Perhaps you can see now why I did not comment on your quote from MN22. It was not the issue! The issue was BT's interpretation of it' D: you are right, I thought you do not accept the sutta quotation..seemingly I misread , sorry ;-) I am a bit confused what exactly it is on which your rejection of B.T. is based, i.e. missing quotations of what he wrote in context and your comment to it. What I have seen up to now were pieces of objections,opinions but nothing substantial to justify your claim in front of the DSG forum that false Dhamma is preached by this wellknown monk. KenH: have done that. And I have provided several quotes from BT's writing. To my mind, the evidence is incontrovertible. BT does not believe there really is no self. He believes the doctrine of anatta is just a strategy for calming the meditator's mind. He says the doctrine of anatta is like a raft that we can dispense with once it has served its purpose. That is fair enough to a certain extent, but he goes so far as to say that, once the strategy has served its purpose, we can *go back* to our old beliefs in self. (Because we don't need to meditate any more, and therefore we don't need to worry about distractions.) D: as mentioned I would be glad to see quotations in its context and your comment to it . In case you have done that please guide me or kindly copy from respective messages KenH: Having read what I have had to say on the matter you could take one of the following attitudes: You could maintain (1) that BT does teach atta-belief and he is wrong to do so: (2) BT does teach atta-belief and he is right to do so: (3) BT does not teach atta-bleief, and I (Ken H) have misrepresented him, or: (4) you are not entirely convinced either way, but will bear what I have said in mind. D: neither one of the four.. as I have not yet a conclusion whether your claim is well founded. So , when you write - as recently to Tep 'I try not to have unreasonable expectations. Perhaps I can occasionally help someone who is being led astray unwittingly by Bhikkhu Thanissaro's heterodoxy. However, if after becoming aware of the facts, someone should insist BT is right and the rest of the world's Buddhist teachers are wrong then so be it. There is only so much I can do.' you claim that you have checked thoroughly, which goes naturally according to ancient procedure... ( the 4 Great References -Maha Pari Nibbana Sutta- : .snip .. the declaration of such a bhikkhu is neither to be received with approval nor with scorn. Without approval and without scorn, but carefully studying the sentences word by word, one should trace them in the Discourses and verify them by the Discipline. If they are neither traceable in the Discourses nor verifiable by the Discipline, one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is not the Blessed One's utterance; this has been misunderstood by that bhikkhu - snip KenH: What do you mean by a "mixture of nibbana and parinibbana?" D: you mentioned raft together with parinibbana.. with Metta Dieter P.S: no interference intended , but I think I would be nice to write to Tep and possibly refer to the links he suggested .... #78829 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 4:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhist Boomers - free of fun? upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Phil) - Sarah, thanks for the article, Sarah. What interests me the most is that it raises the issue of the relationship between one's birth religion and one's adopted Dhamma. I'll have more to say about this, but for now, I'll say just the following: The author seems to suggest a conversion that involves a complete replacing of ones religion of origin by Buddhism. Now, my initial involvement with Judaism was largely an ignorant and perfunctory involvement. My involvement with the Dhamma has become central to my life. Interestingly, my heartfelt taking of refuge in the Dhamma, my study of it, and my practice of it have led me to see important elements of it within Judaism and have provided me with a perspective that has reintroduced me to my birth religion in a far deeper way than ever before. For me, the Dhamma is perfection, and it points to the reality and the practice that lies at the heart of what is of value elsewhere. And now I find that in studying the works of Judaic "masters" that I was previously unaware of, there is available a source of insight into elements of Dhamma that I never dreamed existed. There are writings by Chassidic masters and others on sila, mindfulness, guarding the senses, and meditation (the latter in terms related to "prayer") that read just like Buddhist writings. Somewhere the Buddha said something to the effect that whatever is conducive to wisdom and relinquishment, wherever it is found, is Dhamma. I think that is true. Reality is reality, and truth is truth. But I hasten to add that for me it is the Tipitaka that is the gold standard by which all else is to be measured. With metta, Howard #78830 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 10:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Conditions, Ch17, no3. ...Some Comments... dcwijeratna Hi, Tep, I am sorry about it. I gave you the PTS reference. Here is where you can get it. It is MN 116, Isigili sutta. Fro Access to Insight. If you do a Google search for that, you'll get it. Search for Isigili sutta. The translation is by Ven. Piyadassi. It is a reasonabl translations. You can try Mahaanidaana Sutta of DN as well. D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #78831 From: "reverendaggacitto" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 10:27 am Subject: essence/a hot night in penang and i cant sleep reverendagga... Hi again T.G ! even though the Visuddhimagga is usually good enough for me,i'm still having second thoughts,even though at first reconcideration i thought it not worth pursuing.even though your not just quoting another "what the Buddha taught"type book ,i don't see the need to just accept what is being said either."connectedness by continuity denies identity or otherness"i must disagree. The particles of water in a stream being connected by continuity are'nt denied the identity of "water". I believe the question now becomes this:there is a phenomena that arises and while it exists it manifests certain qualities that we call a characteristic of this or that.Because this qualitive value judgment is subjective on the part of those concerned,does this mean that the phenomena concerned is not expressing any sort of qualative expression associated with its essence or being?Or that it doesn't have any "true" essence? i simply don't see why the conventional and the ultimate dhammic end of this cant be relised together as the same component of "reality".This is the same mistake i believe people make when they speak of not "self"nor "not self".They seek to view only the "ultimate" dhammic end as "true" reality. I'm finally a bit more tired now,i think i'll go back to bed. May the Buddha's,Deva,and Angels bless you all! bhikkhu aggacitto/aka reverend aggacitto #78832 From: Dieter Möller Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 10:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhist Boomers - free of fun? moellerdieter Hi Sarah, Howard ..and thanks for the link ( and thanks, Howard, for your informative response..) It is an interesting issue to see the cultural background and Dhamma acceptance, not at least in a light of ' who, who only knows England, doesn't know England' you recently wrote: p.s Dieter, also interested to read your comments about developments/Buddhist ideas in Germany over the years. Pls also add more anytime.' I probably would have to start with Schopenhauer..most German people nowadays can only associate being the 'arch pessimist ' among great philosophers .. not sure, whether we would find much group interest.. nevertheless will add as you suggest when recognising relevant issues.. probably controversial ones.. ;-) Please continue to promote the information /discussion of contemporary Buddhism in different countries.. with Metta Dieter #78833 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 5:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] essence/a hot night in penang and i cant sleep upasaka_howard Hi, Bhante (and TG) - In a message dated 11/17/2007 1:27:17 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, reverendaggacitto@... writes: Hi again T.G ! even though the Visuddhimagga is usually good enough for me,i'm still having second thoughts,even though at first reconcideration i thought it not worth pursuing.even though your not just quoting another "what the Buddha taught"type book ,i don't see the need to just accept what is being said either."connectedness by continuity denies identity or otherness"i must disagree. The particles of water in a stream being connected by continuity are'nt denied the identity of "water". I believe the question now becomes this:there is a phenomena that arises and while it exists it manifests certain qualities that we call a characteristic of this or that.Because this qualitive value judgment is subjective on the part of those concerned,does this mean that the phenomena concerned is not expressing any sort of qualative expression associated with its essence or being?Or that it doesn't have any "true" essence? i simply don't see why the conventional and the ultimate dhammic end of this cant be relised together as the same component of "reality".This is the same mistake i believe people make when they speak of not "self"nor "not self".They seek to view only the "ultimate" dhammic end as "true" reality. I'm finally a bit more tired now,i think i'll go back to bed. May the Buddha's,Deva,and Angels bless you all! bhikkhu aggacitto/aka reverend aggacitto ==================================== For me, it is not an error to think that dhammas are distinguishable. Dhammas including occurrences of hardness, sounds, sights, bodily sensations etc are distinguishable one from another. They are different "qualities". Where I think there is error is in referring to these as having own-nature, essence, self-nature, or identity, for dhammas do not even have own being, inasmuch as they are entirely dependent on other equally empty dhammas for their very existence. Moreover, what has essence (or a core of self-existence) cannot cease with the cessation of conditions. ["When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one" and " 'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme."] As I see it, the problem lies not in the use of terms such as 'nature' and 'characteristic', but in the use of the term 'own'. There is no "own" or "self". There are only fleeting qualities entirely contingent upon other will' the wisp phenomena. With metta, Howard #78834 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 11:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: vipaka. Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) nilovg Hi Tep, Op 16-nov-2007, om 23:53 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > T: The above discussion about the difficulty in trying to separate > out "the actual moments of vipaaka" from "the many moments of > thinking with sadness" shows me that the paramattha-dhamma theory of > single citta with "kusala vipaaka or akusala vipaaka" in a given > moment is not practical in the real world of concepts. --------- N: Difficult to distinguish, but pa~n~naa can when it is more developed. It is important to know the difference between vipaakacitta and akusala citta or kusala citta. It is important to know which jaati (four jaatis: kusala, akusala, vipaaka and kiriya) a citta is. Otherwise we take akusala citta for vipaakacitta. As to 'the real world of concepts', I think you mean daily life. The question is: what is real? I am always impressed by this sutta text, and I quote this from Kh Sujin's Survey: Thus, no matter anyone knows it or not dhammas occur according to their own conditions. This is real life. We can explain dhammas in conventional language, we can think about them in conventional language, it does not matter. Dhammas arise in accordance with the appropriate conditions, perform their own function and then have to fall away. This happens anyway, 'whether there be an appearance or non-appearance of a Tathågata'. Kamma produces result, vipaakacitta, no matter whether we like it or not. When we have an accident and have to spend our life from then on in a wheelchair, we can think that this accident has grave consequences, but it is all according to conditions. In conventional language we can say or think: this accident is due to kamma and everyday I feel the effects of this accident, the pain. In reality the moments of bodily pain do not last, they arise and fall away and in between there are many moments of thinking; either with akusala citta or with kusala citta. When we have more understanding that whatever happens does so according to conditions, it helps to be patient, and not complain. Understanding can be developed of phenomena so that they are seen as they really are. Nina. #78835 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 11:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Conditions, Ch17, no3. ...Some Comments... nilovg Hi Tep, this is an aside from your dialogue with Scott. I am glad you quote this text, especially after Kh Sujin's explanation about nimitta, sankhaara nimitta. All conditioned dhammas have a nimitta, and this nimitta is experienced. Each conditioned reality falls away immediately, but what remains is the nimitta. Only nibbaana is without nimitta: animitta. This is peace. Nina. Op 17-nov-2007, om 17:13 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > The great Arahant Sariputta also said in the Patisambhidamagga that > the arising, occurrence, sign (nimitta), accumulation, and rebirth- > linking(patisandhi) are dukkha(the opposite to peace, bliss). > > He contemplates as suffering > Arising, occurrence, and the sign, > Accumulation, rebirth-linking > And this his knowledge is of danger. > > He contemplates as bliss no-arising, > And no-occurrence, and no-sign, > No-accumulation, no rebirth-linking > And this his knowledge is of peace. #78836 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 11:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhist Boomers - free of fun? nilovg Hi Howard, I read your post with great interest. Now when reading Latin texts of the old christian tradition I have the same feeling as you when reading Chassidic masters. Or reading my old copy of the Monastic rules of Saint Benedict, about humility. We can genuinely appreciate kusala no matter where it arises. That is why I am pleased when you send me sometimes excerpts of 'ten minutes Torah', etc. Nina. Op 17-nov-2007, om 18:49 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > And now I find that in studying the works of Judaic "masters" that > I was > previously unaware of, there is available a source of insight into > elements of > Dhamma that I never dreamed existed. There are writings by > Chassidic masters and > others on sila, mindfulness, guarding the senses, and meditation > (the latter > in terms related to "prayer") that read just like Buddhist writings. #78837 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 6:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Conditions, Ch17, no3. ...Some Comments... upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Tep) - In a message dated 11/17/2007 2:14:29 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Tep, this is an aside from your dialogue with Scott. I am glad you quote this text, especially after Kh Sujin's explanation about nimitta, sankhaara nimitta. All conditioned dhammas have a nimitta, and this nimitta is experienced. Each conditioned reality falls away immediately, but what remains is the nimitta. Only nibbaana is without nimitta: animitta. This is peace. Nina. ======================================= From the PTS dictionary there is the following: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Nimitta Nimitta (nt.) [cp. Sk. nimitta, to mÄ?, although etym. un- certain] 1. sign, omen, portent, prognostication D , 9 (study of omens=n. satthaÅ‹ DA 9 92, q. v. for detailed expl9); J );11 (caturo nimitte nâddasaÅ‹); Miln 79, 178. Esp. as pubbaËš signs preceding an event, portents, warnings, foreshadowings S s154, 278, 442; It 76 (cp. Divy 193, of the waning of a god); J 1548, 50 (32 signs before birth, some at DA 4861), 59; Miln 298; Vism 577. <-> 2. outward appearance, mark, characteristic, attribute, phenomenon (opp. essence) D 2. 249; A 24256; 256;319, 375 sq.; 31933, 418 sq.; J 33420; Ps 4260, 91 sq., 164, 170; 60,39, 64; Vbh 193 sq. -- Mental reflex, image (with ref. to jhÄ?na) Vism 123, cp. DhsA 167. -- Specified e. g. as foll.: oḷÄ?rika S 39259; pasÄ? daniya S 25156; paccavekkhanaËš D 156;278; Vbh 334; bahiddhÄ? -- sankhÄ?rÄ?Ëš Ps 2766 sq.; bÄ?laËš (opp. paṇá¸?itaËš) M 66 s163; A 16102; mukhaËš (=face) D 1080; S 80; 103; 10121; A 1292, 97 sq., 103; rÅ«paËš, saddaËš etc. S 92, 10; M 10296; Ps 2992, 112; samathaËš D 92, 213; samÄ?dhiËš etc. A 21256 sq.; subhaËš (& asubhaËš) S a64, 103 sq.; A 643 sq., 87, 200; 3 134; Vism 178 sq. nimittaÅ‹ gaṇ hÄ?ti to make something the object of a thought, to catch up a theme for reflection Vin t183, cp. S 18150 sq. (˚ŋ uggaṇhÄ?ti); M 15119 (=five sorts of mental images); Nd1 659; DhsA 53 (=Ä?kÄ?ra). See below n -- gÄ?hin & animitta.<-> nimittaÅ‹ parivajjeti to discard the phenomenal S n188; Sn 341. -- 3. mark, aim: in nimittaÅ‹ karoti to pick out the aim, to mark out J 18436; Nd4 235, 1 ; Miln 418. <-> 4. sexual organ (cp. lakkhaṇa) Vin 4. 129 (n. & aËš, as term of abuse); see also kÄ?á¹ & koá¹?. -- 5. ground, reason, condition, in nimittena (instr.) and nimittaÅ‹ (acc.) as adv.=by means of, on account of DhA (ac175 (instr.) PvA 8, 97 (jÄ?ti -- nimittaÅ‹), 106 (kiÅ‹ n˚ŋ=kissa hetu), 242 (yaÅ‹ n˚ŋ=yato nidÄ?naÅ‹). gahita -- nimittena "by means of being caught" Vism 144=DhsA 116 (read trsl1 154 accordingly!). adj. nimitta ( -- Ëš) caused by, referring to PvA 64 (maraṇa -- nimittaÅ‹ rodanaÅ‹). -- animitta free from marks or attributes, not contaminated by outward signs or appearance, undefiled, ụnaffected, unconditioned (opp. saËš) S 188; 188225 (phassa), 268, 360 (samÄ?dhi); M 22296 (cetovimutti); A 2982; 82; 292; 29278; Vin 78; 129; Th 1, 92; D 129;219, 249; Dh 92; Sn 342; Ps 2160, 91; 60,36, 59 sq. (vimokha), 65 sq., 99; Dhs 530 (read aËš for appaËš); Vism 236; DhsA 223 (absence of the 3 lakkhaṇas); Miln 333, 413; DhA 36,172; ThA 50. See also Cpd. 199, 211 . sanimitta S S213 sq.; A 2182. -- ânusÄ?rin following outward signs (=ËšgÄ?hin) A fol292; Nett 25; -- kamma prognostication, prophecy Vin p172; Vbh 353; -- karaṇa=gÄ?hin S =g97; -- gÄ? hin "taking signs," enticed or led away by outward signs, entranced with the general appearance, sensuously attracted D "70 (cp. Dialogues 80); 80);225; S 225104, 168; A 10416; 16; 99; 99348; Pug 20, 24, 58; Dhs 1345; Miln 367, 403. Cp. Vism 151, 209. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - It seems to be a mark or mental image that is a sort of mental "photocopy". In more detail, what sort of dhamma would that be, Nina, a strictly mind-door phenomenon of the nature of a perfect mental replication such as I have called a "fresh memory"? A nama that is a perfect remembering? With metta, Howard #78838 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 6:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhist Boomers - free of fun? upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 11/17/2007 2:23:37 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, I read your post with great interest. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: :-) ----------------------------------------------- Now when reading Latin texts of the old christian tradition I have the same feeling as you when reading Chassidic masters. Or reading my old copy of the Monastic rules of Saint Benedict, about humility. --------------------------------------------- Howard: I have no doubt! ------------------------------------------- We can genuinely appreciate kusala no matter where it arises. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, indeed. :-) ------------------------------------------ That is why I am pleased when you send me sometimes excerpts of 'ten minutes Torah', etc. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Thanks, Nina. :-) --------------------------------------- Nina. ==================== With metta, Howard #78839 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 12:32 pm Subject: The not-self strategy kenhowardau Hi Tep and Dieter, Re: [dsg] Re: KenH's Thoughts on Self and No Self # 34782 This thread has got out of hand. I have renamed it. Perhaps we can start again by looking at "The Not-self Strategy" by Thanissaro Bhikkhu: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/notself.html It begins: "Books on Buddhism often state that the Buddha's most basic metaphysical tenet is that there is no soul or self. However, a survey of the discourses in the Pali canon — the earliest extant record of the Buddha's teachings — suggests that the Buddha taught the anatta or not-self doctrine, not as a metaphysical assertion, but as a strategy for gaining release from suffering: If one uses the concept of not-self to dis-identify oneself from all phenomena, one goes beyond the reach of all suffering & stress. As for what lies beyond suffering & stress, the Canon states that although it may be experienced, it lies beyond the range of description, and thus such descriptions as "self" or "not-self" would not apply." (end quote) What do you think so far? If you share my view that it is totally ridiculous then we need say no more about it. However, if you think TB has a point then we really do need to discuss it further. Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Dieter Möller wrote: > > Hi Ken H , (Tep and ..) > > you wrote: > > 'Perhaps that was where the confusion lay. Was that why you referred > me to MN 22? Was it to show me that the simile was not BT's original > idea? > Perhaps you can see now why I did not comment on your quote from MN22. It was not the issue! The issue was BT's interpretation of it' > > D: you are right, I thought you do not accept the sutta quotation..seemingly I misread , sorry ;-) > > I am a bit confused what exactly it is on which your rejection of B.T. is based, i.e. missing > quotations of what he wrote in context and your comment to it. > What I have seen up to now were pieces of objections,opinions but nothing substantial #78840 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:13 pm Subject: Re: The not-self strategy truth_aerator Dear Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > "Books on Buddhism often state that the Buddha's most basic > metaphysical tenet is that there is no soul or self. However, a > survey of the discourses in the Pali canon — the earliest extant > record of the Buddha's teachings — suggests that the Buddha taught > the anatta or not-self doctrine, not as a metaphysical assertion, but > as a strategy for gaining release from suffering: If one uses the > concept of not-self to dis-identify oneself from all phenomena, one > goes beyond the reach of all suffering & stress. As for what lies > beyond suffering & stress, the Canon states that although it may be > experienced, it lies beyond the range of description, and thus such > descriptions as "self" or "not-self" would not apply." (end quote) > > What do you think so far? If you share my view that it is totally > ridiculous then we need say no more about it. However, if you think > TB has a point then we really do need to discuss it further. > > Ken H > >> There is nothing there to suggest that TB believes in a self. I 100% agree with what TB wrote above. Entire Buddhist teaching IS A STRATEGY and its proof is in its results. Buddha rejected metaphysical speculations and brought all issues in terms of stress, its cause, its cessation and the path to its cessation. You all heard the parable of the arrow or the raft? Ultimately ALL Dhammas will have to be let go off. (mn 22) Lots of Metta, Alex #78841 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:14 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Conditions, Ch17, no3. ...Some Comments... buddhistmedi... Hi DC, - MN 116 does not compare concepts to ultimate realities. It does not tell us that concepts are not suitable in meditation, etc. like I have learned from Nina. Concept in this sutta is a designation, a name. "This has been the very name, monks, the very designation for this Isigili mountain." Tep ==== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, DC Wijeratna wrote: > > Hi, Tep, > > I am sorry about it. I gave you the PTS reference. Here is where you can get it. It is MN 116, Isigili sutta. Fro Access to Insight. If you do a Google search for that, you'll get it. Search for Isigili sutta. The translation is by Ven. Piyadassi. It is a reasonabl translations. > > You can try Mahaanidaana Sutta of DN as well. > > D. G. D. C. Wijeratna > #78842 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: vipaka. Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) buddhistmedi... Hi Nina, - I hope you do not interpret my rejection of the single citta theory to mean that I reject the Buddha's Teachings or his Enlightenment ! > > > T: The above discussion about the difficulty in trying to separate > > out "the actual moments of vipaaka" from "the many moments of > > thinking with sadness" shows me that the paramattha-dhamma theory of > > single citta with "kusala vipaaka or akusala vipaaka" in a given > > moment is not practical in the real world of concepts. > --------- > N: Difficult to distinguish, but pa~n~naa can when it is more > developed. It is important to know the difference between > vipaakacitta and akusala citta or kusala citta. It is important to > know which jaati (four jaatis: kusala, akusala, vipaaka and kiriya) a > citta is. Otherwise we take akusala citta for vipaakacitta. > > As to 'the real world of concepts', I think you mean daily life. The > question is: what is real? > I am always impressed by this sutta text, and I quote this from Kh > Sujin's Survey: Ch XIV, § 134, Appearance, that the Buddha said: > > Monks, whether there be an appearance or non-appearance of a > Tathågata, this causal law of nature, this orderly fixing of dhammas > prevails, namely, all phenomena are impermanent. > About this a Tathågata is fully enlightened, he fully understands it. > So enlightened and understanding he declares, teaches and makes it > plain. He shows it, he opens it up, explains and makes it clear: this > fact that all phenomena are impermament. > > The same is said about the truth that all conditioned dhammas are > dukkha and that all dhammas are non-self. > The Sammåsambuddha is the pre-eminent preceptor, because he realized > all by himself through his enlightenment the nature of all dhammas. > He realized the truth that dhammas are non-self, not a being, not a > person, and that they cannot be controlled by anybody.> > Thus, no matter anyone knows it or not dhammas occur according to > their own conditions. This is real life. > We can explain dhammas in conventional language, we can think about > them in conventional language, it does not matter. Dhammas arise in > accordance with the appropriate conditions, perform their own > function and then have to fall away. This happens anyway, 'whether > there be an appearance or non-appearance of a Tathågata'. > > Kamma produces result, vipaakacitta, no matter whether we like it or > not. > When we have an accident and have to spend our life from then on in a > wheelchair, we can think that this accident has grave consequences, > but it is all according to conditions. In conventional language we > can say or think: this accident is due to kamma and everyday I feel > the effects of this accident, the pain. In reality the moments of > bodily pain do not last, they arise and fall away and in between > there are many moments of thinking; either with akusala citta or with > kusala citta. When we have more understanding that whatever happens > does so according to conditions, it helps to be patient, and not > complain. Understanding can be developed of phenomena so that they > are seen as they really are. > > Nina. > .................... Tep ==== #78843 From: "Evelyn" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:31 pm Subject: Reincarnation and Buddhism eviebgreen I have been thinking about something this week and have questions regarding reincarnation and Buddhism. And actually you do not even have to be Buddhist to believe in reincarnation, because there are many different types of people who believe that people are reincarnated again and again therefore have many different lifetimes. The entire idea and thought of past lives is based purely from reincarnation. Here are my personal thoughts... When you do not reach enlightenment, and then complete nirvana... do you reincarnate to a different city? Do you reincarnate to a different state? Do you reincarnate to a different country? And what about this... Do you reincarnate to the same world? Do you reincarnate to the same galaxy or the same universe? The universe is infinite.. we do not even know how big everything is because things are still being measured. Is it possible that when you reincarnate that you move onto a different world and different galaxy? I believe that it is possible because anything is possible. So, what do you believe??? I am curious to see what other think about reincarnation. Take care, -Evelyn #78844 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:40 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: KenH's Thoughts on Self and No Self # 34782 buddhistmedi... Hi Dieter, - I am so glad that you cited the Four Great References as the basis to verify validity of a reference/opinion/declaration anyone makes about the Dhamma. >Dieter (talking to Ken H) : > > you claim that you have checked thoroughly, which goes naturally according to ancient procedure... > ( the 4 Great References -Maha Pari Nibbana Sutta- : > .snip .. the declaration of such a bhikkhu is neither to be received with approval nor with scorn. Without approval and without scorn, but carefully studying the sentences word by word, one should trace them in the Discourses and verify them by the Discipline. If they are neither traceable in the Discourses nor verifiable by the Discipline, one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is not the Blessed One's utterance; this has been misunderstood by that bhikkhu - snip > T: Such a wise guideline is also 100% applicable in any Dhamma discussion group of the present days. Thanks. Tep ==== #78845 From: "colette" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 11:20 am Subject: Re: "Number 9, Number 9, ..." ksheri3 Hi Scott, sorry for the delay, I guess I'm getting caught up in things at the moment -- "causes & conditions" huh -- so I do a tremendous amount of flying here flying there, some may refer to it as "flitting", but I digress. I actually lost the moment when I thought of that subject line but you are correct since, in my head when I was reading the post I replied to I could hear that monotone voice-over reminding me "number 9, number 9". I that cut, Revolution number nine, they re-did the rythm and changed the tempo completely and I've always associated that song with John Lennon's song I'm So Tired. We can view this as a "down-shift", since I grew up in the dirt I always tended toward an affection toward dirt bikes and not street machines, that is until I got to Coronado California in 1980 where I began to become acquianted with several motorcyclists, including Hells Angels. So try to visualize the momentum of the lives of the Beattles at that time and then downshifting where the momentum is completely restrained: your knees are bent to absorb the shock from the bike and your elbows are bent so that they too can absorb the shock, your shoulder blades also take a bit of strain as you feel them pushed up and together, be sure to stick those boobs out, I mean your chest naturally is protruding (lol). It's the speed of life at the moment when they saw they same song in a different light which completely changes the atmosphere. Also view this as though you're in the cockpit of a supersonic jet on "full burners". Everything flies by sooooooo fast that it appears as though it's moving extremely slowly. Your life is not flying by at that speed but everything else is, this too is an illusion of the eyes and eye-consciousness. With this as the case can we look into the nature or svabhava of the eye-consciousness knowing that it is extremely susceptible to deception and illusion. After all, Miami and Phil Collins do have a lot of the entire existance placed on the premise that: "Seein' is believin'"? I'm a little ignorant as to the last sentence "Turn me on dead man..." Now I can see that maybe you are inspired by my applications of analysis and recognition which would account for your "turn me on" but does "dead man" refer to The Bay Area and The Dead. Here, in this aspect, I was also thinking about Rainy Day Women by Bob Dylan and the caliphate act of "stoning" a person to death, very popular in Africa these days. "Everybody must get stoned" toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear colette, > > Sorry, I couldn't resist. I love the title - Revolution Number Nine. > Classic. Turn me on dead man... > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > #78846 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 2:49 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Conditions, Ch17, no3. ...Some Comments... buddhistmedi... Hi Nina (Scott and all), - I have a reason to celebrate our perfect agreement below. This is a rare event indeed. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Tep, > this is an aside from your dialogue with Scott. > I am glad you quote this text, especially after Kh Sujin's > explanation about nimitta, sankhaara nimitta. All conditioned dhammas have a nimitta, and this nimitta is experienced. Each conditioned reality falls away immediately, but what remains is the nimitta. Only nibbaana is without nimitta: animitta. This is peace. > Nina. > Op 17-nov-2007, om 17:13 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > > > The great Arahant Sariputta also said in the Patisambhidamagga that the arising, occurrence, sign (nimitta), accumulation, and rebirth- > > linking(patisandhi) are dukkha(the opposite to peace, bliss). > > > > He contemplates as suffering > > Arising, occurrence, and the sign, > > Accumulation, rebirth-linking > > And this his knowledge is of danger. > > > > He contemplates as bliss no-arising, > > And no-occurrence, and no-sign, > > No-accumulation, no rebirth-linking > > And this his knowledge is of peace. > > ........................ T: I am so glad too that not only I now understand clearly what KS means about nimitta or sankhaara nimitta, I also see the meaning of concepts and no longer have the doubt I used to have. >N: Only nibbaana is without nimitta: animitta. This is peace. T: Indeed. Tep ==== #78847 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 10:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Reincarnation and Buddhism upasaka_howard Hi, Evelyn - In a message dated 11/17/2007 5:32:06 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, eviebgreen@... writes: I have been thinking about something this week and have questions regarding reincarnation and Buddhism. And actually you do not even have to be Buddhist to believe in reincarnation, because there are many different types of people who believe that people are reincarnated again and again therefore have many different lifetimes. The entire idea and thought of past lives is based purely from reincarnation. Here are my personal thoughts... When you do not reach enlightenment, and then complete nirvana... do you reincarnate to a different city? ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I hear there's been a population increase in Hoboken, NJ! ;-)) [Sorry - I couldn't resist.] ------------------------------------------------------- Do you reincarnate to a different state? Do you reincarnate to a different country? And what about this... Do you reincarnate to the same world? Do you reincarnate to the same galaxy or the same universe? The universe is infinite.. we do not even know how big everything is because things are still being measured. Is it possible that when you reincarnate that you move onto a different world and different galaxy? I believe that it is possible because anything is possible. So, what do you believe??? I am curious to see what other think about reincarnation. Take care, -Evelyn =================================== The Buddhist understanding is that there are no souls that move from body to body (re-incarnating), but that from moment to moment there flows a coherent psychophysical stream consisting of experiential states, each new state arising due to prior conditions, most especially kamma. At the so-called moment of death there immediately follows the first state of that "continuum" in "its next life". The realm and context of that next life is largely determined by kamma (past intention and intentional action). There are many different realms and sub-realms of experience that exist, and many different modes of existence within each of them, and, again, it is overwhelmingly kamma which determines the context of rebirth. But literally, nothing is reborn or carried over - there is just a next step, though a more radical one. I think of one's existence during a lifetime as analogous to watching a sequence of TV programs on some channel, and death and rebirth being a channel change. With metta, Howard #78848 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 3:03 pm Subject: Re: The not-self strategy buddhistmedi... Hi KenH and Dieter, - Thank you, KenH, for having changed your mind. > KenH: > This thread has got out of hand. I have renamed it. Perhaps we can > start again by looking at "The Not-self Strategy" by Thanissaro > Bhikkhu: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/notself.html > > It begins: > > "Books on Buddhism often state that the Buddha's most basic > metaphysical tenet is that there is no soul or self. However, a > survey of the discourses in the Pali canon — the earliest extant > record of the Buddha's teachings — suggests that the Buddha taught > the anatta or not-self doctrine, not as a metaphysical assertion, but > as a strategy for gaining release from suffering: If one uses the > concept of not-self to dis-identify oneself from all phenomena, one > goes beyond the reach of all suffering & stress. As for what lies > beyond suffering & stress, the Canon states that although it may be > experienced, it lies beyond the range of description, and thus such > descriptions as "self" or "not-self" would not apply." (end quote) > > What do you think so far? If you share my view that it is totally > ridiculous then we need say no more about it. However, if you think > TB has a point then we really do need to discuss it further. > ...................... T: For sure I think he has a great point ! TB's point is not superficial, and so it deserves our careful interpretation and intelligent discussion. What is your thought, Dieter? Tep ==== #78849 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 3:49 pm Subject: Re: The not-self strategy philofillet Hi all from the TB essay: >If one uses the > concept of not-self to dis-identify oneself from all phenomena, one > goes beyond the reach of all suffering & stress. This part sounds great to me. OK, "uses the concept of non-self" is very American, very practical (TB is very straightforward and practical in his approach, which I think is suitable for this sensory-drunken age) but "uses one's understanding of non-self to dis-identify oneself from all phenomena" would be fine, and I think they boil down to the same thing. The point of the Buddha's teaching is to "go beyond the reach of all suffering and stress" - not to understand anatta. That's obviously true. TB is keen on this point, keen on understanding the purpose of the Buddha's teaching, I think. (Lost of doubts and questions about his method of meditation, though, which I will be asking about later.) Metta, Phil #78850 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 3:57 pm Subject: Re: The not-self strategy philofillet Hi again > The point of the Buddha's teaching is to "go beyond the reach of all > suffering and stress" - not to understand anatta. I revise myself - the going beyond must involve understanding anatta. I don't doubt that. But we musn't make a cult out of understanding anatta. I think the udnerstanding of anatta will come as a result of deepending our peception of impermanence and dukkha, that's what I'm seeing in suttas again and again these days. Metta, Phil #78851 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 4:54 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,206 Vism.XVII,207 Vism.XVII,208 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 206. Herein what follows illustrates the meaning. [(1) Mentality as Condition] In immaterial rebirth And life the mind alone will come In seven ways and six to be Condition at the minimum. 207. How? In rebirth-linking, firstly, mentality is a condition in seven ways at the minimum, as conascence, mutuality, support, association, kamma-result, presence, and non-disappearance conditions, for the sixth base. Some mentality, however, is a condition, as root-cause condition [that is, greed, etc.,] and some as nutriment condition [that is, contact and mental volition]. So it is also a condition in other ways. It is by the [two latter] that the maximum and minimum should be understood. In the course of an existence, too, resultant mentality is a condition as already stated. But the other [non-resultant] kind is a condition in six ways at minimum, as the aforesaid conditions except for kamma-result condition. Some, however, is a condition, as root-cause condition, and some as nutriment condition. So it is also a condition in other ways. It is by these that the maximum and minimum should be understood. 208. In five-constituent becoming At rebirth, mind in the same ways Acts as condition for the sixth, And for the others in six ways. *********************** 206. tatraayamatthadiipanaa -- naamameva hi aaruppe, pa.tisandhipavattisu. paccayo sattadhaa chadhaa, hoti ta.m avaka.msato.. 207. katha.m? pa.tisandhiya.m taava avaka.msato sahajaataa~n~nama~n~nanissayasampayuttavipaakaatthiavigatapaccayehi sattadhaa naama.m cha.t.thaayatanassa paccayo hoti. ki~nci panettha hetupaccayena, ki~nci aahaarapaccayenaati eva.m a~n~nathaapi paccayo hoti, tassa vasena ukka.msaavaka.mso veditabbo. pavattepi vipaaka.m vuttanayeneva paccayo hoti, itara.m pana avaka.msato vuttappakaaresu paccayesu vipaakapaccayavajjehi chahi paccayehi paccayo hoti. ki~nci panettha hetupaccayena, ki~nci aahaarapaccayenaati eva.m a~n~nathaapi paccayo hoti, tassa vasena ukka.msaavaka.mso veditabbo. 208. a~n~nasmimpi bhave naama.m, tatheva pa.tisandhiya.m. cha.t.thassa itaresa.m ta.m, chahaakaarehi paccayo.. #78852 From: han tun Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 4:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) hantun1 Dear Tep and Elaine, When I started Buddhist studies and practice some years ago, my family members and friends from Burma sent me enormous amount of books. I picked up those which were of immediate use to me and I kept the rest in a wooden box. After some years, I forgot all about those remaining books. Dhammasanga.nii was one of them, put aside and forgotten. Now only, when Sarah quoted it, I looked inside the wooden box, and there I found this very valuable book (but in Burmese). I just had a glance at the few opening pages. I have to study the book which may take days if not months. It looks like it is going to be difficult. So to answer your question, I will take some excerpts from Guide to the Tipitaka by Prof U Ko Lay. --------------------- The Dhammasangani Pali The Dhammasangani, the first book of the Abhidhamma, and the Patthana, the last book, are the most important of the seven treatises of Abhidhamma, providing as they do the quintessence of the entire Abhidhamma. Scheme of Classification in the Dhammasangani (1) The Matika The Dhammasangani enumerates all the dhammas (phenomena) i.e., all categories of nama, namely, Consciousness and mental concomitant, and , rupa, Corporeality. Having enumerated the phenomena, they are arranged under different heads to bring out their exact nature, function and mutual relationship both internally (in our own being) and with the outside world. The Dhammasangani begins with a complete list of heads called the Matika. The Matika serves as a classified table of mental constituents treated not only in the Dhammasangani but in the entire system of the Abhidhamma. The Matika consists altogether of one hundred and twenty two groups, of which the first twenty two are called the Tikas or Triads, those that are divided under three heads; and the remaining one hundred are called the Dukas or Dyads, those that are divided under two heads. The Matika concludes with a list of the categories of dhamma entitled Suttantika Matika made up of' forty two groups of dhamma found in the suttas. (2) The four Divisions Based on these Matikas of Tikas and Dukas, the Dhammasangani is divided into four Divisions: (i) Cittuppada Kanda. Division on the arising of consciousness and mental concomitants. (ii) Rupa Kanda, Division concerning corporeality. (iii) Nikkhepa Kanda, Division that avoids elaboration. (iv) Atthakatha Kanda, Division of Supplementary Digest Of the four divisions, the first two, namely, Cittuppada Kanda and Rupa Kanda form the main and the essential portion of' the book. They set the model of thorough investigation into the nature, properties, function and interrelationship of each of the dhammas listed in the Matika, by providing a simple analysis and review of the first Tika, namely, the Kusala Tika of Kusala, Akusala and Abyakata Dhamma. Cittuppada Kanda deals with a complete enumeration of all the states of mind that come under the headings of Kusala and Akusala; the Rupa Kanda is concerned with all states of matter that come under the heading of Abyakata; mention is also made of Asankhata Dhatu (Nibbana) without discussing it. The Nikkhepa Kanda, the third division, gives, not too elaborately nor too briefly, the summary of distribution of all the Tikas and Dukas, so that their full contents and significance will become comprehensible and fully covered. Atthakatha Kanda, the last division of the book, is of the same nature as the third division, giving a summary of the dhammas under the different heads of the Tika and the Duka groups. But it provides it in a more condensed manner, thus forming a supplementary digest of the first book of the Abhidhamma for easy memorizing. ------------------------------ Han: Tep knows Guide to the Tipitaka. For Elaine, I give below the link to read the Guide to Tipitaka. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/guide-tipitaka/guidetipitaka-00.htm With metta and respect, Han --- Tep Sastri wrote: > > Hi Han and all - > > How would you explain the presentation format of the > Dhammasanga.nii > that is also seen in the Patisambhidamagga, i.e. > terse, no story > telling -- just the dhammas that are easier to > memorize than most > suttas ? Is it likely that both Dhammasanga.nii and > Patisambhidamagga > ARE the Abhidhamma? > > Thanks. > > Tep > === #78853 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 6:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) dcwijeratna Dear Han, I am so pleased with myself this morning Han. Can you guess? You won't. I guessed your keen intelligence from the first few e-ms, that I saw. And now I am proved right. [See P.S.] Here's somethings I have learned about the History of Abhidhamma. 1. The meaning of "Abhidhamma" is highly controversial. It occurs only in two places may be three places in the Sutta's. 3. So today, knowledgeable people don't talk really about "Abhidhamma" 4. What they really mean by Abhidhamma is Abhidhamma Pi.taka. 5. Even here there is a problem: There are three abhidhamma pi.takas in existence: Thervaada, Sarvastivaada, and Saariputra Abhidharma Sastra. This last one is only in Chinese and I have not seen it. 6. The problem with the last two is they don't agree with each other on many key issues. 7. In view of this Abhidhamma is now referred to as a philosophy. Abhidhmma philosophy 8. In the Universities of Sri Lanka, Abhidhamma now they teach courses on Abhidhamma Philosophy. 9. Philosophy is at the end of the day mere speculation. Nothing 'proved' or realised, or 'directly experienced'. 10. Now to a different subject. 11. Ven. Mahinda brought Abhidhamma Pi.taka to Sri Lanka. 12. It is from Sri Lanka, that Abhidhamma went to Myanmar. 13. Where they took to the study of Abhidhamma in great enthusiasm. 14. In fact later developments of Abhidhamm took place in Myanmar. 15. You can see this by glancing at the early translators of Abhidhamma texts to English. 16. Dhammasangani was originally translated to English by Mrs. Rhys Davids. 17. You have to be careful in reading that translation. I am sure you know that she had some weird ideas about the Teaching of the Buddha. 18. Reading these original texts, especially the Abhidhamma texts is not an easy task without a teacher. In olden days, you always learned from a teacher. 19. To me it is like trying to read Newton's "Principia Mathematica" to understand the laws of motion. 20. I have found "Abhidhamma Studies", Ven. Nyanaponika Thera, to be a good summary of the book. It is published by Wisdom Publications, and is currently in their catalogue. 21. This work is considered "...one of the most profound and lucid interpreters of Buddhist psychology in our time." [Note Buddhist psychology; another name by which people refer to Buddhist psychology] 22. I am sure reading this book before you plunge into Dhammasangani will be very useful. 22. For details go to the Burmese masters. I think there are many by Ven. Mahaathera Ledi Sayadaw. 23. Traditionally, in our country, studying Abhidhamma without an excellent teacher was not very favourably looked upon. There were two reasons for that: (1) It has no practical purpose as far as the achievement of Nibbaana is considered--at least it is "Abhidhamma", "Hihger dhamma", "Excellent dhamma", "Special dhamma", etc. And what we experience are dhammas. (ii) The difficulty of the books, and the language in which they are written. 24. Application of Abhidhamma to daily life--our villager's would have a good laugh about it. In fact, one rather vulgar local expression for somebody who talks in a language that is not understandable was "abhidharmakaaryek" , an Abhidhammika. 25. That is what I know about Abhidhamma and what I would tell a friend of mine. For somebody with an anlaytical mind, Dhammasangani is excellent reading. 26. I personally have learnt abhidhamma, the little I know from two excellent Sinhala books, by the two most eminent Sri Lankan bhikkhus of the last century. Agga maha pandita, ven Ananda Maithreeys, the teacher of Bhikkhu Bodhi. And Ven. Rerukaane Chandawimals, he was the Abhidhammika, and learnt his Abhidhamma in Myanmar, where he went when he was a child. How he learnt Abhidhamma in Myanmar is interesting reading. It explains how people became "Tipit.takadhara." This is in high contrast to people who pick up a couple of words, and then pose off as Abhidhamma experts. 27. Any way, my respected friend, if you are studying Abhidhamma, I would like to join you. I have a lot of time in my hand, being retired, more importantly I love to discuss things with friends; not to argue. And you can supplement my meagre knowledge of Abhidhamma from Abhidhamma masters of Myanmar. With lots of mettaa, D. G. D. C. Wijeratna P. S. One way or the other, you are planning to go back to the real masters of Abhidhamma. Not listen to nonsense. #78854 From: Elaine Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 6:52 pm Subject: Re: More on dana :-)) shennieca Hi Phil, (all), Thank you for sharing your thoughts on dana. I enjoyed reading it. I know exactly what you mean about people shelling out money to temples. Many Chinese families (my own included), when they go to temples, they donate a few Ringgits and pray for the protection and safety of their family. That is the traditional way Chinese people do it. I think they get some ideas right, they believe if they do good deeds, they hope to get good results in return. Being generous and hoping for a reward is very natural for all human beings, I think. I want to share my stories and my own point of view of dana and generosity. I hope you won’t think that I am boasting. For me, if I do dana, the reward is secondary. As long as it brings joy to my heart, I am satisfied. Dana does not have to be in monetary form, it can be doing a volunteer service, giving our time, or expertise to help other people. I grew up in a small rubber plantation town in Kedah, Malaysia. There is a Thai temple in front of my grandfather’s rubber estate. Before Wesak Day celebration, my grandfather would buy cans of paint, and he and his workers would go and paint the temple Pagoda. The Pagoda is very high, with the yellow pointy tip architecture. They would climb up a tall ladder to get up there to paint it. That was the way my grandfather did dana when he was alive. He donated the paints and did the painting himself. The adults always give to temples, we grew up watching them doing dana. So when we grew up, it becomes second nature to us. A year before my grandfather passed away, we took a road trip from our hometown to another town in Perak state. Along the way, we stopped at every temple, we prayed, and my grandfather put a few ringgits in the donation box. He was a generous man and he did a lot of charities when he was alive. I pray that my grandfather is in a heavenly realm right now. On Kathina day, my grandmother would buy the robes and alms bowl set for the monks. I remember the first Kathina that I attended was with my grandmother when I was about 10 or 12 years old. It was in MBMC, Penang. I really enjoyed it. I loved listening to the Pali chanting. I also pray that my grandmother is in a heavenly realm right now. When I was young, my mother always told us to share our toys with our siblings. Kids are selfish and don’t like to share their toys with other kids, but some kids don’t mind sharing. I was the selfish one and had to be ‘coerced’ to share my toys. After a while, I think I got used to it. When I went to primary school, sometimes I bought sweets from the school canteen. I would eat one or two and save up the rest for my younger brother and sister. I enjoyed eating the sweets and I wanted my siblings to enjoy it too. This didn’t happen very often though, only once in a while, well maybe twice only. I think this is the starting point of learning to share and be generous. When I started working, I used my own money to do dana. There is a Buddhist meditation temple about 15 mins walk from my house. I usually buy the bath-robes for doing dana. The real monk robes are expensive, the bath-robe is only Rm10 each and I buy those for the dana. At one time I was into all fruits diet, I ate oranges and granny smith apples every day. I enjoyed eating the fruits so much, I wanted to share the joy of eating it with others. So I bought oranges and green granny smith apples for the temple during Sunday dana. I think dana is also about sharing the joy you get, with others, hoping that they would get the same joy too. Sometimes my mother and I bought a bag of rice, and we would both carry it and knelt in front of the monk, Bhante or Sayadaw and do dana. Even on my mother’s death bed, my mother requested my sister to do dana for the temple. I owed my whole life to mother, if there is no mother, there would be no me. My mother taught me many things and most of all, she taught me to be a Buddhist. I pray that my mother is in a heavenly realm right now. My family also donated to the printing of free dhamma books for distributions in loving memory of my late mother. To cut a long story short, before I came to Toronto, I volunteered at the Sunday dhamma school (for children) for about four months. I taught English to the children. Sometimes when there is no translator around, I helped Sayadaw during the daily interview with meditators. No, I don’t speak Burmese, I translate from mandarin or hokkien to english, but my chinese language skill is not very good and I told Sayadaw I don’t know how to translate mindfulness into chinese! I hope I didn’t mess up the yogis’s interview, I pray that I won’t get bad kamma from the bad translations. :-/ There are many volunteers at the temple every weekend. They cook, serve, wash, clean up and direct traffic, etc. etc. They ask the temple people if there are anything they can help with and they would help. These are the things that are considered dana also, they are service dana. But, the main dana is the food dana that the devotees bring from home to be offered to the monks. The food line is long and huge! They devotees are planting good seeds, they will sow good results in the future. :-)) That’s basically how Dana is done in Malaysia. I hope everyone in DSG can share their dana stories and how dana is done in their respective countries. I read about the dana that Nina, Jon, Sarah, KS & group did for the group of monks in India / Nepal. I felt really happy reading it and rejoiced in their dana. May I Anumodana too. Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu! Thank you. Warmest regards, Elaine #78855 From: "reverendaggacitto" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 6:57 pm Subject: essence/a hot night in penang and i can't sleep/a few more thoughts reverendagga... Hi Howard/T.G and everybody! I believe That you are correct,but only from one angle that perspective not being the totality of what we speek. Let me put it yet another way, If a man burns his hand on a stove he can talk ALL he wants about how the stove didn't "OWN" the quality of BEING 10,000 degrees, at the moment that he was burned the stove possessed that (and was therefore in "ownership")of that quality. This is why it is something more than "mere dilusion" that his hand hurts now and is swelling.Something more than his mere "subjective perception". Does his hand now not "possess" the quality of pain at the moment that he feels such pain? Merely his subjective dilusion? i think not. He would only wish it to be something no more than a "phantom and a dream", if only it were no more than a mere "bubble and a flash"! May the Buddha's,Deva,and Angel's bless ALL of You! bhikkhu aggacitto/aka reverend aggacitto #78856 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:24 pm Subject: (No subject) nichiconn Vism.XVII,206 Vism.XVII,207 Vism.XVII,208 Tatraayamatthadiipanaa- Naamameva hi aaruppe, pa.tisandhipavattisu; paccayo sattadhaa chadhaa, hoti ta.m avaka.msato. PPn xvii, 206. Herein what follows illustrates the meaning. [(a) Mentality as Condition] In immaterial rebirth And life the mind alone will come In seven ways and six to be Condition at the minimum. {PoP p.675} The explanation is as follows: For at formless procedure and rebirth Just name is cause sevenfold, sixfold, at least. Katha.m? Pa.tisandhiya.m taava avaka.msato sahajaata-a~n~nama~n~nanissayasampayuttavipaaka-atthi-avigatapaccayehi sattadhaa naama.m cha.t.thaayatanassa paccayo hoti. Ki~nci panettha hetupaccayena, ki~nci aahaarapaccayenaati eva.m a~n~nathaapi paccayo hoti, tassa vasena ukka.msaavaka.mso veditabbo. Pavattepi vipaaka.m vuttanayeneva paccayo hoti, itara.m pana avaka.msato vuttappakaaresu paccayesu vipaakapaccayavajjehi chahi paccayehi paccayo hoti. Ki~nci panettha hetupaccayena, ki~nci aahaarapaccayenaati eva.m a~n~nathaapi paccayo hoti, tassa vasena ukka.msaavaka.mso veditabbo. PPn xvii, 207. How? In rebirth-linking, firstly, mentality is a condition in seven ways at the minimum, as conascence, mutuality, support, association, kamma-result, presence, and non-disappearance, condition, for the sixth base. Some mentality however, is a condition, as root-cause condition, [that is, greed, etc.,] and some as nutriment condition [that is, contact and mental volition]. So it is also a condition in other ways. It is by the [two latter] that the maximum and minimum should be understood. In the course of an existence, too, resultant mentality is a condition as already stated. But the other [non-resultant] kind is a condition in six ways at minimum, as the aforesaid conditions except for kamma-result condition. Some, however, is a condition as root-cause condition, and some as nutriment condition. So it is also a condition in other ways. It is by these that the maximum and minimum should be understood. {PoP p.675-6} How? At rebirth name is cause at least sevenfold of the sixth sense by way of the causes of co-existence, reciprocity, dependence, association, result, presence, non-absence. Some sort of name is cause through condtion, some through sustenance. Thus the cause is also in other ways. In this way is the highest and the lowest number of causes to be understood. At procedure also resultant name is the cause in the way described. The other (non-resultant) is cause at least sixfold by way of causes excepting the result among those mentioned above. Here also some sort is cause through conditon, some through sustenance. Thus the cause is also in other ways. In this way is the highest and the lowest number to be understood. A~n~nasmimpi bhave naama.m, tatheva pa.tisandhiya.m; cha.t.thassa itaresa.m ta.m, chahaakaarehi paccayo. PPn xvii, 208. In five-constituent becoming At rebirth, mind in the same ways Acts as condition for the sixth, And for the others in six ways. {PoP p.676} In the other existence also name Is such a cause of sixth. It is a cause In six ways of the other five senses. #78857 From: "robmoult" Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 8:09 pm Subject: Re: A Quick Question on Conditionality robmoult Hi Phil / Howard / Scott / Ken O / DC, As mentioned in BB's CMA (p 309), the conditioning states for natural decisive support condition are, "strong past 89 cittas, 52 cetasikas, 28 rupas, some concepts" and the conditioned states are "later 89 cittas, 52 cetasikas". In other words, something "strong" (something = citta, cetasika, rupa, concept) in the past influences every subsequent mental state (mental state = 89 cittas, 52 cetasikas). What is it that makes something "strong"? I have not found any information in the texts or commentaries to answer this question. However, my own view which I have discussed with numerous people considered to be "Abhidhamma scholars" (including Khun Sujin) is that something is "strong" when: 1. It happened a very sort time ago 2. It happened repetitively 3. It happened with strong volition As an example of #1, if I had a bad day at work, this will influence my mental states when I get home. As an example of #2, experiments have shown that routine meditation (even for a few weeks) has a measurable long term impact on the mind and body. As an example of #3, the vow the Sumeda the hermit made to become a future Buddha influenced the mental states of all of the Bodhisattas. Natural decisive support includes the concepts of "frame of mind", "habits", "accumulations" and "character". I do not know the details of Scott's experience, but the passing away of a loved one is often a trigger for a sense of spiritual urgency (samvega-vatthu) and faith. Vism IV, 63 says, "When his mind is listless owing to sluggishness in the experience of understanding or to failure to attain the bliss of peace, then he should stimulate it by reviewing the eight grounds for a sense of urgency. These are the four, namely, birth, ageing, sickness, and death, with the suffering of the states of loss as the fifth, and also the suffering in the past rooted in the round [of rebirths], the suffering in the future rooted in the round [of rebirths], and the suffering in the present rooted in the search for nutriment. And he creates confidence [saddha], by recollecting the special qualities of the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha. This is how he encourages the mind on an occasion when it should be encouraged." It is possible that the passing away of Scott's wife was a trigger which brought back countless similar experiences from past existences when loved ones passed away. It is possible that in past lifetimes, Scott reflected deeply on the eight samvega-vatthu as well as confidence [saddha] the Triple Gem and the passing away of his wife in this existence was a triggering event for this renewed confidence [saddha]. In this experience, there is a lot of "object condition" as well as "natural decisive support condition". Conditions never work alone and the interactions are always complex. The purpose of studying conditions is not psychology, but rather to show the mind operating under natural conditions rather than under the control of a "self". I hope that this makes sense. Metta, Rob M :-) #78858 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 3:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Quick Question on Conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, Rob (and Phil, Scott, Ken, and DC) - In a message dated 11/17/2007 11:09:23 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@... writes: Hi Phil / Howard / Scott / Ken O / DC, As mentioned in BB's CMA (p 309), the conditioning states for natural decisive support condition are, "strong past 89 cittas, 52 cetasikas, 28 rupas, some concepts" and the conditioned states are "later 89 cittas, 52 cetasikas". In other words, something "strong" (something = citta, cetasika, rupa, concept) in the past influences every subsequent mental state (mental state = 89 cittas, 52 cetasikas). What is it that makes something "strong"? I have not found any information in the texts or commentaries to answer this question. However, my own view which I have discussed with numerous people considered to be "Abhidhamma scholars" (including Khun Sujin) is that something is "strong" when: 1. It happened a very sort time ago 2. It happened repetitively 3. It happened with strong volition As an example of #1, if I had a bad day at work, this will influence my mental states when I get home. As an example of #2, experiments have shown that routine meditation (even for a few weeks) has a measurable long term impact on the mind and body. As an example of #3, the vow the Sumeda the hermit made to become a future Buddha influenced the mental states of all of the Bodhisattas. ===================================== Rob, I found this presentation of yours interesting, and the examples particularly so. The examples are useful, I believe, because of being "conventional" (though, of course, it is the dhammas underlying the conventional objects and events that actually serve as conditions). BTW, Rob, it's great to hear from you! I regret that this doesn't happen more often! :-) With metta, Howard #78859 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Sat Nov 17, 2007 9:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More on dana :-)) dcwijeratna Dear Elaine, "natthi jhaana.m apa~n~nassa pa~n~naa natthi ajjhaayato yamhi jhaana.nca pa~n~nanca save nibbaa.nasantike" [Dhammapada, 372] There is no jhaana for one who lacks pa~n~naa; There is no pa~n~naa for a non-meditating one In whom there is jhaana and pa~n~naa SHE IS, certainly, IN THE PRESENCE OF NIBBAA.NA SAADHU! SAADHU!! SAADHU!!! D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #78860 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 12:48 am Subject: Slowing down tempo nilovg Dear Elaine, Tep, and friends, Forgive me for not answering all questions immediately, I cannot keep up the dsg tempo. Elaine, your questions are very intense. I appreciate them, but I have to take more time. Other work is also waiting for me. The visuddhimagga commentary studies twice a week, revising old works, etc. etc. I keep the posts to be answered with red flags, and will answer as I have time. Nina. #78861 From: han tun Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 1:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) hantun1 Dear Friend DC, Thank you very much for your long post explaining about History of Abhidhamma and valuable tips as to how to study Abhidhamma. I have only two books, The Essence of Buddha Abhidhamma by Dr. Mehm Tin Mon, and A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma by Mahathera Narada and Bhikkhu Bodhi. I read these two books frequently, and I will read Dhammasangani more as a reference book. I will consult with you when I have some difficulty in understanding some portion of Abhidhamma. I know that there are senior monks in Burma who are real experts in Abhidhamma, but the problem is I do not go back to Burma quite often. I left Burma in 1978 and for the first (21) years I did not go back at all – not even once. Then I went to Yangon in 1999 just for two weeks. Then after another 5 years, in 2004, I went there for three weeks. Since then I was trying to go to Yangon at least once a year for about 3 weeks at a time. So you see although I am a Burmese I am like a foreigner to my own country. I also do not have personal contact with senior monks. So whatever I study I am on my own. I will be happy to have consultations with you. Respectfully, Han #78862 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 3:39 am Subject: Re: A Quick Question on Conditionality philofillet Hi Rob Lovely to see you here! > > What is it that makes something "strong"? I have not found any > information in the texts or commentaries to answer this question. > However, my own view which I have discussed with numerous people > considered to be "Abhidhamma scholars" (including Khun Sujin) is > that something is "strong" when: > 1. It happened a very sort time ago > 2. It happened repetitively > 3. It happened with strong volition PH: This makes sense to me. A. Sujin may have hesitated to phrase it so clearly (sounded more like any past citta) because she thought her listeneners would be tempted to try to shape ndsc to get results - self at work etc. > As an example of #1, if I had a bad day at work, this will influence > my mental states when I get home. Ph: And if we have a good morning, with mindfulness, wholesome factors at work, we'll usually find that a good afternoon follows. It just happens that way. Nt to be counted on or shaped, but our experience tells us that this is so. (But then in my case, the following day is often crap for some reason, I think a very good days conditions carelessness,, one is tricked into carelesssness by all the pleasant objects.) > As an example of #2, experiments have shown that routine meditation > (even for a few weeks) has a measurable long term impact on the mind > and body. Yes, it's well-documented. >> > I do not know the details of Scott's experience, but the passing > away of a loved one is often a trigger for a sense of spiritual > urgency (samvega-vatthu) and faith. Vism IV, 63 says, "When his mind > is listless owing to sluggishness in the experience of understanding > or to failure to attain the bliss of peace, then he should stimulate > it by reviewing the eight grounds for a sense of urgency. These are > the four, namely, birth, ageing, sickness, and death, with the > suffering of the states of loss as the fifth, and also the suffering > in the past rooted in the round [of rebirths], the suffering in the > future rooted in the round [of rebirths], and the suffering in the > present rooted in the search for nutriment. And he creates > confidence [saddha], by recollecting the special qualities of the > Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha. This is how he encourages the > mind on an occasion when it should be encouraged." > > It is possible that the passing away of Scott's wife was a trigger > which brought back countless similar experiences from past > existences when loved ones passed away. It is possible that in past > lifetimes, Scott reflected deeply on the eight samvega-vatthu as > well as confidence [saddha] the Triple Gem and the passing away of > his wife in this existence was a triggering event for this renewed > confidence [saddha]. Yes, this could certainly be. I'm going to talk more with Scott in a couple of days, though won't be insisting on going into this terrority. For me, I do those 5 reflections almost every morning, and it certainly is a powerful condition for watching my step, thanks to #5, the impact of which is conditioned by #1-4. I do this in a very intentional way, so I guess it is idsc. (intentional decisive support condition. haha. a little paccayas joke...very little.) Please, please do come around more often if you can Rob! Metta, Phil > > #78863 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 4:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) jonoabb Hi Phil Phil wrote: > ?@Hi Jon > > Not to debate, but just to ask whether Vism. is considered > an "ancient text." I'm studying it these days, and it is an incredibly > detailed compendium of specific practices. My goodness, chapter after > chapter on how to choose meditation subjects. I'm sure I'm missing > something - it must be in the "correctly understood" - but isn't Vism. > an ancient text? > Yes, the Vism is definitely an "ancient text" as far as I'm concerned. > And it can't be said that it is only for people of > advanced understanding who dealt directly with the Buddha etc. because > it came later and there are passages referring to "clansmen who are > beginners", and also, in the section on the various kasinas, there is > reference to people to whom the object comes naturally, and others who > must make it intentionally. > This is a side issue, but it may be that those "to whom the object [of samatha] comes naturally" refers to persons for whom the object is one that has been the object of a high level of samatha in (recent) previous lives. > So how is Vism explained away by AS and you folks? I had best get > accustomed to that one ASAP because I am in love with Vism. these days, > no doubt for all the wrong-view reasons! :) > I'm not sure what you see as being needed to be "explained away" ;-)) Would you mind quoting a passage or two? (I take it you are referring to the statement of mine that appears at the end of this message.) > Is it because above you says "awareness and insight" rather than > samadhi? That doesn't make sense to me because samadhi is clearly > condition for insight. > If you are referring to the samadhi that is described in Part II of PoP, I'm not sure your statement is correct. Please consider the following from Ch III, par 27: "The method of developing the kind of concentration associated with the noble paths mentioned under that 'of two kinds of mundane and supramundane', etc. is included in the method of developing understanding (Ch XXII); for in developing [path] understanding that is developed too. So we shall say nothing separately [here] about how that is to be developed." As I read that passage, it's saying that the samadhi associated with vipassana is developed along with the development of vipassana itself. > p.s as for the suttanta, there are many many suttas which point at > intentional practices. > Please give an example of two of the passages you have in mind, for discussion. > But they - as shared by those who are > enthusiastic about them - are always written off by Sujinists so I > guess they do not fall within the awfully tight little "correctly > understood" category. > As far as I know, no suttas have ever been "written off" by anyone here (although it's not uncommon for important words or phrases to be overlooked in one's individual reading, I find -- that's why study in an open forum such as this can be helpful). Jon >> Jon: >> I don't know of anything in the ancient texts, correctly understood, >> that says that in order to develop awarenss or insight it is >> necessary (or advisable) to undertake a 'practice' consisting of >> particular mental activities, that is to say, something done for >> the express purpose of arousing awareness or insight. >> #78864 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 5:23 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) philofillet Hi Jon (p.s to Rob) > > But they - as shared by those who are > > enthusiastic about them - are always written off by Sujinists so I > > guess they do not fall within the awfully tight little "correctly > > understood" category. > > > > As far as I know, no suttas have ever been "written off" by anyone here > (although it's not uncommon for important words or phrases to be > overlooked in one's individual reading, I find -- that's why study in an > open forum such as this can be helpful). I wouldn't say what I wrote above anymore, not at this time - I was in one of my venting periods I guess, which alternate with "appreciating the opportunity to hear from all different approaches" periods. Hopefully the latter will come to predominate, but I'm sure there will be more of the former now and then! Metta, Phil p.s Rob, not that it matters so much but when I referred to my daily contemplations on #1-4 etc in the previous post, I was referring to the daily recollections on aging, illness, death and loss of dear ones. I read and replied to your post very quickly before dinner, I confess, and thought you were referring to that rather than the 8 causes of a sense of urgency. A more careful reading after dinner showed me otherwise. Thanks again. #78865 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 6:22 am Subject: Re: The not-self strategy buddhistmedi... Hi Phil, - You have become very active lately. Are your family and friends not around? ;-)) >Phil: > I don't doubt that. But we musn't make a cult out of understanding > anatta. I think the udnerstanding of anatta will come as a result >of deepending our peception of impermanence and dukkha, that's what >I'm seeing in suttas again and again these days. > T: I like that "musn't make a cult out of understanding anatta" which implies that we musn't be obsessed by anything, a dhamma or not. A warning ! Your suggestion that "the understanding of anatta will come as a result of deepending our peception of impermanence and dukkha" is proned to be attacked by the DSG Abhidhammikas as a wrong idea. Why? Because you assume that understanding of the dhammas arises sequentially, step by step. Nina and Sarah, for example, have said many times that all dhammas are not controllable and when they arise, they do so together in a single moment. [But I do not agree with them.] Tep === #78866 From: "robmoult" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 6:31 am Subject: Re: More on dana :-)) robmoult Hi Elaine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Elaine wrote: > > Hi Phil, (all), > > Thank you for sharing your thoughts on dana. I enjoyed reading it. > > I know exactly what you mean about people shelling out money to temples. > > ===== Thank you for sharing your experiences regarding dana. Very inspirational. You grew up in Malaysia and have moved to Toronto. I grew up in Toronto and have moved to Malaysia! I have been living in KL for 16 years and teach Abhidhamma at Brickfields on Sunday mornings. Have you been to the Sri Lankan vihara on Kingston Road (east side of Toronto)? It is really beautiful. My father passed away a few months ago and my family visted this temple to do lunch dana. The monks said that it was very rare for them to get Canadian food, even though they lived in Canada, the people who gave dana were Sri Lankans so the monks only got Sri Lankan food. Metta, Rob M :-) #78867 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 6:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) buddhistmedi... Dear Han, - Thank you for a lively chat. >Han: >When I started Buddhist studies and practice some years ago, my family members and friends from Burma sent me enormous amount of books. I picked up those which were of immediate use to me and I kept the rest in a wooden box. T: I'd love to see that magic box of knowledge ! >Han: >I just had a glance at the few opening pages. I have to study the book which may take days if not months. T: But please don't give up too soon. Besides, Prof. U Ko Lay doesn't answer my question (that I asked you) : > Is it likely that both Dhammasanga.nii and > Patisambhidamagga ARE the Abhidhamma? Tep === #78868 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 1:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More on dana :-)) upasaka_howard Hi, Rob - In a message dated 11/18/2007 9:31:29 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@... writes: My father passed away a few months ago and my family visted this temple to do lunch dana. =============================== I'm very sorry, Rob. I hope you have fond and comforting memories of him and that your confidence in the Dhamma has supported you well in this loss. With metta, Howard #78869 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 7:12 am Subject: Re: Perfections Corner (37) buddhistmedi... Dear Connie, - I have a question about the following Commentary : "The Buddhas, Pacceka Buddhas and the ariyan disciples have a high reputation because of ultimate truth, paramattha sacca {**}." {**} They have realized the true nature of the paramattha dhammas of citta, cetasika, ruupa and nibbaana. T: I understand the above commentary to mean that ultimate truth is only known (through realization) by the Buddhas, Pacceka Buddhas and the ariyan disciples. Thus, is it right (or wrong) to infer that non- ariyans can never have high reputation about ultimate truth that they only talk about but do not realize it? Thanks. Tep === #78870 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 3:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] essence/a hot night in penang and i can't sleep/a few more thoughts TGrand458@... Hi bhikkhu aggacitto/aka reverend aggacitto In a message dated 11/17/2007 7:58:07 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, reverendaggacitto@... writes: Hi Howard/T.G and everybody! I believe That you are correct,but only from one angle that perspective not being the totality of what we speek. Let me put it yet another way, If a man burns his hand on a stove he can talk ALL he wants about how the stove didn't "OWN" the quality of BEING 10,000 degrees, at the moment that he was burned the stove possessed that (and was therefore in "ownership")that (and was theref TG: Due to a diversity of elements there are a diversity of experiences. The various experiences arise in accordance to the configuration of the elements (both "internal" and "external"). The configurations of elements are in accordance to causal forces. To say that something has its "own character" or "own essence" or "ownership" is overstating the matter IMO. When discriminating between one type of configuration vs another, it is causal circumstances that are being discriminated ... not "own characteristics" or "own essences." This is why it is something more than "mere dilusion" that his hand hurts now and is swelling.Something more than his mere "subjective perception". TG: The delusion is NOT the experience. The delusion is "reading" too much into the experience...i.e., misinterpreting the experience. In other words, delusion "over-characterizes" the experience. The same comment applies to the rest of your post. Does his hand now not "possess" the quality of pain at the moment that he feels such pain? Merely his subjective dilusion? i think not. He would only wish it to be something no more than a "phantom and a dream", if only it were no more than a mere "bubble and a flash"! May the Buddha's,Deva,May the Buddha's,Deva,and An bhikkhu aggacitto/aka reverend aggacitto TG OUT #78871 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 3:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] essence/a hot night in penang and i cant sleep TGrand458@... Hi Howard In a message dated 11/17/2007 11:51:16 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: ["When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one" and " 'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme."] As I see it, the problem lies not in the use of terms such as 'nature' and 'characteristic'and 'characteristic', but in the use of the term 'ow "self". There are only fleeting qualities entirely contingent upon other will' the wisp phenomena. With metta, Howard TG: I, for one, love quotes from the Pali Canon. Lay it on me baby! Howard, if you check out my response to Bhikkhu Aggacitto with the same subject heading, I think it addresses all the issues you brought up to me in an almost classic "Howard Elegance" style. (Actually better cause its more Buddha style.) ;-) TG OUT #78872 From: Dieter Möller Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 8:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The not-self strategy ( Ken 'thoughts) moellerdieter Hi Ken H, Tep and all interested, you wrote: 'Re: [dsg] Re: KenH's Thoughts on Self and No Self # 34782 This thread has got out of hand. I have renamed it. D: Perhaps we can start again by looking at "The Not-self Strategy" by Thanissaro Bhikkhu: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/notself.html It begins: "Books on Buddhism often state that the Buddha's most basic metaphysical tenet is that there is no soul or self. However, a survey of the discourses in the Pali canon - the earliest extant record of the Buddha's teachings - suggests that the Buddha taught the anatta or not-self doctrine, not as a metaphysical assertion, but as a strategy for gaining release from suffering: If one uses the concept of not-self to dis-identify oneself from all phenomena, one goes beyond the reach of all suffering & stress. As for what lies beyond suffering & stress, the Canon states that although it may be experienced, it lies beyond the range of description, and thus such descriptions as "self" or "not-self" would not apply." (end quote) What do you think so far? D: so far so good .. you quoted as requested ;-) KenH: If you share my view that it is totally ridiculous then we need say no more about it. D: I wonder what makes you think that somebody else shares your view , that the introduction of the essay, you quoted, ' is totally ridiculous' ? Kenh: However, if you think TB has a point then we really do need to discuss it further. D: Remember , you accused the Venerable of heterodoxy, misleading his students , i.e. scorning a senior monk, who has done so much for the benefit of many Dhamma students. What I and probably others expect is that YOU have a point, thoroughly checked and will now present that to the forum in line with the mentioned procedure. It is from there where the discussion should start.. Looking forward to your elaboration.. with Metta Dieter #78873 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 9:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The not-self strategy ( Ken 'thoughts) buddhistmedi... Hi KenH and Dieter, - Now the armwretling match has become threesome. > D: Remember , you accused the Venerable of heterodoxy, misleading his students , i.e. scorning a senior monk, who has done so much for the benefit of many Dhamma students. > What I and probably others expect is that YOU have a point, thoroughly checked and will now present that to the forum in line with the mentioned procedure. > > It is from there where the discussion should start.. > T: I second Dieter's motion, Ken. Thank you Dieter. Tep === #78874 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 9:23 am Subject: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 3, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, Three akusala cetasikas are roots, hetus, and these are: attachment, lobha, aversion or hate, dosa, and ignorance, moha. Akusala cittas can be rooted in attachment, in aversion or in ignorance, but the hetu that is ignorance accompanies each akusala citta. Thus, ignorance of realities conditions all akusala that arises. Besides the three akusala hetus, several other akusala cetasikas may accompany akusala citta such as wrong view, stinginess or conceit. There are three beautiful roots, sobhana hetus: non-attachment, alobha, non-aversion, adosa and wisdom or paññå. Alobha and adosa accompany each kusala citta and paññå may or may not accompany kusala citta. Besides the three sobhana hetus several other sobhana cetasikas accompany kusala citta, such as confidence in wholesomeness and mindfulness. Cittas such as seeing or hearing arise within a series or process of cittas. When seeing experiences visible object, it arises in a process of cittas experiencing visible object through the eye-door, they are eye-door process cittas. Seeing does not like or dislike, it is not wholesome, kusala, nor unwholesome, akusala; it is citta that is result of kamma, of a wholesome or unwholesome deed performed in the past. Seeing is vipakacitta, citta that is result. Thus, seeing arises when the right conditions are present, and the rúpas which condition it are eyesense and colour or visible object. What occurs at this moment? Shouldn't we verify realities at this moment? There is seeing now, but no self who sees. Can we make seeing arise? It has arisen already because of conditions. Do we really consider and investigate this? We have to see, we have to hear, because there are conditions, no “I” who can cause their arising. If we do not consider this again and again we cannot understand the meaning of anattå. Seeing is not the only citta arising in the eye-door process, there are other cittas that also experience visible object but perform each their own function. After seeing has fallen away, there are several more types of cittas and then kusala cittas or akusala cittas arise experiencing visible object in a wholesome or unwholesome way. When the sense-door process has ended a mind-door process of cittas arise that experience visible object. After that there may be other mind- door processes of cittas thinking of concepts. When we experience a sense object through one of the sense-doors we often react with attachment, lobha, when the object is pleasant, and with aversion, dosa, when the object is unpleasant. Let us consider our daily life. When we experience a disgusting odour, aversion can arise even before it is known what kind of odour it is. When a delicious morsel of food is on the tongue, attachment can arise even before knowing what kind of flavour it is. When we are sitting on a soft chair, the rupa that is softness may appear through the bodysense and attachment arises already, but we may not even realize that there is attachment. This may happen just now while we are sitting. Many moments of akusala cittas arise but we do not even notice them. ****** Nina. #78875 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 10:21 am Subject: Re: Conditions, Ch17, no3. ...Some Comments... scottduncan2 Dear Tep, Thanks for the reply: T: :The ATI Glossary gives a simple yet adequate meaning of concepts as follows: 'sammati [sammati]: Conventional reality; convention; relative truth; supposition; anything conjured into being by the mind'." Scott: I believe this should be 'sammuti'. I see that the site has a spelling error. I see you are connecting sammuti with pa~n~natti, but I think it might be more precise to use pa~n~natti to refer to concepts, although I see how they might intersect conceptually. Later you focus on the 'anything conjured into being by the mind'. Perhaps one might say that when speaking conventionally one makes use of concepts. PTS PED: "Sammuti (f.)...1. consent, permission ...2. choice, selection, delegation...3. fixing, determination (of boundary)...4. common consent, general opinion, convention, that which is generally accepted...conventional, e. g. sammuti-sacca conventional truth (as opposed to paramatthasacca the absolute truth)...sammuti-~naa.na common knowledge...sammuti-deva what is called a deva... sammuti-mara.na what is commonly called 'death'...sammuccaa (instr.) by convention or common consent...(v. l. sammacca=ger. of sammannati). 5. opinion, doctrine...(=dvaasa.t.thii di.t.thigataani...6. definition, declaration, statement (ummattaka-sammuti)... (vaadakasammuti); (bhu~njakasammuti). 7. a popular expression, a mere name or word" "Pa~n~natti (f.) [fr. pa~n~naapeti, cp. pa~n~natta] making known, manifestation, description, designation, name, idea, notion, concept..." Scott: You mentioned to Nina that you understand concepts now. Can you summarise this so I can keep up with you? Perhaps you can clarify how you see sammuti and pa~n~natti to correspond. T: "To me that the most important meaning of concepts is "anything conjured into being by the mind", which is the same as mental fabrication/concoction that is opposite to the pure dhamma(reality, phenomenon the way it really is BEFORE mental concoctions): it is a creation of kamma. Thus the construction, creation, or formation by the mind is dukkha. The right understanding of the pure dhamma (the way it is) is the opposite : it is the de-construction, separation, or dis-aggregatation of all fomations. When the 'coming-together' is stopped, dukkha is eradicated, kamma ceases, and that is Nibbana. "And what is the cessation of kamma? From the cessation of contact is the cessation of kamma." [Nibbedhika Sutta]." Scott: Dhammasa"nganii 1306-1310 is interesting: "[1306] Which are the states (dhammas) that are equivalent terms (adhivacanaa)? That which is an enumeration, that which is a designation, an expression, a current term, a name, a denomination, the assigning of a name, an interpretation, a distinctive mark of discourse on this state or that state. [1306a] All states are processes of equivalent nomenclature. [1307] Which are the states that are explanation (nirutti)? Answer as in 1306. [1307a] All states are processes of explanation. [1308] Which are the states that are expressions (pa~n~natti)? Answer as in 1306. [1308a] All states are processes of expression." [1308a] All states are processes of expression. In this connexion, [1309]What is name? The four khandas and unconditioned element. [1310] What is [material] form? The four great phenomena and the [material] form which is derived from them." T: "Based on my discussion above (ATI definition plus the paragraph 304 from Patism), thought is a mental formation and it may or may not be a concept. I believe thought is not concept when it is pure dhamma, i.e. such a "thought" does not lead to arising, occurrence, sign, accumulation, and rebirth-linking. What do you think now?" Scott: Atthasaalinii (p. 499): "...'Concept' means a revealing..." I'll need some clarification on the term 'thought'. Do you mean, for example, cintaa ("the act of thinking"), sa.nkappa ("thought, intention, purpose, plan"), or cetanaa ("state of ceto in action, thinking as active thought, intention, purpose, will")? Sincerely, Scott. #78876 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Reincarnation and Buddhism dcwijeratna Hi, Evelyn, As we understand there is no re-incarnation in the Teaching of the Buddha. The word used in the Suttas is 'punabbhava' --meaning re-becoming. Our idea is similar to that of Howard. Really, human beings cannot understand what happens after death or before birth. If you go even deeper, all you really know is the 'bare experience'. What is meant by 'bare experience' is the following: Example--when you see something (a red rose) there is seeing consciousness (cakkhu vi~n~naa.na). When you think about it, that is a different thought. (the rose is red, I like red etc.). Now the object of your thoughts is red or something. That is why you say: Knowledge is only the present moment. From another angle, the psycho-physical-unit (naama ruupa) has changed (whatever is). These are extremely complex. I am not sure whether my understanding is correct. According to the Dhamma, one has to develop Dhamma-vision (Dhamma-cakkhu) to understand this. What I have written can help you to resolve your problem; on the other hand, it may add to the confusion. With mettaa, D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #78877 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Conditions, Ch17, no3. ...Some Comments... nilovg Hi Howard, Op 17-nov-2007, om 20:28 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > It seems to be a mark or mental image that is a sort of mental > "photocopy". > In more detail, what sort of dhamma would that be, Nina, a strictly > mind-door > phenomenon of the nature of a perfect mental replication such as I > have > called a "fresh memory"? A nama that is a perfect remembering? -------- N: As I wrote to you before, sankhaara nimitta, mentioned in the Path of Discrimination, is not nimitta in the sense of outward appearance of things or concept on a account of what is perceived and remembered. There is ruupa-nimitta, vedanaa-nimitta, sa~n~naa- nimitta, sa.nkhaara-nimitta and vi~n~naa.na-nimitta. Thus a nimitta of each of the five khandhas, or in other words of naama and ruupa, of realities. You ask whether it is < a strictly mind-door phenomenon>. I do not know much about mind-door, except in theory. I have not attained the first vipassana ~naa.na. But I think that it does not help at all to find out. Cittas in a sense-door process arise and then cittas in a mind-door process and again after a while cittas in a sense-door process. They alternate so quickly, and moreoever, it is important to attend to the characteristic of reality that appears. I understood better now in India that it has to be wordless attention to the characteristic that appears, no naming, not trying to find out about this or that doorway. Kh Sujin also said: if you think about that reality there is no opportunity for awareness of a next reality. I understand, because then there is thinking and thinking and thinking. You also asked whether nimitta is a nama that is a perfect remembering? No, I did not understand it that way. It is useful to learn about nimitta because we realize that as soon as a dhamma appears it has fallen away already. Say, sound appears, but in reality that sound has gone already. Another sound impinges again on the earsense and who knows which one appears? It does not matter. No need to think all the time: it is a nimitta. or, the reality has fallen away. There are different characteristics appearing and is this not enough ? Nina. #78878 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More on dana :-)) nilovg Dear Elaine, that is an excellent description of your life full of dana in Malaysia. Appreciating, Nina. Op 18-nov-2007, om 3:52 heeft Elaine het volgende geschreven: > That’s basically how Dana is done in Malaysia. I hope everyone in > DSG can share their dana stories and how dana is done in their > respective countries. #78879 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy nilovg Hi Tep, Op 18-nov-2007, om 15:22 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > Nina and Sarah, for example, have > said many times that all dhammas are not controllable and when they > arise, they do so together in a single moment. [But I do not agree > with them.] ------- N: As to the single moment, it depends which dhammas arise with which dhammas at which moment. This has to be very precise. We can come back to this later. Nina. #78880 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 12:53 pm Subject: Re: Conditions, Ch17, no3. ...Some Comments... buddhistmedi... Dear Scott (Nina, Han, Dieter, Elaine, Phil) - Your post (#78875) is very good -- I like your methodical and precise approach to the discussion of pa~n~natti (concepts). You are right about the misspelling of sammuti at ATI. Thanks. The PTS usually is not helpful because of the confusing format they use to present meanings and usages. Their old references are not very useful to me. So I appreciate your editing of the PTS presentation to make it more understandable. I found your information about sammuti and pa~n~natti very helpful because I had thought they were identical. Well, now it is clear that concepts are not the same as 'sammuti sacca' like Nina said in her recent post to me. Sammuti : choice, selection, common consent, convention, conventional (generally accepted), opinion, doctrine, definition, declaration, statement, expression, name or word. Pa~n~natti : making known, manifestation, description, designation, name, idea, notion, concept..." T: The Dhammasa"nganii 1306-1310 is interesting like you said, especially the followings. [1308] Which are the states that are expressions (pa~n~natti)? Answer as in 1306. [1306a] All states are processes of equivalent nomenclature. [1308a] All states are processes of expression [1309]What is name? The four khandas and unconditioned element. T: Why are expressions pa~n~natti, given the PTS definitions above? Expressions are speech for communicating an idea. In this sense expressions are description and concept. But expressions are not 'making known' or 'manifestion', or are they? ............... >Scott: Atthasaalinii (p. 499): "...'Concept' means a revealing..." >I'll need some clarification on the term 'thought'. Do you mean, for example, cintaa ("the act of thinking"), sa.nkappa ("thought, intention, purpose, plan"), or cetanaa ("state of ceto in action, thinking as active thought, intention, purpose, will")? T: Very interesting! I mean the second, i.e. sa.nkappa. And I also understand that mental formations are also thoughts (mental fabrications, concoctions). T: If its meaning is 'a revealing', then concept is same as 'making known' or 'manifestion', hence it is identical to expression. Now I have an interesting sutta about 'expression' for you to read and tell me what you think. "Having first directed one's thoughts and made an evaluation, one then breaks out into speech. That's why directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabrications. Perceptions & feelings are mental; these are things tied up with the mind. That's why perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications." [MN 44] T: This sutta is the basis for my understanding (above) that says 'expression is sa.nkappa and mental formations'. I am not 100% sure, though. :-)) Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > Thanks for the reply: > > T: :The ATI Glossary gives a simple yet adequate meaning of concepts > as follows: 'sammati [sammati]: Conventional reality; convention; > relative truth; supposition; anything conjured into being by the > mind'." > #78881 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 1:18 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy buddhistmedi... Hi Nina, - Your awareness is admirable. > > Nina and Sarah, for example, have > > said many times that all dhammas are not controllable and when they > > arise, they do so together in a single moment. [But I do not agree > > with them.] > ------- > N: As to the single moment, it depends which dhammas arise with which > dhammas at which moment. This has to be very precise. We can come > back to this later. T: You are right that we have got to be precise. The sequential development of siila-samaadhi-panna (siila first? Or Panna together with the other two?) was discussed several times (one example is # 76371). And there was another discussion on the sequential 'patipada' (see #54720). Yet, there was another discussion on the sequential development of the seven visudhi and the 'relay chariots' simile in MN 34 (see #58645). Thanks. Tep === #78882 From: Elaine Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 1:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Slowing down tempo - it is okay :-)) shennieca Hi Nina, It is okay. Take your time to reply slowly. Take good care of your body and mind, don't stress yourself too much. I understand your workload! :-)) May all beings be well and happy. With mettaa, Elaine ---------------------- #78883 From: Elaine Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 2:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The not-self strategy (Ken 'thoughts) shennieca Dear KenH, Are you concerned with the word 'strategy'? Dukkha, anicca and anatta are the characteristics of dhamma and sankhara. Whether you understand about anatta or not, this characteristic is in You. This characteristic is in every human being, every Buddhists, Christians, etc.. because Anatta is a characteristic. And when you use the Word anatta to explain to others about your understanding of anatta, aren't you using that explanation as a 'strategy'? Aren't you yourself using anatta as a strategy for discovering the real anatta-ness in you? Or have you totally understood Anatta already? What do you understand by anatta? How are you going to realize the supramundane Anatta, what method do you use? Bhante Thanissaro is teaching you to use the mundane anatta understanding as a strategy, to realize the real characteristic of anatta that is in you. What other strategy are you using to realize Anatta, KenH? If you don't like the word strategy, can you suggest another word for it ? Do you have your own strategy / plan / devise to learn Buddhism, apart from using the mundane understanding of Anatta? Is it even possible to learn the real anatta by not using the normal spoken words of anatta as a strategy/method? KenH, may I know who is your Buddhist teacher? Thank you. Sincerely, Elaine P/S: I'm sorry, I would really like to make this e-m sweeter but it would lose its essence. I apologize in advance. ----------------------- #78884 From: han tun Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 2:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) hantun1 Dear Tep, You know very well that Dhammasanga.nii belongs to Abhidhamma Pitaka, and Patisambhidamagga belongs to Khunddaka Nikaaya. I cannot change that classification. However, if you ask me the nature of these two books, I can say that they are similar in the sense that they are dealing mainly with paramatthaa dhammas (citta, cetasika, ruupa). But the format and presentation is different, and you know how different they are, because you have the books. Respectfully, Han #78885 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 3:28 pm Subject: Re: The not-self strategy kenhowardau Hi Alex, Phil, Tep and Dieter, Re the first paragraph of BT's essay: Correct me if I am wrong, but I think Alex adequately summed up the position for all of you when he wrote: "There is nothing there to suggest that TB believes in a self." I, on the other hand, am far from satisfied with Alex's summary. To my mind the paragraph screams exactly that suggestion. If BT had wanted to reassure his us that he did not believe in a self why didn't he take the opportunity? I don't want to make this an overly long post, but I also don't want to be accused of not giving reasons. So, please bear with me. (Anyone who agrees with me (that the "suggestion" is obvious) should skip to the end.) The opening two sentences read as follows: "Books on Buddhism often state that the Buddha's most basic metaphysical tenet is that there is no soul or self. However, a survey of the discourses in the Pali canon — the earliest extant record of the Buddha's teachings — suggests that the Buddha taught the anatta or not-self doctrine, not as a metaphysical assertion, but as a strategy for gaining release from suffering:" (end quote) There are two issues in these sentences, aren't there? Or am I the only one who can see them? (You fellows are making me feel paranoid!) :-) One issue is, did the Buddha teach that there was no soul or self? The other issue is, did the Buddha teach the doctrine of anatta as a strategy? Surely, the average reader will be keenly aware of these two issues! Surely he will be waiting for BT to comment on both of them! Can you see what I mean? BT could easily have added, "Of course, all Dhamma students know there is no self - neither in the conditioned world nor in nibbana." Or he could have said something like, "I am not suggesting there is a self, but . . . etc, etc." However, he didn't take that opportunity. Come on, fellows, surely I'm not the only one who can see this! Alex's summary is clearly wrong. There is at least a *suggestion* in this opening paragraph that the author believes in a self. I could go through the rest of the paragraph in the same way, but (unless someone wants me to) I'll just repost it below. At this point, I should reiterate my objections to BT's essay. Not only does he fail to quash any "suggestion" that he might believe in a self, he actually wants us to conclude exactly that. You are not doing him any favours when you fail to see atta-belief. You are missing the whole point he is trying to make. Shall we move on? The second paragraph begins: "The evidence for this reading of the Canon centers around four points: 1 The one passage where the Buddha is asked point-blank to take a position on the ontological question of whether or not there is a self, he refuses to answer." (end quote) Is that a fair statement? I think it is extremely misleading. It gives the impression that the entire Dhamma is somehow something other than an affirmation of anatta - no self. According to my reading, this (item 1) sets the scene for the rest of BT's essay. And it sets the scene for his entire philosophy. BT wants us to believe that thoughts of self are a distraction to meditation, and so, for the purposes of meditation, we should not "take a position" either way. And he wants us to believe that this - and only this - is why the Buddha never stated, "Yes, of course there is a self!" I don't believe I am being disrespectful to Ven Thanissaro. I believe I am spelling out exactly what he is trying to tell us. It is you (who maintain he is not suggesting the existence of self) who are doing him a disservice. You are refusing to grasp the very point the is trying so hard to make. Ken H PS: Here, again, is the remainder of the first paragraph. Any further discussion of it before we move on to the above second paragraph is welcome, of course. "If one uses the concept of not-self to dis-identify oneself from all phenomena, one goes beyond the reach of all suffering & stress. As for what lies beyond suffering & stress, the Canon states that although it may be experienced, it lies beyond the range of description, and thus such descriptions as "self" or "not-self" would not apply." #78886 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 3:48 pm Subject: Re: The not-self strategy truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Alex, Phil, Tep and Dieter, > > Re the first paragraph of BT's essay: > > Correct me if I am wrong, but I think Alex adequately summed up the > position for all of you when he wrote: "There is nothing there to > suggest that TB believes in a self." >>>> Direct Knowledge is what ultimately counts. Anatta has to BE REALIZED rather than speculated and talked about in chat boards. > I, on the other hand, am far from satisfied with Alex's summary. To > my mind the paragraph screams exactly that suggestion. If BT had > wanted to reassure his us that he did not believe in a self why > didn't he take the opportunity? >>>> He nowhere has said that "The Soul Exists". Furthermore if you said that the 5 aggregates are Anatta, then it would be impossible to claim atta since there is no separation between self/not self. > > The opening two sentences read as follows: "Books on Buddhism often > state that the Buddha's most basic metaphysical tenet is that there > is no soul or self. >>>>>>> This MUST BE REALIZED rather than uncritically accepted at face value. However, a survey of the discourses in the Pali > canon — the earliest extant record of the Buddha's teachings — > suggests that the Buddha taught the anatta or not-self doctrine, not > as a metaphysical assertion, but as a strategy for gaining release > from suffering:" (end quote) > > There are two issues in these sentences, aren't there? Or am I the > only one who can see them? (You fellows are making me feel paranoid!) > :-) >>>>> I don't see any hints of Atta belief. > One issue is, did the Buddha teach that there was no soul or self? > The other issue is, did the Buddha teach the doctrine of anatta as a strategy? >>>>> All of Buddha Dhamma IS A STRATEGY. It doesn't make it wrong. It is simply teaching "Stress (ie: atta belief, clinging) and cessation of stress". > Come on, fellows, surely I'm not the only one who can see this! > Alex's summary is clearly wrong. There is at least a *suggestion* in this opening paragraph that the author believes in a self. >>>>>>> As I've said: TB calls to PRACTICE and make this YOUR OWN TRUTH! Shall we move on? The second paragraph begins: > > "The evidence for this reading of the Canon centers around four > points: 1 The one passage where the Buddha is asked point- blank to > take a position on the ontological question of whether or > not there is a self, he refuses to answer." (end quote) > > Is that a fair statement? YES! When he comes to the Suttas, he is correct. Buddha was VERY careful with anatta. >>>> I think it is extremely misleading. It > gives the impression that the entire Dhamma is somehow something > other than an affirmation of anatta - no self. >>>> Anatta HAS to be realized. > According to my reading, this (item 1) sets the scene for the rest of BT's essay. And it sets the scene for his entire philosophy. BT wants > us to believe that thoughts of self are a distraction to meditation, >>>> Correct. Moreover for many people saying "Self doesn't exist" may not be as enlightening as they think it is (and it may be hatred or desire for extermination). Ordinary worldling may develop aversion or a delusion that they know Anatta. Your knowledge of Anatta can be checked on a cushion in deep Jhana meditations. > Ken H > > PS: Here, again, is the remainder of the first paragraph. Any further > discussion of it before we move on to the above second paragraph is > welcome, of course. > > "If one uses the concept of not-self to dis-identify oneself from all > phenomena, one goes beyond the reach of all suffering & stress. As > for what lies beyond suffering & stress, the Canon states that > although it may be experienced, it lies beyond the range of > description, and thus such descriptions as "self" or "not-self" would > not apply." > That is correct. I will NOT be surprised if Ven. TB is an ariya. Please be careful with your accusations. Nibbana isn't a state of non-existence, existence, both, neither. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.174.than.html Lots of Metta, Alex #78887 From: mlnease Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 5:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) m_nease Hi Phil, Phil wrote: > Hi Mike and all > > How's it going? Great, thanks--the same for you I hope. > Yes, these impediments should be talked about more often, I > think. I think they're far more meaningful than talking > about "clinging to rules and rituals" (I forget the Pali) or > clinging to self involved in formal meditation, etc. I haven't come > across any mention of those in the samadhi section of Vism, not yet > anyways. I'm inclined to agree. The objections to meditation--by that or any other name--based on the likelihood of either diá¹¹?dÄ?na or sÄ«labbatupÄ?dÄ?na are moot if the impediments haven't been overcome, seems to me. > Irregardless of these impediments, I personally feel that there > are very important benefits to samatha even short of jhanas - very > important. Perhaps it's not samatha, technically speaking - probably > just clinging to calm. Perhaps nothing more than the well known non- > Dhamma benefits of "take ten deep breaths." But as for what it does > in aiding me to abstain from bad deeds of body, speech and mind, > it's very real. So yes, let's note the impediments to fulfillment of > samatha, but I don't think this means writing off the benefits even > for beginners. More later! :) Well, I certainly wouldn't argue that sitting quietly isn't likely to have better results than smoking crack or cracking heads. Still, if it occurs without understanding, as I understand it, it still isn't kusala --being neither daana, siila or bhaavanaa--since, if I do understand it right, all kusala arises with understanding. But I think we may be starting in on some old circles here, so maybe best just to drop it. Anyway, my very best wishes for your practice whatever form it takes. mike p.s. I've just converted to Linux from MS, so I'd appreciate any feedback re. problems with display of this post--also with Paa.li, since I've lost my dear old Windows-based spell-checker. #78888 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 5:49 pm Subject: Re: Perfections Corner (37) nichiconn Dear Tep, "The Buddhas, Pacceka Buddhas and the ariyan disciples have a high reputation because of ultimate truth, paramattha sacca {**}." {**} They have realized the true nature of the paramattha dhammas of citta, cetasika, ruupa and nibbaana. T: I understand the above commentary to mean that ultimate truth is only known (through realization) by the Buddhas, Pacceka Buddhas and the ariyan disciples. Thus, is it right (or wrong) to infer that non-ariyans can never have high reputation about ultimate truth that they only talk about but do not realize it? C: Relatively speaking. "The monastery and the house are far apart from each other"; "from whomsoever a man learns the law, he should worship him". peace, connie #78889 From: "robmoult" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 5:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) robmoult Hi Tep / Han Tun, If you have the PTS version of the Patisambhidamagga, there is a great introductory essay by A K Warder which talks about the historical development of the Abhidhamma and the role of the Patisambhidamagga. Metta, Rob M :-) #78890 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 5:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) buddhistmedi... Dear Han, - I only asked about the real original source of the Patisambhidamagga, not about the classification that was made many years after the time the great Arahant Sariputta learned the Abhidhamma from thr Buddha. The format/presentation style of the published book is irrelevant. Thank you. Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > You know very well that Dhammasanga.nii belongs to > Abhidhamma Pitaka, and Patisambhidamagga belongs to > Khunddaka Nikaaya. I cannot change that > classification. > #78891 From: han tun Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 6:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) hantun1 Dear Tep, You are asking ME about the real original source of the Patisambhidamagga! You, who have studied Patisambhidamagga for decades asking me who started reading the book only when I started working together with you. I have not yet read other chapters of Patisambhidamagga other than the ones I am working together with you. How can I answer that question? Respectfully, han --- Tep Sastri wrote: > > Dear Han, - > > I only asked about the real original source of the > Patisambhidamagga, > not about the classification that was made many > years after the time > the great Arahant Sariputta learned the Abhidhamma > from thr Buddha. > The format/presentation style of the published book > is irrelevant. > > Thank you. > > Tep > === #78892 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 6:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The not-self strategy (Ken 'thoughts) kenhowardau Hi Elaine, Welcome to the thread. Had I seen your contribution in time I would have included your name at the top of my previous post. I'll get around to the points you raise later. I am a very slow writer, and your post is at the wrong end of the queue. :-) Meanwhile, please don't worry that I may be commiting seriously bad kamma by attacking Ven Thanissaro. Contrary to what you have heard I am not attacking him at all. I am trying to understand what he has written. As I said, some others are not paying him that courtesy. With the best of intentions, they are refusing to listen to what he is trying to tell them. Ken H #78893 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 7:12 pm Subject: Re: The not-self strategy buddhistmedi... Dear KenH (Dieter, Alex, ...), - Thank you for your kind permission, "Correct me if I am wrong, but ...". No, I am not going to try, because it is impossible to correct anyone who doesn't admit that s/he is wrong. I call him TB (Thanissaro Bhikkhu) and you call him BT. Does that indicate maybe we will never reach the same conclusion? ;-) So I am going to give my comments without trying to correct you. TB: "Books on Buddhism often state that the Buddha's most basic metaphysical tenet is that there is no soul or self. However, a survey of the discourses in the Pali canon — the earliest extant record of the Buddha's teachings — suggests that the Buddha taught the anatta or not-self doctrine, not as a metaphysical assertion, but as a strategy for gaining release from suffering:" KH: There are two issues in these sentences, aren't there? ... One issue is, did the Buddha teach that there was no soul or self? The other issue is, did the Buddha teach the doctrine of anatta as a strategy? T: I think it is clear that your first issue is not an issue to him. Because TB wrote, "Views that there is no self are ranked with views that that there is a self as a "fetter of views" which a person aiming at release from suffering would do well to avoid". ... "The person who has attained the goal of release views reality in such a way that all views — even such basic notions as self & no-self, true & false — can have no hold power over the mind". [TB's article : The Not-self Strategy] KH: Shall we move on? The second paragraph begins: "The evidence for this reading of the Canon centers around four points: 1 The one passage where the Buddha is asked point-blank to take a position on the ontological question of whether or not there is a self, he refuses to answer." (end quote) KH: Is that a fair statement? I think it is extremely misleading. It gives the impression that the entire Dhamma is somehow something other than an affirmation of anatta - no self. T: You should instead ask "Is it true that the Buddha refused to answer the question of whether or not there is a self?". To answer you just go read the sutta yourself and find out. There is nothing misleading about that statement. It is fair and simple. ........ KH: (continuing to talk about the above quote) According to my reading, this (item 1) sets the scene for the rest of BT's essay. And it sets the scene for his entire philosophy. BT wants us to believe that thoughts of self are a distraction to meditation, and so, for the purposes of meditation, we should not "take a position" either way. And he wants us to believe that this - and only this - is why the Buddha never stated, "Yes, of course there is a self!" T: Since there was no issue from the beginning, everything you said above is just your imagination. Plain and simple. Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Alex, Phil, Tep and Dieter, > > Re the first paragraph of BT's essay: > > Correct me if I am wrong, but I think Alex adequately summed up the > position for all of you when he wrote: "There is nothing there to > suggest that TB believes in a self." > > #78894 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 7:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) buddhistmedi... Hi RobM (Han), Thanks for the suggestion. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi Tep / Han Tun, > > If you have the PTS version of the Patisambhidamagga, there is a > great introductory essay by A K Warder which talks about the > historical development of the Abhidhamma and the role of the > Patisambhidamagga. > T: Okay, Rob. What did Warder say? Tep === #78895 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 7:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) buddhistmedi... Dear friend Han, - I got a feeling that I did not ask the kind of question you liked! > Han: > You are asking ME about the real original source of > the Patisambhidamagga! You, who have studied > Patisambhidamagga for decades asking me who started > reading the book only when I started working together > with you. I have not yet read other chapters of > Patisambhidamagga other than the ones I am working > together with you. How can I answer that question? > T: I am sorry, Han. Forgive me, please? Tep === #78896 From: "robmoult" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 7:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) robmoult Hi Tep / Han, Sorry, I am on the road, so I do not have my texts with me. It was something along the lines of the "original Abhidhamma" (before the breakup of the 18 schools) having four main texts which roughly map into: 1. The Suttana explanation in the Vibhanga 2. The Abhidhamma explanation in the Vibhanga 3. The Dhatukatha and Patthana 4. The Patisambhidamagga It has been a few months since I read this, so I am not sure of the details. Metta, Rob M :-) > > > > If you have the PTS version of the Patisambhidamagga, there is a > > great introductory essay by A K Warder which talks about the > > historical development of the Abhidhamma and the role of the > > Patisambhidamagga. > > > > T: Okay, Rob. What did Warder say? > #78897 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 2:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Alex, Phil, Tep, and Dieter) - In a message dated 11/18/2007 6:28:38 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Alex, Phil, Tep and Dieter, Re the first paragraph of BT's essay: Correct me if I am wrong, but I think Alex adequately summed up the position for all of you when he wrote: "There is nothing there to suggest that TB believes in a self." I, on the other hand, am far from satisfied with Alex's summary. To my mind the paragraph screams exactly that suggestion. If BT had wanted to reassure his us that he did not believe in a self why didn't he take the opportunity? I don't want to make this an overly long post, but I also don't want to be accused of not giving reasons. So, please bear with me. (Anyone who agrees with me (that the "suggestion" is obvious) should skip to the end.) The opening two sentences read as follows: "Books on Buddhism often state that the Buddha's most basic metaphysical tenet is that there is no soul or self. However, a survey of the discourses in the Pali canon — the earliest extant record of the Buddha's teachings — suggests that the Buddha taught the anatta or not-self doctrine, not as a metaphysical assertion, but as a strategy for gaining release from suffering:" (end quote) There are two issues in these sentences, aren't there? Or am I the only one who can see them? (You fellows are making me feel paranoid!) :-) One issue is, did the Buddha teach that there was no soul or self? The other issue is, did the Buddha teach the doctrine of anatta as a strategy? =================================== I really don't know what the venerable believes. I can, however, think of an easy scenario that would allow for him believing that the Buddha knew that there is no self anywhere in anything and that he, himself, believes that to be so, and yet he also believes that the Buddha used a strategy *leading* to the direct knowing of no self instead of outright teaching a no-self article of faith. The idea is that Ven T presumes that the Buddha knew as fact that the only proper way for people to come to truly realize no self is, in fact, to avoid accepting it on faith, but, instead, to come to know it as one being struck by a thunderbolt because of a step by step seeing that nothing ever encountered, neither rupa nor nama, is self. Thus, the goal is to know, to truly know, of NO self by seeing again and again the fact of NOT self. If this is the venerable's position, it would make sense that he would proceed along the same assumed lines as the Buddha and avoid attempting to inculcate a no-self belief but instead teach what will eventually *lead* to a no-self realization. Because of this, I do not presume that Ven Thanissaro had a heterodox belief. He *may* have, but I don't know this as fact. I, myself, do think that there are places where the Buddha did explicitly teach no self. In fact, it is the most trivial inference to conclude that there is no self (anywhere in anything) from the third of the tilakkhana, because the assertion "All dhammas are not self" ("Sabbe dhamma anatta") is logically equivalent to "No dhamma is self" and to "There is nothing that is self" and to "Nothing is self" and to "There is no self". With metta, Howard #78898 From: "R. K. Wijayaratne" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 6:06 pm Subject: Be Rather a Victor of Yourself than a Victor of Others, None Can Turn Self-Victory Into Defeat * rwijayaratne Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammâ Sambuddhassa! .... Taken from The Dhammapada1 Translated by Venerable K. Sri Dhammananda SAHASSA VAGGA - THOUSANDS : BE RATHER A VICTOR OF YOURSELF THAN A VICTOR OF OTHERS, NONE CAN TURN SELF-VICTORY INTO DEFEAT Atta have jitam seyyo----- ya ca yam itara paja Attadantassa posassa----- niccam sannatacarino(104) N'eva devo na gandhabbo----- na maro saha brahmuna Jitam apajitam kayira----- tatharupassa jantuno(105) Self-conquest2 is, indeed, far greater than the conquest of all other folk; neither a god nor a gandhabba3, nor Mara4, nor Brahma5, can win back the victory of such a person who is self-subdued and ever lives in restraint. (104-105) Dhammapada, Verse 104-105 Gain and loss in gambling On one occasion, a brahmin told the Buddha, 'Venerable Sir, I think you know only the practices that are beneficial and not the practices that are unbeneficial.' The Buddha replied that he also knew the practices which were unbeneficial and harmful. Then the Buddha enumerated six practices which cause dissipation (loss) of wealth. They are (1) sleeping until the sun has arisen, (2) habitual idleness, (3) cruelty, (4) indulgence in intoxicants which cause drunkenness and negligence, (5) wandering alone in streets at suspicious (late) hours, and (6) sexual misconduct. Further, the Buddha asked the brahmin how he earned his living, and the brahmin replied that he earned his living by playing dice, i.e. by gambling.6 Next, the Buddha asked him whether he had won or lost. When the brahmin answered that he sometimes lost and sometimes won, the Buddha said to him, 'To win in a game of dice is nothing compared to a victory over moral defilements.' 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/ 2. Atta - The Buddha often uses this term in the sense of oneself or mind but not in the sense of a soul or special self. 3. A class of beings who are supposed to be heavenly musicians. 4. Here Mara is used in the sense of a god. 5. Another class of beings, even superior to the gods in heaven, who have developed the Jhanas (ecstasies). 6. In the Parabhava Sutta the Buddha says that gambling is one of the causes of a man's downfall. See this sutta here http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.06.nara.html and here http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.06.piya.html . Also refer to the Sigalovada Sutta here http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.31.0.nara.html and here http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.31.0.ksw0.html . ..... #78899 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 9:10 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy rjkjp1 Dear Alex there was a discussion about this point here: http://www.forum.websangha.org/viewtopic.php? t=133&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=thanissaro&start=15 BHIKKHU SANTI: "There are plenty of Sutta passages that either explicitly say that there is NO self in the ultimate sense or clearly imply that. An example that comes to mind is a Dhp. verse: "when even your self is not your own, how can there be sons or cows for you?" (attaa hi attano natthi...). I used to read Aj. Geoff's translations of the Suttas on accesstoinsight for years, since I was twelve years old actually, and I read all his essays and books. Now I don't like his writings any more, and sometimes find his translations in-credible too, because he tends to read the Suttas through his interpretation. His own interpretation comes first, then he tries to fit the Suttas into it. He actually admits this in the intro to his "Mind like fire unbound" when he says that first he took a short, enigmatic statement of LP Fuang (?) and came to a conclusion about the meaning of nibbana, then he went looking for Suttas to prove it. In his latest history book "Buddhist Religions" he presents his idiosyncatic interpretations with virtually no references as usual, and the one reference he did give to support his 'no self strategy' theory there to MN2 simply did not say what he said it says. He says that MN 2 (Sabbaasava Sutta) says that one who believes 'there is no self' is caught in the net of views... etc. Whereas actually it says one who believes "there is no self FOR ME" is caught in the net of views, the tangle of views, the thicket of views etc. That small little "me" in the Pali means that this is the view of the annhilationists not the Buddhists. The Buddhist teaching of anatta and the nature of is very close to annhilationism, that's why you can find so much praise for the annhilationists in the Suttas, the Buddha called them the holders of 'the foremost of outside viewpoints' because: "they already have revulsion towards existence and non revulsion towards the cessation of existence, so when the Dhamma is taught to them for the cessation of existence they do not recoil from it". The Four Noble Truths are meant to be challenging, if they're presented as a mundane teaching for being relatively comfortable in Samsara then that's wrong. The difficulty with interpreting and understanding the Four Noble Truths, anatta and the true meaning of nibbana is not that they are intellectually complicated or that there is not enough clear explanations in the Suttas the problem is that as ordinary people we have an extremely strong emotional resistance to accepting what they really mean. When I feel I have had the clearest most peaceful, insightful meditations what I have seen every time so far is how deep the defilements go, that in fact they are normally in complete control of our perceptions without us being aware of that. I also saw how when I tried watching impermanence and extending it to the past and the future with a relatively peaceful mind my mind totally rebelled, got frightened to the very depth of its existence, not on a discursive level or with any conscious intention. I saw how deeply, deeply frightened my mind is of accepting impermanence, even though theoretically I accept it. So it seems to me that this is why 99.99% of books on Buddhism and teachers of Buddhism compromise on the challengingness of the Four Noble Truths in one way or another - because the truth is too terrifying emotionally, not because the Suttas are intellectually hard to understand. By teaching his extremely unique interpretation of nibbana, which is not as he claims supported by the Thai Kruba Ajahns, or at least not all of them by any means, he is effectively setting up one side of a bridge except for the keystone, then by teaching that the Buddha never taught that there is no ultimate self or essence he sets up the other half of the bridge. He leaves it to the extremely fertile imagination of biased ordinary beings to fill in the gap that "nibbaana is the ultimate self", which I've actually heard that he admits he believes in private. He bases this last point on Dhp. "all things are without-self (or, 'not self'), when one sees this with wisdom, then one turns away from suffering, this is the path of purification". So then I've heard that he says that this means that the perception "all dhammas are anatta" is just a part of the path of purification, it's not necessarily a fact that applies to the goal. It's intriguing how his interpretations mirror so closely some of the other contemporary non-Buddhist teachers that are described in "Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge" and also the Puggalavaadins and their theory of a transcendent, ineffable self. He sometimes even uses the same similes. I wonder if there is some influence from past lives here? I know I'm going to get flack for criticising such a popular teacher, and also he does teach a lot of good Dhamma that is not popular, like renunciation and the need for samaadhi (never mind that his interpretation of 'jhaana' is uniquely creative (!) too). However, sometimes I feel you just have to tell it like it is, even if he is famous. I've also benefitted alot from his translations of the Suttas, even if now I prefer Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi's (or my own), at least he puts them out there for free, and imperfect as they are they are an entrance to the Suttas for many people, and that's great.""endquote santi Robert _________________ -- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > Hi, Ken (and Alex, Phil, Tep, and Dieter) - > > In a message dated 11/18/2007 6:28:38 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, > kenhowardau@... writes: > > Hi Alex, Phil, Tep and Dieter, > > Re the first paragraph of BT's essay: > > Correct me if I am wrong, but I think Alex adequately summed up the > position for all of you when he wrote: "There is nothing there to > suggest that TB believes in a self." > > #78900 From: Elaine Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 9:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dana - to Rob M shennieca Hello Rob M, Thank you for your e-m. I'm happy that you find my dana story inspirational. I'm sorry to hear about the loss of your father. May your dana bring lots of merits to you and your family. Sadhu! I have not been to the Toronto Mahavihara Sri Lankan temple on Kingston Road. It is difficult to convince my dear hubby to go to a temple. I've been to KL Brickfields temple a couple of times. May I know what time is your Abhidhamma class on Sunday? Is it Ok for me to attend your class for a day? (I may go to KL sometime next year). Do you use any particular Abhidhamma books in your class? I have an Abhidhamma question. What does the Abhidhamma say about 'cetana', volition? One abhidhamma book excerpt that I've read, it says a human being has some free-will and another book, it says we don't have any free-will at all. May I know what is your opinion on 'cetana'? Please take your time to reply. Thank you. With metta, Elaine --------------------------- #78901 From: han tun Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 10:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) hantun1 Dear Friend Tep, No need to say sorry, please! It was my fault that I did not understand your initial question. You first asked me, “Is it likely that both Dhammasanga.nii and Patisambhidamagga ARE the Abhidhamma?” At that time, you did not specifically say that you wanted to know the real original source of the Patisambhidamagga. So, I had answered about the classification and the format and presentation style of Dhammasanga.nii and Patisambhidamagga, which you found it irrelevant. So, I also ask for your forgiveness. Respectfully, Han #78902 From: "reverendaggacitto" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:12 pm Subject: a late night in Penang/You're not really reading this....... reverendagga... Hi Everybody! It's only you're subjective perception that you are! "When discriminating between one type of configuration or another it is casual circumstance that are being discriminated... not "own" characteristics or "own" essences". Howard These five faculties...remain standing in dependence on vitality. ...and vitality remains standing in dependence on what? Vitality remains standing in dependence on heat. The 4 Great existents...The earth property, the water property the fire property,the wind property. S.N.35,197 At the moment that a phenomena arises it has a certain qualitive casual circumstance,or "characteristic". Several casual circumstances can combine to form a chacteristic! Let me give you an example! The "qualitive circumstances" of heat and water can combine to cause the "characteristic" of that which we call "humid". These are like different concepts that arise due to the combination of different precepts that then go on to perhaps act as their own precepts to form other concepts. Call it a characteristic or a casual circumstance if you want, the point is at the end of the day so to speak,the water is still wet!At the moment the phenomena that we call "water" arises and exists it has POSSESSION as an entegral part of its BEING the "qualitive circumstance"called "wetness".Otherwise the water would not be wet and therefore would not be called "water"! Any attempt to deny this is a way of making Buddha dhamma impotent as a teaching by making it all just another form of subjectivly relative philosophy.Buddhism is a religion,not a philosophy. A very practical and straight forward religion with a practical and straight forward teaching.It is for this reason The abbidhamma was not even discussed at the first council.Later on we are told that theres this work called the "abbidhamma" that we should study! i firmly believe this to be the direct work of prince Mara himself whom i am sure many concider to be just a "superstition" as well. The "phantom and a dream" type talk goes into this catagory as well. i don't deny the apparent truth of "ultimate" dhamma as opposed to "conventional" dhamma.What i disagree with is making it the totality of discernment regarding the Buddha dhamma. This is a dangerious tendency for the above and before mentioned reason of its being twisted into a form of subjective philosophy. As a form of subjective philosophy, it can then be no more and no less than simply what one wishes it to be.Nothing to really concern ourselves with if its simply no more than a "bubble and a flash" with no true essence of self (and therefore others)to speak of. i will be traveling back to Burma by way of Thailand tomorrow. My stay in Malaysia has been an interesting one. i am not sure how often i will be able to keep in contact. i hope i have not offended anyone by this posting,i simply speak honestly. May the Buddha's,Deva,and Angel's bless ALL of you! bhikkhu aggacitto/aka reverend aggacitto #78903 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The not-self strategy (Ken 'thoughts) rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Elaine wrote: > > Dear KenH, > > Are you concerned with the word 'strategy'? > > +++++++\Dear Elaine In his comments on the vacchagotta sutta (connected diascourses) Bhikkhu Bodhi says "We should carefully heed the two reasons the Buddha does not declare, "There is no self": not because he recognizes a transcendent self of some kind (as some interpreters allege), or because he is concerned only with delineating a "STRATEGY of perception" devoid of ontological implications (as OTHERS hold), but (i) because such a mode of expression was used by the annihilationists, and the Buddha wanted to avoid aligning his teaching with theirs; and (ii) because he wished to avoid causing confusion in those already attached to the idea of self. The Buddha declares that "all phenomena are nonself" (sabbe dhammâ anattâ), which means that if one seeks a self anywhere one will not find one. Since "all phenomena" includes both the conditioned and the unconditioned, this precludes an utterly transcendent, ineffable self."" (thanks to ven Dhammanando for pointing out this passage) Why do you think Bhikkhu bodhi especially highlighted the mistake in seeing anatta as a strategy? Also, do you think anicca (impermance) is a strategy that the Buddha used or is it literal truth? (If ven. Thanissaro has an essay called the "Impermanence strategy" it might be good to comapre) Robert #78904 From: "robmoult" Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:44 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: dana - to Rob M robmoult Hi Elaine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Elaine wrote: > > Hello Rob M, > > Thank you for your e-m. I'm happy that you find my dana story inspirational. > > I'm sorry to hear about the loss of your father. May your dana bring lots of merits to you and your family. Sadhu! > ===== The funeral was a wonderful celebration of my father's life. After the service, so many people came up to me and said, "When I die, that is how I want my funeral service to be!" Later, I will craft a post sharing what happened. ===== > I have not been to the Toronto Mahavihara Sri Lankan temple on Kingston Road. It is difficult to convince my dear hubby to go to a temple. ===== My advice is to not go to the temple during a service. I sense that there is a strong element of a "Sri Lankan Community Centre", so you and your husband may feel out of place. I suggest that you pick a time when there is nothing going on. Just stop in and look around to get a feel for the place. If your husband does not feel comfortable, you can leave after five minutes. Bringing an ang pow for the monks (I think that there are three) is optional. ===== > I've been to KL Brickfields temple a couple of times. May I know what time is your Abhidhamma class on Sunday? Is it Ok for me to attend your class for a day? (I may go to KL sometime next year). ===== Of course, you are welcome to join! My class starts at 9:45 after the morning puja. It is supposed to last for one hour, but we often do not stop until 11:30 or even later because of the amount of Q&A discussion that happens. ===== > > Do you use any particular Abhidhamma books in your class? > ===== My class is meant for beginners. I find Bhikkhu Bodhi's "Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma" to be an excellent text, but a bit heavy for my class where discussion is more around the practical application of the theory. In the files section of this discussion group, you can find two files that I wrote, "z - Abhidhamma - Theory Behind Buddha's Smile" and "z-Introduction to the Abhidhamma - Speaker Notes". In general, I use the framework of the Abhidhamma to structure the course, but in each class there is a lot of discussion of Suttas and practical application of the theory. ===== > I have an Abhidhamma question. What does the Abhidhamma say about 'cetana', volition? > One abhidhamma book excerpt that I've read, it says a human being has some free-will and another book, it says we don't have any free-will at all. May I know what is your opinion on 'cetana'? ===== I suggest that you go to http://www.zolag.co.uk/ebook.html and download Nina's book titled, "Cetasikas". I suggest that you read Chapters 4 & 5 (page 43 - 58) to get a good understanding of cetana. In this text, Nina does not take a position on the question of "free will". However, once you have read the text, I will give you my view (I do not want to overload you with deep topics - I have already given you a lot of "reading material"!). Metta, Rob M :-) #78905 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 12:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Conditions, Ch17, no3. ...Some Comments... nilovg Hi Tep, just butting in. Op 18-nov-2007, om 21:53 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > Very interesting! I mean the second, i.e. sa.nkappa. And I also > understand that mental formations are also thoughts (mental > fabrications, concoctions). ------ N: Sa"nkhaarakkhandha is translated as formations or activities. All cetasikas except feeling and sa~n~naa. In D.O. : abhisankhaara: kusala kamma and akusala kamma conditioning rebirth. But you will continue your dialogue with Scott. Nina. #78906 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 12:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy nilovg Hi Tep. I remember. It is best if pa~n~naa accompanies siila and samaadhi, then these are purer. I think that the visuddhis come one after the other, just as the stages of vipassana. Nina. Op 18-nov-2007, om 22:18 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > You are right that we have got to be precise. The sequential > development of siila-samaadhi-panna (siila first? Or Panna together > with the other two?) was discussed several times (one example is # > 76371). And there was another discussion on the sequential 'patipada' > (see #54720). Yet, there was another discussion on the sequential > development of the seven visudhi and the 'relay chariots' simile in > MN 34 (see #58645). #78907 From: "reverendaggacitto" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 1:07 am Subject: A late night in Penang/Your'e not really reading this... reverendagga... HI EVERYBODY! To revise and update... darn!i did it again! abbidhamma should be spelled abhidhamma! NOT THAT I THINK MUTCH OF IT ANYWAY! THANKS everybody for the good conversation! Once again i'm not sure how often i will be able to keep in touch, not that some will really care! BLESSINGS TO ALL! bhikkhu aggacitto/aka reverend aggacitto #78908 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 2:38 am Subject: Re: Response to Phil - Part 1 philofillet Hi again Sukin As you know I've been intending to get back to this series, but you know, I'm feeling so little inclination to criticize Acharn Sujin's approach these days, that I think I'll hold off. Of course, our dialogue wouldn't be all about that, but I suspect there'd be a lot of it. If you don't mind, I'll hold off until the next time I feel the need to gripe. And I'll save your series until then - I've bookmarked it. Thanks! Metta, Phil #78909 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 2:43 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) philofillet ?@?@Hi Mike Thanks for your feedback. I agree with what you wrote. I am interested in the benefits of using breath as an intentional object in a very crude way, but I don't think it's bhavana - could be helpful in setting up bhavana. > p.s. I've just converted to Linux from MS, so I'd appreciate any > feedback re. problems with display of this post--also with Paa.li, since > I've lost my dear old Windows-based spell-checker. No problems that I can see. TW, we're thinking that we'll be moving to Vancouver permanently in 5 years or so, so we'll have a chance to get together, surely. Clinging to that notion already. Metta, Phil #78910 From: "robmoult" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 2:58 am Subject: Re: A late night in Penang/Your'e not really reading this... robmoult Hi Bante, As you know, this weekend, I will be leading a discussion on "Abhidhamma - Myths, Facts and Utility" at the "Closer to Reality Dhamma Seminar" which you are hosting in Sasanarakkha Buddhist Sanctuary. Is your "NOT THAT I THINK MUCH OF IT ANYWAY!" a heads-up that it is going to be a "hostile audience"? :-) :-) Venerable Sir, hostile audience or not, I am really looking forward to it and to seeing you again! :-) :-) Respectfully, Rob M :-) #78911 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:00 am Subject: Re: The not-self strategy philofillet Hi Tep > You have become very active lately. Are your family and friends not > around? ;-)) For better or worse (better I think) my family and friends have become concentrated into one person, and she's very much here, thankfully. She hasn't been complaining about my posting, I guess because she has seen how concentrated and confident I've become about the novel I'm writing. > > >Phil: > > I don't doubt that. But we musn't make a cult out of understanding > > anatta. I think the udnerstanding of anatta will come as a result > >of deepending our peception of impermanence and dukkha, that's what > >I'm seeing in suttas again and again these days. Ph: Wow! Look at all those typos. You can see that while I post a lot I don't spend much time doing it! > > T: I like that "musn't make a cult out of understanding anatta" which > implies that we musn't be obsessed by anything, a dhamma or not. Ph: Right. The Buddha praises zeal, but he warns against infatuation. I think that when we get keen on Dhamma there'll a lot of infatuation and obsessive thinking moments involved with the wholesome desire to make progress. No need to sort it out. > A warning ! Your suggestion that "the understanding of anatta will > come as a result of deepending our peception of impermanence and > dukkha" is proned to be attacked by the DSG Abhidhammikas as a wrong > idea. Why? Because you assume that understanding of the dhammas > arises sequentially, step by step. Nina and Sarah, for example, have > said many times that all dhammas are not controllable and when they > arise, they do so together in a single moment. [But I do not agree > with them.] P: Well, I would certainly agree that dhammas are not controllable, not truly, not ultimately, but there is a very, very useful illusion of control. Having a healthy sense of a wholesome self/ego is absolutely necessary to begin to clear out the gross defilements. (ie, becoming a better or more wholesome person, in the conventional sense, which is denied by folks as a useful teaching but is the way to go when one is prone to the worse kind of proliferations.) And I don't think anyone here would deny that dhammas arise sequentially. In the paccayas there is contiguity condition, promximity condition etc which are about cittas arising after other cittas. The "cittas arising altogether" thing is about the path moments, the supra-mundane cittas, isn't it. I personally think it's good to note that there are supra-mundane cittas, to have a look at those texts now and then. But I think there is excessive interest in them at times. Oh dear, dinner is ready. I have to go. I wanted to post at length on the many texts I've been seeing lately about how the perception of impermanence conditions insight into dukkha and subsequently anatta but it'll have to be another time. Metta, Phil #78912 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:08 am Subject: Re: More on dana :-)) philofillet Hi Elaine you wrote: "I want to share my stories and my own point of view of dana and generosity. I hope you won't think that I am boasting. For me, if I do dana, the reward is secondary. As long as it brings joy to my heart, I am satisfied. Dana does not have to be in monetary form, it can be doing a volunteer service, giving our time, or expertise to help other people." Just want to thank you for this great post you wrote on Dana, sharing your experiences. I'll be asking more about your experiences growing up in Malaysia, and asking Han and Tep and DC and others about what it's like growing up in a Buddhist country, but not now. Thanks again, talk to you later. Metta, Phil p.s one great thing Rob M does on occasion is share his kusala, telling us about, for example, serving ice cream to monks who visited his house (my personall all-time favorite dana anecdote) or the time his wife abstained from killing some ants (?) or something like that. It's not boasting, it's a deed of merit to share one's kusala, as you know. #78913 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] a late night in Penang/You're not really reading this....... upasaka_howard Hi, Bhante - In a message dated 11/19/2007 2:12:52 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, reverendaggacitto@... writes: Hi Everybody! It's only you're subjective perception that you are! "When discriminating between one type of configuration or another it is casual circumstance that are being discriminated... not "own" characteristics or "own" essences". Howard ============================== Bhante, that may have been by TG - I'm not sure, but it wasn't I who wrote that. With metta, Howard #78914 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] a late night in Penang/You're not really reading this....... upasaka_howard Hi, Bhante - In a message dated 11/19/2007 2:12:52 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, reverendaggacitto@... writes: Later on we are told that theres this work called the "abbidhamma" that we should study! i firmly believe this to be the direct work of prince Mara himself whom i am sure many concider to be just a "superstition" as well. The "phantom and a dream" type talk goes into this catagory as well. ================================ The Devil made us do it, Bhante! Ole nasty Satan hisself! Say Hallelujah!! With infernal metta, Howard #78915 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 5:03 am Subject: Re: A Quick Question on Conditionality scottduncan2 Dear Rob M, Thanks for these clarifications: R: "As mentioned in BB's CMA (p 309), the conditioning states for natural decisive support condition are, 'strong past 89 cittas, 52 cetasikas, 28 rupas, some concepts'..." Scott: I also appreciate these ideas: R: "...It is possible that the passing away of Scott's wife was a trigger which brought back countless similar experiences from past existences when loved ones passed away. It is possible that in past lifetimes, Scott reflected deeply on the eight samvega-vatthu as well as confidence [saddha] the Triple Gem and the passing away of his wife in this existence was a triggering event for this renewed confidence [saddha]...Conditions never work alone and the interactions are always complex." Scott: Its so complex, isn't it? R: "...The purpose of studying conditions is not psychology, but rather to show the mind operating under natural conditions rather than under the control of a 'self'." Scott: A very important point here, I think, Rob. I couldn't agree more. Conditionality, or Abhidhamma in general, is often subtly dismissed as being an 'ancient psychology'. Conditionality doesn't represent an ancient way of referring to modern concepts about self or psychodynamics. I agree wholeheartedly that it is not psychology. It is amazing to consider the dynamic complexity of it all without having to posit an agent exerting overarching control. Sincerely, Scott. #78916 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 4:43 am Subject: The Rhinoceros Horn! bhikkhu0 Friends: The Rhinocero’s Horn: Originally spoken by solitary Pacceka Buddhas! Laying aside all violence, respecting all beings, never harming even one of them, one should not wish for a son, nor neither for any companion. One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Affection comes into being for one who has associations; following this affection, this misery arises. Seeing the peril born of this affection, this passion, this lust One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Sympathising with friends and companions one misses ones goal Being shackled in mind. Seeing such danger in acquaintance, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. The considerations which exists for sons and wives is like a spreading bamboo entangled, a solid web of bars, Like a single young bamboo shoot up free, not caught up with others One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. As a deer is not tied up goes where-ever it wishes Fully free in forest, an understanding friend, regarding and enjoying his independence, should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Among many companions; whether one rests, stand, sit, or walk; there are endless requests from others... Having respect for and appreciation of Freeing Independence... which is not liked by any other, [than Nobles] One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Among many companions; there are sport, enjoyment, and great love for sons and men Although loathing the later separation from what is liked, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. One is a friend of the four directions and not hostile, being pleased with whatever comes ones way. A fearless bearer of the dangers, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Even some wanderers [& some bhikkhus] are not kindly disposed and also some householders dwelling in a house can also be hostile. Paying little attention to the children [pupils] of others; One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Having shed the appearance of a householder, like a naked tree, whose leaves have fallen; A true Hero, having cut the householders bond, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. If one can obtain a zealous companion, an associate of good & pure disposition, who is resolute, firm, unwavering overcoming all obstructions, swiftly, One should wander with him, elated & mindfull. Certainly let us praise the excellent fortune of having a Friend, better or equal than one-self, such one should truly be followed. However if such Noble Friend is absent, not to be found then enjoying only blameless things, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Seeing that even golden bracelets, quite well made inevitable are clashing together, when two on same arm, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. In same way seeing: With a companion there would be objectionable empty talk and abuse for me. Seeing such danger of the future in company, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. For sensual pleasures, variegated, sweet and delightful disturb and perturb the mind with their manifold forms. Seeing the danger in the many forms of sensual delights, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. This for me is a calamity, a cancer tumour, a misfortune, a dis-ease, a barb and a fear! Seeing the danger of sensual strands of pleasure exactly like such distress & disaster, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Cold, heat, hunger and thirst, rainy storm and the sting of the scorching sun, gadflies and snakes, having mindfully endured all these, training patience, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. As an Elephant with massive shoulders, spotted by age, but Noble in mind, may leave the herds and live as it pleases all alone in the forest peace, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. It is an IMPOSSIBILITY!!! for one who delights in company to obtain even a trace of even temporary release... Having heard such word from the son of the sun, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Gone beyond the contortions of wrong view, arrived at the fixed straight course to salvation, having gained the way, having entered the stream, thinking: Ice-Clear Certain Insight has arisen in me; I am not to be led by others anymore... One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Being without desire, without deceit, without thirst, without hypocrisy, with delusion and faults blown all away, without longing for anything whatsoever in the whole world, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. One should avoid a companion defiled by evil, who does not see the goal, who has accepted bad behaviour. One should not associate with one who is dominated by wrong views and is negligent, all blinded, fumbling... One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. One should cultivate one certain Friend of Great Learning, Expert in the Doctrine, a Noble Friend possessed of ultra-sharp Intelligence. When understanding one’s aim, [from such friend] having dispelled any doubt and dried out all confusion, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Not finding any satisfaction in sport, activity and empty entertainment, nor in the fading happiness arisen from sensual pleasures of this glitter world, one should pay no attention whatsoever to such, abstain from adornment of mere body frame and speaking only plain straight absolute truth, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Leaving behind son and wife, and father and mother and house and wealth, and sensual pleasures to the limit One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. This is an attachment, a bond, a chain; here is little happiness, modest satisfaction, much misery, this is a hook of pain! Seeing this, knowing this, the wise should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Having broke ones chains asunder, like a fish breaking through the catching net, not returning, like a fire gone out, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. With downcast eyes, not foot-loose, nor restless, with senses well guarded, with mind well protected, not emitting any defiled mental dirt, not burning inside, cooled with no fewer, contented, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Having shed the marks of a householder, like a winter tree its leaves, having left the house, wearing the saffron robe, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Showing no greed for mere taste, not wanton, not hireling for others, going on an uninterrupted begging round, not bound to this or that family, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Having left behind the five hindrances of the mind, having blown away all defilements, utterly independent, having cut out affection and hate, passion and aversion One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Having put both happiness and misery all behind, even so with joy and dejection already, having gained the precious equanimity, purified tranquillity One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Determined, solidly resolute for the attainment of the Supreme Goal, with great force, not indolent, of firm exertion, furnished with power and enduring strength One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Neither giving up seclusion nor meditation, constantly living according to the Dhamma, yet amongst all the flickering phenomena of this world, understanding the ultimate danger inherent in this existence itself…, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Working for the utter destruction of craving, not negligent, not foolish, learned, possessing continuous mindfulness, brightly aware, very present, having examined the doctrine, restrained, energetic, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Like a mighty lion is not trembling at any sound, not caught up with others, like the wind passes freely through a net, not in love like a lotus leave sheds a falling water drop, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Wandering Victorious, like a long toothed tiger the king of beasts, one should resort to secluded remote hermitages, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Training at regular times friendliness, empathy pity, joy, equanimity, and mental release, unobstructed, unimpeded by the entire world One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Leaving behind the dust of passion, aversion and confusion having broken all such mental chains all apart, not even slightly nervous at the moment of complete life destruction, One should wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. People associate with others for some motive of advantage for themselves; nowadays real Friends without such motive hidden behind are hard to find. Attentive to their own good only, humans are impure. One should therefore wander solitary as a rhinoceros horn. Source: Sutta-Nipata I.3 v35-75 Such is it: Without periods of solitary seclusion one lacks completion of mindfulness; With muddled mindfulness, one cannot complete any investigation of wisdom.. With incomplete investigation of the wisdom, no energy arises as curiosity and engagement… With such sluggish energy, lacking the necessary effort no unsullied Rapture arises, still unsatisfied… With no rapturous joy arisen, one is discontented not satisfied, restless, lacking results; and neither body nor thought is silenced! With no tranquillity arisen, body is not at ease no high concentration can the ever emerge… With no attainment of high level concentration no aloof equanimity can evolve… With no fulfilment of aloof equanimity, thought itself cannot be looked on from above with proper care. Consequently attainment of: Freedom through direct Knowledge is obstructed like a bird without wings simply cannot fly ...] : - ] Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka * .... #78917 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 5:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More on dana :-)) dcwijeratna Dear Phil, In your e-m to Elaine you said: "I'll be asking more about your experiences growing up in Malaysia, and asking Han and Tep and DC and others about what it's like growing up in a Buddhist country, but not now." I read and thought I would tell you about my own experience. Then I copied the above and saw "but not now." Now I am in two minds: whether to write or wait until you ask. So I'll compromise I write a very short paragraph. I grew up and am living in a traditionally Buddhist country. We learnt our "religious" practices from our parents and from the village temples [bhikkhus.] What I have to say need not be generalised; you'll see why in what follows: (1) My father's ancestral house adjoined the Temple. My father and the Chief-bhikkhu of the temple were playmates. So to my grandmother, there were two "Eldest sons." And apart from the standard daana practices, passing anything to eat to the "son" at the temple was a sheer act of motherly love. That was the attitude to daana we inherited. If you have something good to eat, you share it with your best friend. (2) My father died when I was quite young--six and half years. My mother was a school teacher, so was my father, and she was determined to give me a good education. I was sent to a Christian school in the city. So, she decided I should go to the temple and learn Pali, Sanskrit etc. When I went there, I always get sweets; naturally, I loved to go to the temple. I would have been around 12 years. Only later I got to know that, the "Loku haamuduruwo" had instigated it. Our relationship with the temple was extremely close. That was the place where we went for all the advice. (3) I'll cap it off with one more incident. About four years ago I went to the temple after a long absence. The "Loku haamuduruwo" was sweeping the temple compound when I went. I got down from my vehicle, went up to him and worshipped him. He could not recognise me, his eyesight was poor; his memory too; he looked at me in askance. I mentioned my father's name. "Ah, his face lit up, he said you are the eldest son of "Name of my father"; I remember the night you were born. It was raining hard, and the area was flooded. Your father came here by a bicycle, travelling from [a village about six miles away]. We sat through the night and made your horoscope. So I told your father, that he was very blessed with a 'good son'..." When he said that he was 89 years old. He died about 3 years ago. May he attain nibbaana! Well that was our relationship with the temple. Three years ago we donated that whole ancestral property to the temple. With lots of mettaa, D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #78918 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 5:43 am Subject: Re: Conditions, Ch17, no3. ...Some Comments... scottduncan2 Dear Tep, Thanks for the reply. I'll need to think more about sa.nkappa but this is compelling as well: T: "If its meaning is 'a revealing', then concept is same as 'making known' or 'manifestion', hence it is identical to expression. Now I have an interesting sutta about 'expression' for you to read and tell me what you think...This sutta is the basis for my understanding (above) that says 'expression is sa.nkappa and mental formations'. I am not 100% sure, though." "Having first directed one's thoughts and made an evaluation, one then breaks out into speech. That's why directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabrications. Perceptions & feelings are mental; these are things tied up with the mind. That's why perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications." [MN 44]" ~Naa.namoli/Bodhi: "First one applies thought and sustains thought, and subsequently one breaks out into speech; that is why applied thought and sustained thought are the verbal formation. Perception and feeling are mental, these states are bound up with the mind; that is why perception and feeling are mental formation." Scott: The Pali: Pubbe kho aavuso visaakha vitakketvaa vicaaretvaa pacchaa vaaca.m bhindati. Tasmaa vitakkavicaaraa vaciisa"nkhaaro. Sa~n~na ca vedanaa ca cetasikaa ete dhammaa cittapa.tibaddhaa. Tasmaa sa~n~naa ca vedanaa ca cittasa"nkhaaroti. Scott: Earlier in the sutta, this clarification is made: "Vitakkavicaaraa vaciisa"nkhaaro. Sa~n~naa ca vedanaa ca cittasa"nkhaaroti." This is rendered by ~Naa.namoli/Bodhi as: "...applied thought [vitakkaa] and sustained thought [vicaaraa] are the verbal formation; perception [sa~n~naa] and feeling [vedanaa] are the mental formation..." Scott: We are dealing with a classification of these mental factors, I guess. I'm out of time but I'll come back to this. Interesting stuff, eh? Sincerely, Scott. #78919 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 5:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) buddhistmedi... Dear friend Han, - According to Newtonian Mechanics, when action equals reaction the object is in equilibrium; either it is static, or it continues to move with the same speed. > Han: > So, I also ask for your forgiveness. > T: No problem ! We are back to equilibrium. ;-) Tep ==== #78920 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 5:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) buddhistmedi... Hi RobM, - I appreciate the conversation. > RobM: > Sorry, I am on the road, so I do not have my texts with me. It was > something along the lines of the "original Abhidhamma" (before the > breakup of the 18 schools) having four main texts which roughly map > into: > 1. The Suttana explanation in the Vibhanga > 2. The Abhidhamma explanation in the Vibhanga > 3. The Dhatukatha and Patthana > 4. The Patisambhidamagga > > It has been a few months since I read this, so I am not sure of the > details. > T: That is inline with my thinking too. And it was the reason why I asked Han if he thought the Patisambhidamagga was also the Abhidhamma. Your help is the clue "original Abhidhamma" that deserves more research. Thank you very much. Tep ==== #78921 From: Dieter Möller Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 6:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) moellerdieter Hi Jon , you wrote: (D: not really the same .. it is not by chance that anatta is mentioned as the last one ) Jon: Interesting. Could you say more about how the special significance of the 'anattaa' characteristic, compared to the other 2 characteristics? Thanks. D: I think (the relation of) anicca and dukkha are rather obvious, whereas anatta is is 'veiled' ... Without anicca and dukkha we wouldn't really care for anatta , would we ? with Metta Dieter #78922 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 6:14 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Conditions, Ch17, no3. ...Some Comments... buddhistmedi... Hi Nina (and Scott), - > Nina: > Hi Tep, > just butting in. T: You just butted in with a perfect timing!! > Op 18-nov-2007, om 21:53 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > > > Very interesting! I mean the second, i.e. sa.nkappa. And I also > > understand that mental formations are also thoughts (mental > > fabrications, concoctions). > ------ > N: Sa"nkhaarakkhandha is translated as formations or activities. All > cetasikas except feeling and sa~n~naa. In D.O. : abhisankhaara: > kusala kamma and akusala kamma conditioning rebirth. But you will > continue your dialogue with Scott. > Nina. > T: It is very helpful, Nina. Thank you very much for the overview. Tep ==== #78923 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 6:25 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy buddhistmedi... Hi again Nina, - My understanding of the Abhidhamma (in general, not at the expert level) is getting closer to yours, I think. Thanks for the clarifications you have patiently given. > Nina: > Hi Tep. > I remember. > It is best if pa~n~naa accompanies siila and samaadhi, then these are purer. I think that the visuddhis come one after the other, just as > the stages of vipassana. > Nina. > Op 18-nov-2007, om 22:18 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > > > You are right that we have got to be precise. The sequential > > development of siila-samaadhi-panna (siila first? Or Panna together > > with the other two?) was discussed several times (one example is # > > 76371). And there was another discussion on the sequential 'patipada' > > (see #54720). Yet, there was another discussion on the sequential > > development of the seven visudhi and the 'relay chariots' simile in > > MN 34 (see #58645). > Tep ==== #78924 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 7:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) buddhistmedi... Hi Dieter (and Jon, Nina), - Your brief one- to two lines dhamma discussion usually turns on dhamma- vicaya in me. Thanks. > D: I think (the relation of) anicca and dukkha are rather obvious, whereas anatta is is 'veiled' ... > Without anicca and dukkha we wouldn't really care for anatta , would we ? > T: In Maha-satipatthana Sutta(DN 22), one fundamental contemplation (anupassanaa) is on the "the phenomenon of origination & passing away" (samudaya-vaya ) with regard to body, feeling, consciousness, and mindstate(dhamma). These are sankhara-dhamma. Seeing 'anicca' is a consequence of anupassanaa of the samudaya- vaya characteristics as follows. AN 3.47: "Monks, these three are fabricated characteristics of what is fabricated. Which three? Arising is discernible, passing away is discernible, alteration (literally, other-ness) while staying is discernible. "These are three fabricated characteristics of what is fabricated. "Now these three are unfabricated characteristics of what is unfabricated. Which three? No arising is discernible, no passing away is discernible, no alteration while staying is discernible. "These are three unfabricated characteristics of what is unfabricated." T: Whatever dhamma that arises and passes away, that dhamma is impermanent and is dukkha. Seeing anatta is further downstream, after seeing dukkha in the formations that are impermanent. Tep ==== #78925 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 7:31 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy truth_aerator Dear Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > "There are plenty of Sutta passages that either explicitly say that there is NO self in the ultimate sense or clearly imply that. An example that comes to mind is a Dhp. verse: "when even your self is not your own, how can there be sons or cows for you?" (attaa hi attano natthi...). I >>>>> First of all, I am not implying atta or that Ven. TB teaches atta. It seems that the problem is with the "strategy" part. Ven. TB makes a good point that Buddha's Anatta teaching MUST be put into practice rather than simply accepted on faith or after pondering. >>>>> Now I don't like his writings any more, and sometimes find his translations in-credible too, because he tends to read the Suttas > through his interpretation. His own interpretation comes first, then he tries to fit the Suttas into it. >>>>> Is it possible that he knows MORE than us? After all he has been a monk more than I've lived in this present life. Even though seniority is no proof of his correctness, maybe he does have something to say. He has read so much Suttas, he knows Pali well, maybe we are mistaken?? Of He actually admits this in the intro to > his "Mind like fire unbound" when he says that first he took a short, enigmatic statement of LP Fuang (?) and came to a conclusion about the meaning of nibbana, then he went looking for Suttas to prove it. >>> If there are sutta passages to support his take on Nibbana, then those things may be correct. >>>>>>>>>> Whereas actually it says one who believes "there is no self FOR ME" is caught in the net of views, the > tangle of views, the thicket of views etc. That small little "me" in the Pali means that this is the view of the annhilationists not the Buddhists. >>>>>>>>>> Ven. TB isn't the only translator to translate "I have no self" as a wrong view. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/002-sabbasava-sutta-e1.htm "There is no self for me" Begs the question: What does "self" and "me" exactly stands for ? There is no self for me can be rephrased as: "For me there is no self" -> "I have no self". I and Me are both singular pronouns. The difference appears to be only semantics. Besides in Kaccayana sutta the Buddha has said that existence and non-existence are two extremes to be avoided. >>> So then I've heard that he says that this means > that the perception "all dhammas are anatta" >>> Can there be "something" outside of Dhamma????? > (never mind that his interpretation of 'jhaana' is uniquely creative (!) too). >>> Can you please explain that? Lots of Metta, Alex #78926 From: "reverendaggacitto" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 7:34 am Subject: For Howard reverendagga... Hi Howard! You're right. It WAS T.G. ...SORRY for the misquote credit. It does not surprise me though, to see you mock a Monastic perspective. i will sincerely pray for your spiritual well being. In case your wondering,i do not say that as a way of trying to get some sort of spiritual "upperhand" smarty pants style. i really mean it! MAY THE BUDDHA'S, DEVA AND ANGELS BLESS YOU ALL! bhikkhu aggacitto/aka reverend aggacitto #78927 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 7:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The not-self strategy (Ken 'thoughts) truth_aerator Dear Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > In his comments on the vacchagotta sutta (connected diascourses) > Bhikkhu Bodhi says "We should carefully heed the two reasons the > Buddha does not declare, "There is no self": not because he recognizes a transcendent self of some kind (as some interpreters allege), or > because he is concerned only with delineating a "STRATEGY of > perception" devoid of ontological implications (as OTHERS hold), but (i) > because such a mode of expression was used by the annihilationists, > and the Buddha wanted to avoid aligning his teaching with theirs; and > (ii) because he wished to avoid causing confusion in those already > attached to the idea of self. >>> After Vachagotta has left, did the Buddha say to Ananda (somebody capable of understanding), "there is no self" ? What about the ascetics in Anattalakhana sutta? It is a logical fallacy to infer that: Since A,B,C,D is NOT self, Self doesn't exist". Or do you think those people who became Arahants were incapable of properly taking "The Self does not exist". >> The Buddha declares that "all phenomena are nonself" (sabbe dhammâ anattâ), >>>> A) This is found in another sutta. b) The argument depends very much about what "dhamma" meant when it was said on that occasion. It is interesting that Buddha DID NOT TEACH Anatta (directly) for stream entry. And please don't tell me that the person wasn't ready to hear it. "Then the Blessed One, having encompassed the awareness of the entire assembly with his awareness, asked himself, "Now who here is capable of understanding the Dhamma?" He saw Suppabuddha the leper sitting in the assembly, and on seeing him the thought occurred to him, "This person here is capable of understanding the Dhamma." So, aiming at Suppabuddha the leper, he gave a step-by-step talk, i.e., a talk on giving, a talk on virtue, a talk on heaven; he declared the drawbacks, degradation, & corruption of sensual passions, and the rewards of renunciation. Then when he saw that Suppabuddha the leper's mind was ready, malleable, free from hindrances, elated, & bright, he then gave the Dhamma-talk peculiar to Awakened Ones, i.e., stress, origination, cessation, & path. And just as a clean cloth, free of stains, would properly absorb a dye, in the same way, as Suppabuddha the leper was sitting in that very seat, the dustless, stainless Dhamma eye arose within him, "Whatever is subject to origination is all subject to cessation." " http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.5.03.than.html --- Lots of Metta, Alex #78928 From: "nidive" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 7:53 am Subject: Re: The not-self strategy nidive Hi Howard (& RobertK), > The idea is that Ven T presumes that the Buddha knew as fact that > the only proper way for people to come to truly realize no self is, > in fact, to avoid accepting it on faith, but, instead, to come to > know it as one being struck by a thunderbolt because of a step by > step seeing that nothing ever encountered, neither rupa nor nama, > is self. Thus, the goal is to know, to truly know, of NO self by > seeing again and again the fact of NOT self. I believe that this is what Thanissaro is trying to say and I myself believe that the Buddha taught no self by means of not self. By the way, do you have any comments on a passage RobertK quoted in post 78899? -------------------------------------------------------------------- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/78899 The Buddhist teaching of anatta and the nature of is very close to annhilationism, that's why you can find so much praise for the annhilationists in the Suttas, the Buddha called them the holders of 'the foremost of outside viewpoints' because: "they already have revulsion towards existence and non revulsion towards the cessation of existence, so when the Dhamma is taught to them for the cessation of existence they do not recoil from it". -------------------------------------------------------------------- To RobertK: Did the Buddha actually praise the annihilationists? Swee Boon #78931 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon (and Robert) - In a message dated 11/19/2007 10:53:30 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, nidive@... writes: Hi Howard (& RobertK), > The idea is that Ven T presumes that the Buddha knew as fact that > the only proper way for people to come to truly realize no self is, > in fact, to avoid accepting it on faith, but, instead, to come to > know it as one being struck by a thunderbolt because of a step by > step seeing that nothing ever encountered, neither rupa nor nama, > is self. Thus, the goal is to know, to truly know, of NO self by > seeing again and again the fact of NOT self. I believe that this is what Thanissaro is trying to say and I myself believe that the Buddha taught no self by means of not self. By the way, do you have any comments on a passage RobertK quoted in post 78899? -------------------------------------------------------------------- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/78899 The Buddhist teaching of anatta and the nature of is very close to annhilationism, that's why you can find so much praise for the annhilationists in the Suttas, the Buddha called them the holders of 'the foremost of outside viewpoints' because: "they already have revulsion towards existence and non revulsion towards the cessation of existence, so when the Dhamma is taught to them for the cessation of existence they do not recoil from it". -------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: My only comment is that I was surprised by Robert's quite interesting assertion, for it was my impression that the Buddha, if anything, believed that there was greater danger in annihilationist views than substantialist views, as suggested by the following from MN 117: And what is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view. I would love to know the source of Robert's quotation. It may well be that a misapprehending of a genuine insight into emptiness might leave one the kind of annihilationist who is not far from true understanding of the middle way. Perhaps such annihilationists might be people who "already have revulsion towards existence and non revulsion towards the cessation of existence, so when the Dhamma is taught to them for the cessation of existence they do not recoil from it." ----------------------------------------------------- To RobertK: Did the Buddha actually praise the annihilationists? Swee Boon ============================ With metta, Howard #78932 From: Elaine Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The not-self strategy (Ken 'thoughts) shennieca Hi RobK, Ajahn Thanissaro is one of the most learned Pali scholars of our time, he is also a virtuous monk. I personally believe that Ajahn is an Ariya. He has not and did not say anywhere in all his essays that there is a permanent self. The meaning of the word 'strategy' is 'approach, plan, tactic, method'. Ajahn is teaching us 'how to use' the mundane understanding of anatta skillfully. He knows that some people take the interpretation of Anatta too far, so far that it is Not in line with what the Buddha taught. Ajahn knows this extreme view of Anatta is unhealthy. These extreme-view people are the ones who have misinterpreted Ajahn's teachings. Extreme-view people cannot see the middle-path of understanding mundane Anatta. If these extreme-view people want to believe that Anatta means no-control and no-person, it is Ok with them, but that is Not Buddhism. If the no-control philosophy resonate well with some people, it makes their life more liberating and happy, it is good for them. I can only pray that they won't go around telling the public that the Buddha taught "no-control" and "no-person". Personal belief is one thing but saying out loud that Ajahn is teaching a self is malign, is a weighty kamma. Sincerely, Elaine ------------------- #78933 From: "reverendaggacitto" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:33 am Subject: i now know your name reverendagga... i now know your name oh magnificent gods of the 33,keepers of the heavens and the stars that shine at night. The Deva kiss your feet how worthy is your might. magnificent gods of the 33 i now know your name. i see the homeless drinking the wine of their own blood and shooting your dope in the alleyways of Penang. magnificent gods of the 33 i now know your name. i see the hungry children crying in Penang,hopeing their tears will wash away their "sin". i see the bitten,bleeding,limping,flea infested dogs in Penang, when they sleep at night they know who you are. They feel your presence and know you are'nt very far. i held one of your nightime angels in my arms as she cried and sobbed the other night,as her mascara ran down my robe in the rain, we both knew your name. happiness,suffering,joy or pain. oh dear prince mara,how unforgiving your precious samsara seems to be. Ven. Gotama knew you well when he sat under the bodi tree. enjoy your wine and your song as you and your ilk watch and laugh, as the "ignorants" hop and skip in a trance. drink up well, it shall soon be your last dance. bhikkhu aggacitto/aka reverend aggacitto #78934 From: Dieter Möller Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] For Howard moellerdieter Hi Howard, good to have the opportunity to return your kind compliment : very well said , Howard! ;-) We are not always sure who is behind the posting , are we ? with Metta Dieter #78935 From: Dieter Möller Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) moellerdieter Hi Tep ( Jon, Nina and ..), you wrote: 'Your brief one- to two lines dhamma discussion usually turns on dhamma- vicaya in me. Thanks.' D: thank you , Tep .. nothing better to happen ;-) T:: In Maha-satipatthana Sutta(DN 22), one fundamental contemplation (anupassanaa) is on the "the phenomenon of origination & passing away" (samudaya-vaya ) with regard to body, feeling, consciousness, and ..snip Whatever dhamma that arises and passes away, that dhamma is impermanent and is dukkha. Seeing anatta is further downstream, after seeing dukkha in the formations that are impermanent. D: you say it.. yes .. There is a beautiful anthology of suttas from Samyutta Nikaya by J.D.Ireland. In this respect part three, the section on the Aggregates, provides excellent details. Concerning anatta , part two , the section on Causation, is - as I see it - a treasure waiting for the student to explore. In case you haven't downloaded the source yet , please click : http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/ireland/wheel107.html with Metta Dieter #78936 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 5:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] For Howard upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 11/19/2007 12:03:43 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard, good to have the opportunity to return your kind compliment : very well said , Howard! ;-) ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Thanks, my friend. :-) ---------------------------------------------- We are not always sure who is behind the posting , are we ? ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Certainly true, Dieter. The internet has its vagaries (if that is the right word). ---------------------------------------------------- with Metta Dieter ============================ With metta, Howard #78937 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 10:19 am Subject: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 3, no 6. nilovg Dear friends, Cittas arise extremely fast, it seems that many impressions occur all at the same time. But there are different realities each with their own characteristic. We should verify this so that we can understand, at least in theory, the rapidity of the cittas arising and falling away in processes, cittas which have no owner and cannot be controlled. They have the characteristic of non-self, anattå. We don't have to do anything special to cause the arising of lobha or dosa, they arise already because of their own conditions. After odour or flavour is experienced during the sense-door process and aversion or attachment have arisen in that process, it is experienced through the mind-door, and again there can be aversion or attachment. It is still not known what kind of odour or flavour it is. That is known afterwards in other mind-door processes which experience concepts. We can think of concepts with kusala citta or with akusala citta, but usually we think with akusala citta. When the objective of the cittas that think is not generosity, dåna, morality, síla or mental development, bhåvanå, they are akusala cittas. There is no person who is good or bad, wholesomeness and unwholesomeness are particular cetasikas arising because of conditions that perform their functions in a wholesome way or in an unwholesome way. When we act, speak and think we can gradually find out that usually akusala cittas motivate deeds, speech and thinking. When we are stretching out our hands to take hold of things, when we walk or speak, cittas with attachment, lobha, are bound to arise. We like to speak, we speak with attachment or conceit. There are many degrees of akusala, they can be coarse or more subtle. Also when we do not hurt others there may be akusala cittas, but we do not notice them. Even when we consider the Dhamma, there can be clinging to the idea of self who wishes to make progress in understanding. The Buddha spoke to the monks about síla, morality, under the aspect of restraint of the sense faculties (indriya saÿvara síla) by mindfulness of realities that are experienced through the six doors. At such moments one is not overwhelmed by defilements that may arise on account of what one experiences. The “Visuddhimagga” (I, 42) quotes from the “Middle Length Sayings” (I, 27, Lesser Discourse on the Elephantís Footprint), explaining the virtue of restraint of the sense faculties as follows: “... On seeing a visible object with the eye, he apprehends neither the sign (nimitta) nor the particulars (anubyañjana) through which, if he left the eye faculty unguarded, evil and unprofitable states of covetousness and grief might invade him, he enters upon the way of its restraint, he guards the eye faculty, undertakes the restraint of the eye faculty. On hearing a sound with the ear... On smelling an odour with the nose... On tasting a flavour with the tongue... On touching a tangible object with the body... On cognizing a mental object with the mind, he apprehends neither the signs nor the particulars through which, if he left the mind faculty unguarded, evil and unprofitable states of covetousness and grief might invade him, he enters upon the way of its restraint, he guards the mind faculty, undertakes the restraint of the mind faculty...” ***** Nina. #78938 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 10:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Conditions, Ch17, no3. ...Some Comments... nilovg Hi Tep, Op 19-nov-2007, om 15:14 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > Very interesting! I mean the second, i.e. sa.nkappa. And I also > > > understand that mental formations are also thoughts (mental > > > fabrications, concoctions). > > ------ > > N: Sa"nkhaarakkhandha is translated as formations or activities. All > > cetasikas except feeling and sa~n~naa. In D.O. : abhisankhaara: > > kusala kamma and akusala kamma conditioning rebirth. But you will > > continue your dialogue with Scott. > > Nina. > > > > T: It is very helpful, Nina. Thank you very much for the overview. ------- N: Yes, but now I see another point. Scott's text : <"Vitakkavicaaraa vaciisa"nkhaaro. Sa~n~naa ca vedanaa ca cittasa"nkhaaroti." This is rendered by ~Naa.namoli/Bodhi as: "...applied thought [vitakkaa] and sustained thought [vicaaraa] are the verbal formation; perception [sa~n~naa] and feeling [vedanaa] are the mental formation..."> This is another context, so it all depends on the context. Nina. #78939 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:15 am Subject: Re: Typos/DC Re: [dsg] A Quick Question on Conditionality dcwijeratna Hi Howard, You wrote: " The word 'dukkha', I believe, is used both as noun and adjective. As adjective it means "unsatisfactory" or "unsatisfying" . As noun it can mean "suffering" (i.e., mental pain) and "unsatisfactoriness " (a characteristic of dhammas). In saying that the five grasped-at aggregates are dukkha, I take that 'dukkha' usage to be the adjectival one. I do not take 'dukkha' to be a synonym for the five grasped-at aggregates. Certainly, the five grasped-at aggregates are not sources of satisfaction - in fact they are quite the opposite, but the term 'dukkha' is not a name for them." ------------------------------- Your statement above raises and interesting issue: How would we attach meanings to Dhammic terms--dhammic is a word I just coined to mean that the term belongs to dhamma and has been defined by the Buddha. Now the First Noble Truth, a declaration made by the Buddha consequent to his attainment of Sambodhi, says: "jaatipi dukkhaa, jaraapidukkhaa, vyaadhipi dukkho, maranampi dukkha.m appiyehi sampayogo dukkho, piyehi vippayogo dukkho, yampiccha.m na labhati tampi dukkham sankhittena pancupaadaanakkhandha dukkhaa." According to this there are many things that are defined as dukkha. If would be difficult to consider for example, jaraa, as suffering. In the long term, may be when you become very old. Take vyaadhipi dukkho: When we are sick, there is dukkha, rest of the time, we are ok. What is the single characterstic common to all these? Change or impermanence. And that is a characteristic of the five-aggregates of grasping as dukkha. So it appears more reasonable to take that as dukkha. Now in the anantalakkhana sutta, each aggreagate is separately shown to be dukkha. In the DO: in this manner, is the arising of dukkhakkhandha. 2. 'A characteristic of dhammas." Now according to Suttas: dhammas mean conditioned dhammas. Really, the totality of dhmaas is the human beings. 3. My understanding is: Yes, suffering is one aspect of the dukkha; the dukkha vedanaa component. But dukkha vedanaa is only one of three vedanaas. Other two are sukha and adukkhamasukha (neither pleasant or unpleasant) Howeve, in Dhamma these two are also dukkha. 4. So that is why I thought that the five-aggregates of suffering is more logical. In any case, the unsatisfactoriness refers to the whole of human existence. With mettaa, DC #78940 From: Elaine Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More on dana :-)) shennieca Dear DC, Thank you for sharing your dana story, it is a pleasure to read it. May your father and Humudurowo attain the bliss of Nibbana. Your story is very touching. The love and sacrifice of parents are so great. In the heavy rain, your father cycled 6 miles to the temple to tell Hamudurowo of your birth. He must have loved you very much. Your mother brought you up well. Her love and dedication has paid off. Your parents and grandparents must be very proud of you, I am sure your father knows your success. I’d like to say a big Sadhu to you and your family for donating the ancestral land to the temple. May I Anumodana (rejoicing together) also. Idam me punnam asavakkhaya vaham hotu Idam me punnam nibbanassa paccayo hotu May I (we) be able to attain the extinction of defilements by this meritorious deed. May my (our) meritorious deeds be the cause of attaining Nibbana. Sadhu! Warmest regards, Elaine #78941 From: "m_nease" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:57 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) m_nease Hi PHil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > Hi Mike > > Thanks for your feedback. I agree with what you wrote. I am > interested in the benefits of using breath as an intentional object > in a very crude way, but I don't think it's bhavana - could be > helpful in setting up bhavana. I'm glad to read this. I'm always glad--rightly, I hope--when I see what I take to be another's realization of the absolute enormity of What's Wrong--the incredible pervasity of delusion in all our lives. > TW, we're thinking that we'll be moving to Vancouver permanently > in 5 years or so, so we'll have a chance to get together, surely. > Clinging to that notion already. Excellent news--I look forward to meeting you both. mike #78942 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 12:27 pm Subject: Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 3, no 6. .. Brain .. buddhistmedi... Hi Nina (Sarah, Elaine, Phil, Han, Scott, DC), - In this post you talk about conditioned dhammas that arise through uncontrollable conditions (cetasikas) that may result in a wholesome or unwholesome action of a person. >N: There is no person who is good or bad, wholesomeness and unwholesomeness are particular cetasikas arising because of conditions that perform their functions in a wholesome way or in an unwholesome way. T: The idea that there is no one practices, or controls an outcome of his/her action, has been made known here thousands of times at least. But your following sutta quote clearly indicates control in terms of restraining/guarding of the sense faculties. > "... On seeing a visible object with the eye, he apprehends neither > the sign (nimitta) nor the particulars (anubya~njana) through which, > if he left the eye faculty unguarded, evil and unprofitable states of > covetousness and grief might invade him, he enters upon the way of > its restraint, he guards the eye faculty, undertakes the restraint of > the eye faculty. ... ... T; The guarding and restraining of one's eye faculty is obviously a willed action that controls the sensing to affect non-arising of an akusala citta. What is your thought about this? If you say only citta restrains and guards the sense faculties, then what is the difference between your reply and the non-Buddhist belief that any restraining/guarding of human's sense faculties is done by the brain, and there is no such things called 'citta and cetasikas'? This is an old issue, but so far it has not been treated satisfactorily (at least for me). Not unlike an illness that the doctor has failed to treat correctly, so the desperate, confused, and sad patient has to come back for another treatment. Well, he also has a choice to go to another clinic. Tep ==== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > > Cittas arise extremely fast, it seems that many impressions occur all > at the same time. But there are different realities each with their > own characteristic. We should verify this so that we can understand, > at least in theory, the rapidity of the cittas arising and falling > away in processes, cittas which have no owner and cannot be > controlled. #78943 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 2:31 pm Subject: A Homework Paper to be Graded buddhistmedi... Hi Nina (Elaine, Scott, Howard, DC and others), - In an off-list conversation with Elaine she asked me to tell her what I understood about nimitta, pa~n~natti, and sammuti, since I earlier made a claim (in a message to Scott) that I clearly understood them. That is a fair question that is not easy to answer. But instead of sending her my answer, I think I should first check its accuracy with you, since I am no expert in the Abhidhamma and do not want to misinform Elaine. So please help me review the following writing and correct it so that Elaine, myself, and others may arrive at the same right description of these important terms with no more confusion. This should help put all questions about them to rest, and that would be a blessing at least to me. :-) 1. Nimitta is a mental image, formation, or fabrication of whatever 'name & form' that has been earlier perceived, noticed, or marked in the mind. Thus we may have a nimitta of each of the five khandhas (e.g. sankhara-nimitta). 2. Sammuti : choice, selection, common consent, convention, conventional (generally accepted), opinion, doctrine, definition, declaration, statement, expression, name or word. 3. Pa~n~natti: making known, manifestation, description, designation, name, idea, notion, concept. It is because people need to communicate in order to make some ideas known to others, they have to use description/designation and conceptual thinking as the media to get their ideas across. The conceptual thought, definition, notations, name or word are sammuti, but the system (or tool) that make sammuti known to others is pa~n~natti. In my opinion, I think the combined term sammuti-pa~n~natti is the opposite to the ultimate truths, which do not depend on any convention or "tools" of communication invented by man.. 4. The difference between an ultimate reality and concepts, or sammuti- pa~n~natti, is as follows. When a dhamma, or a characteristic of a dhamma, arises in its pure form, i.e. not fabricated/concocted/imagined by the mind, that dhamma (or mind object) is paramattha. It is the opposite to sammuti-pa~n~natti. A paramattha dhamma is convention-free, expression-free, words- or description-independent. That is, a paramattha dhamma can only be directly, experientially known by an ariyan. I believe a thought is not concept when it is in pure dhamma, i.e. such a "thought" does not lead to arising, occurrence, sign, accumulation, and rebirth-linking [Patism. I, 304]. Thank you very much. Tep === #78944 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:41 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Anatta of "Self" and the World dacostacharles Dear Alex The 6th aggregate is called the personality aggregate, your motivations .etc. I think I got this concept from a book written by the top monk of Thailand, I am not sure because I have read so many in the past . I agree that a whole depends on its parts; but just because you don't know any Arhants doesn't mean none exist today. Likewise, just because there is no knowing does not mean there is no knower. The knower could be "sleeping." If all knowing stopped, then on the basis of being able to know (having a functioning sensory system) would there be a "Knower" even if the sensory system is turned off for a while. The knower could know that he/she does not know :-) To see the knower as Arhat or Buddha, read the Lion's Roar Suttras. The suttras claim those Monks know themselves pretty well. There is plenty of ego-based self-personality references in these suttras. If I were to accept your arguments, I would have to conclude that you have found the ESSENCE of the Buddhas, "His" stream." Charles DaCosta _____ #78945 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 12:03 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy dacostacharles Hi Tep, Phil, Alex Tep: "A warning ! Your suggestion that "the understanding of anatta will come as a result of deepending our peception of impermanence and dukkha" is proned to be attacked by the DSG Abhidhammikas as a wrong idea. Why? Because you assume that understanding of the dhammas arises sequentially, step by step. Nina and Sarah, for example, have said many times that all dhammas are not controllable and when they arise, they do so together in a single moment." Isn't this rather ZEN like - sudden Enlightenment ! The following sounds like part of what I have been trying say for years on DSG: "The Not-self Strategy" by Thanissaro Bhikkhu: > http://www.accessto insight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/notself.html > > It begins: > > "Books on Buddhism often state that the Buddha's most basic > metaphysical tenet is that there is no soul or self. However, a > survey of the discourses in the Pali canon - the earliest extant > record of the Buddha's teachings - suggests that the Buddha taught > the anatta or not-self doctrine, not as a metaphysical assertion, but > as a strategy for gaining release from suffering: If one uses the > concept of not-self to dis-identify oneself from all phenomena, one > goes beyond the reach of all suffering & stress. As for what lies > beyond suffering & stress, the Canon states that although it may be > experienced, it lies beyond the range of description, and thus such > descriptions as "self" or "not-self" would not apply." (end quote)" In a nutshell, this is what Americans call "Being Self-less." Even though the Self exists, it is not the driving factor. FOR DSG: you can argue that "Ultimately speaking" there are no selves; only "Relatively speaking" are there selves. The thing that most DSG members have forgotten is that both are TRUTH. The Buddha had defined both TRUTHS the Relative, and the Ultimate. He never said Relative Truth was a lie. He did say it was based on curtain conditions. Charles DaCosta _____ #78946 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 12:16 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy dacostacharles Hi Ken H, Very good analysis below: ------------------------------------- Hi Alex, Phil, Tep and Dieter, Re the first paragraph of BT's essay: Correct me if I am wrong, but I think Alex adequately summed up the position for all of you when he wrote: "There is nothing there to suggest that TB believes in a self." I, on the other hand, am far from satisfied with Alex's summary. To my mind the paragraph screams exactly that suggestion. If BT had wanted to reassure his us that he did not believe in a self why didn't he take the opportunity? I don't want to make this an overly long post, but I also don't want to be accused of not giving reasons. So, please bear with me. (Anyone who agrees with me (that the "suggestion" is obvious) should skip to the end.) The opening two sentences read as follows: "Books on Buddhism often state that the Buddha's most basic metaphysical tenet is that there is no soul or self. However, a survey of the discourses in the Pali canon - the earliest extant record of the Buddha's teachings - suggests that the Buddha taught the anatta or not-self doctrine, not as a metaphysical assertion, but as a strategy for gaining release from suffering:" (end quote) There are two issues in these sentences, aren't there? Or am I the only one who can see them? (You fellows are making me feel paranoid!) :-) One issue is, did the Buddha teach that there was no soul or self? The other issue is, did the Buddha teach the doctrine of anatta as a strategy? Surely, the average reader will be keenly aware of these two issues! Surely he will be waiting for BT to comment on both of them! Can you see what I mean? BT could easily have added, "Of course, all Dhamma students know there is no self - neither in the conditioned world nor in nibbana." Or he could have said something like, "I am not suggesting there is a self, but . . . etc, etc." However, he didn't take that opportunity. Come on, fellows, surely I'm not the only one who can see this! Alex's summary is clearly wrong. There is at least a *suggestion* in this opening paragraph that the author believes in a self. I could go through the rest of the paragraph in the same way, but (unless someone wants me to) I'll just repost it below. At this point, I should reiterate my objections to BT's essay. Not only does he fail to quash any "suggestion" that he might believe in a self, he actually wants us to conclude exactly that. You are not doing him any favours when you fail to see atta-belief. You are missing the whole point he is trying to make. Shall we move on? The second paragraph begins: "The evidence for this reading of the Canon centers around four points: 1 The one passage where the Buddha is asked point-blank to take a position on the ontological question of whether or not there is a self, he refuses to answer." (end quote) Is that a fair statement? I think it is extremely misleading. It gives the impression that the entire Dhamma is somehow something other than an affirmation of anatta - no self. According to my reading, this (item 1) sets the scene for the rest of BT's essay. And it sets the scene for his entire philosophy. BT wants us to believe that thoughts of self are a distraction to meditation, and so, for the purposes of meditation, we should not "take a position" either way. And he wants us to believe that this - and only this - is why the Buddha never stated, "Yes, of course there is a self!" I don't believe I am being disrespectful to Ven Thanissaro. I believe I am spelling out exactly what he is trying to tell us. It is you (who maintain he is not suggesting the existence of self) who are doing him a disservice. You are refusing to grasp the very point the is trying so hard to make. Ken H PS: Here, again, is the remainder of the first paragraph. Any further discussion of it before we move on to the above second paragraph is welcome, of course. "If one uses the concept of not-self to dis-identify oneself from all phenomena, one goes beyond the reach of all suffering & stress. As for what lies beyond suffering & stress, the Canon states that although it may be experienced, it lies beyond the range of description, and thus such descriptions as "self" or "not-self" would not apply." You already know my position :-) So full of Self it hurts at times ;-) Charles DaCosta _____ #78947 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 12:40 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy dacostacharles Hi all, I have to say this is a good thread, good analysis, but I wonder what most of you have experienced interims of this issue. Charles DaCosta _____ #78948 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:45 pm Subject: Re: More on dana :-)) philofillet Hi DC > I read and thought I would tell you about my own experience. Then I copied the above and saw "but not now." > > Now I am in two minds: whether to write or wait until you ask. So I'll compromise I write a very short paragraph. I don't know why I wrote "but not now" and I'm so glad you wrote. Thank you for those beautiful, inspirational anecdotes and please write more when you have time or the inclination. Maybe it is my wrong view to separate those who were raised as Buddhists from those of us who weren't, but I find there is something very interesting indeed about hearing one's childhood/youthful experiences with dana etc. Thanks again. Metta, Phil #78949 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 4:16 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Anatta of "Self" and the World truth_aerator Dear Charles, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles DaCosta" wrote: > > Dear Alex > > > The 6th aggregate is called the personality aggregate, your motivations > .etc. >>> This is sankhara skandha. One of the 5 aggregates. > > I agree that a whole depends on its parts; but just because you don't know any Arhants doesn't mean none exist today. >>> Just because we haven't explored entire planet and didn't see any giant elves on this planet it doesn't mean they don't exist. Likewise, just because there is > no knowing does not mean there is no knower. The knower could be "sleeping." ><>>> How can a "Knower" be unknowing? If you do not feel your self, then it is like saying "The refrigirator is my self". What kind of self is it that depends on 5 (not 6) aggregates?? > > > > If all knowing stopped, then on the basis of being able to know (having a > functioning sensory system) would there be a "Knower" even if the sensory > system is turned off for a while. > > > > The knower could know that he/she does not know :-) >>>> Knowledge of absence of knowing is different than Having no knowledge. Just like when you pass out unconscious, you don't see black space. You don't see anything. > > > To see the knower as Arhat or Buddha, read the Lion's Roar Suttras. The suttras claim those Monks know themselves pretty well. >>> Yes they know 4 frames of references, 5 aggregates, 6 sense spheres... There is plenty of > ego-based self-personality references in these suttras. > > If I were to accept your arguments, I would have to conclude that you have > found the ESSENCE of the Buddhas, "His" stream." >>>> What do you mean by last sentence? Lots of Metta, Alex #78950 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 4:35 pm Subject: The Fallacy of Ultimate Vs Conventional Vedantist add onto Buddhist teaching truth_aerator Hello all. Buddha has Never taught what is called "conventional & absolute truth." You will never find it in authentic discources of the Buddha such a ridiculous Vedantist Hindu concept which has crept into Buddha's teaching. The whole point of Ultimate truth is to give an illusion of self something stable (and ultimate) to stand on. It also plays on inability of people to see the logical errors and deviations from Buddhist pragmatic path. For example some later non-buddhists like to use an all too familiar similie of the chariot. Conventionally they say, a chariot exists and it functions. However when you take it apart, then none of the parts is a chariot. Thus since chariout is not found in any of its parts, chariot ultimately doesn't exist. The logic is flawed and it used to decieve me for a long time. When you take a chariot apart and show the parts to someone, you are NOT showing the chariot! You have dissassembled it, and NO FRIGGIN WONDER you cannot find it there. It is like saying here is an apple, here is a banana. Is banana an apple? No. Thus apple doesn't exist. If you reasemble the chariot incorrectly, then it won't work (as it isn't a chariot at this time). Furthermore there cannot be 2 contradictory truths at the same time. A chariot is a functional assemblage of parts, and if you take it apart (mentally or physically) then you are NOT working with the same chariot on an Absolute level. It is a trick on those aren't sharp enough to see through the deception. Since "truth" is a perception and dependents on 5 aggregates, like 5 aggregates it is IMPERMANENT, UNSATISFACTORY and what sort of Ultimate can it be?? There is no sutta where Buddha talks of what was later added on. In MN#1 The Buddha has shown that any idea of breaking reality into neat and tight categories is what WORLDINGS DO. No category is eternal and unchanging, thus one should not cling to it. Clinging, conceit and tendency towards views - causes so much misery, suffering, stress and elongation of samsara with its cemeteries.... A very good discussion was written by Ven. Nanavira Thera at: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/9366/paramsac.htm I hope more and more people realize DO and the path to freedom... Lots of Metta, Alex #78951 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 4:36 pm Subject: Re: The not-self strategy buddhistmedi... Hi Charles (Phil, Nina, Sarah), - Thank you for initiating this conversation. >Tep: ... Nina and Sarah, for example, have said many times that all dhammas are not controllable and when they arise, they do so together in a single moment .. CD: Isn't this rather ZEN like - sudden Enlightenment ! T: Sorry for giving the wrong impression that Nina and Sarah strictly believe that the single-moment principle applies in all cases. The following mesage from Nina shows the exceptions. >Nina (#78906): It is best if pa~n~naa accompanies siila and samaadhi, then these are purer. I think that the visuddhis come one after the other, just as the stages of vipassana. T: Thanks to Nina. I want to offer my apologies to both Sarah and Nina. She (as well as Sarah) is more precise in the meanings because of her expert knowledge of the Abhidhamma. In the above message she explains that the sequence siila-samaadhi-pannaa is not strictly linear, but the seven visuddhis process and vipassana stages are sequential. That makes sense. ............ Thanissaro Bhikkhu: ... the earliest extant record of the Buddha's teachings - suggests that the Buddha taught the anatta or not-self doctrine, not as a metaphysical assertion, but as a strategy for gaining release from suffering: If one uses the concept of not-self to dis-identify oneself from all phenomena, one goes beyond the reach of all suffering & stress. As for what lies beyond suffering & stress, the Canon states that although it may be experienced, it lies beyond the range of description, and thus such descriptions as "self" or "not-self" would not apply. CD: In a nutshell, this is what Americans call "Being Self-less." Even though the Self exists, it is not the driving factor. FOR DSG: you can argue that "Ultimately speaking" there are no selves; only "Relatively speaking" are there selves. The thing that most DSG members have forgotten is that both are TRUTH. The Buddha had defined both TRUTHS the Relative, and the Ultimate. He never said Relative Truth was a lie. He did say it was based on curtain conditions. T: Now you may think I am strange if I tell you that I am somewhere in between the two camps. I believe DN 9 which states that certain kinds of self (attapa.tilabha and attabhaava) exist, but neither "self" as a soul, i.e. an ego identity that lasts "as long as eternity", nor a self that is temporarily permanent but eventually annihilated, exist. Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles DaCosta" wrote: > > Hi Tep, Phil, Alex > > > > Tep: "A warning ! Your suggestion that "the understanding of anatta will come as a result of deepending our peception of impermanence and > dukkha" is proned to be attacked by the DSG Abhidhammikas as a wrong idea. Why? Because you assume that understanding of the dhammas > arises sequentially, step by step. Nina and Sarah, for example, have said many times that all dhammas are not controllable and when they arise, they do so together in a single moment." > #78952 From: han tun Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 5:34 pm Subject: Realities and Concepts (4) hantun1 Dear All, I am presenting a series of Questions and Answers taken from the book, Realities and Concepts by Ajahn Sujin Boriharnwanaket. Comments and different opinions are welcome! ----------------------------- Question (5): Did you say that a concept is a kind of dhammarammana (mind-door object)? Sujin: A concept is dhammarammana. It is an object which can only be known through the mind-door. ----------------------------- Question (6): Are there also paramattha dhammas (ultimate realities) which are dhammarammana? Sujin: There are six classes of dhammarammana. [1] Five classes are paramattha dhammas and one class is not paramattha dhamma. We should know when the object is a concept. When the object is not a paramattha dhamma the object is a concept. When we think of concepts in daily life the characteristics of the paramattha dhammas which are experienced through the six doors are hidden. Thus realities are not known as they are. One does not know that what appears through the eyes is not a being, person, or self. It is only colour which appears when it impinges on the eyesense. When will panna become keener so that it will know the truth when there is seeing? When the truth is known we will let go of the idea that there is a self, that there are beings or people. One will be able to distinguish between the object which is a paramattha dhamma and the object which is a concept and one will have right understanding of the realities which appear through the six doors. Note [1] The six classes are: (i) the five sense-organs, (ii) the sixteen subtle rupas, (iii) citta, (iv) cetasika, (v) nibbana, and (vi) concept. ---------------------------- With metta, Han #78953 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 5:41 pm Subject: Re: The not-self strategy rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: >> To RobertK: Did the Buddha actually praise the annihilationists? > > Swee Boon > Dear Swee Boon Never to my knowledge, do you have any references? It seems there is some confusion as the passage I quoted was from venerable Santii, (he is an Austrlian monk who rejects Abhidhamma ) it wasn't my own writing. Robert #78954 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 1:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy upasaka_howard Hi, Robert (and Swee Boon) - In a message dated 11/19/2007 8:41:20 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@... writes: Dear Swee Boon Never to my knowledge, do you have any references? It seems there is some confusion as the passage I quoted was from venerable Santii, (he is an Austrlian monk who rejects Abhidhamma ) it wasn't my own writing. Robert ============================== Ah, good. I was one who was confused. :-) With metta, Howard #78955 From: "reverendaggacitto" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 6:53 pm Subject: for Howard/again! reverendagga... HiHoward! i do believe that in the original post i did mention that i was not trying to offend any one but was only speaking honestly. As well i dont remember calling myself infalable as a monastic. i DO have the right to question one third of the tipitaka as influinced by prince mara weather you like it or not. SORRY IF THAT OFFENDS YOU , BUT ITS TRUE. Futhermore,once again i ment what i said about SINCERELY praying for your spiritual well being. i can say honestly that i sincerely care for you and wish you the very best. May the Buddha's, Deva and Angel's bless ALL of you! bhikkhu aggacitto/aka reverend aggacitto #78956 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 2:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] for Howard/again! upasaka_howard Thank you, Bhante. :-) ============================= With metta, Howard #78957 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 8:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Fallacy of Ultimate Vs Conventional Vedantist add onto Buddhist teaching dcwijeratna Dear Alex, I fully support your position. And I add one or two comments. 1. There is only one truth. 2. That is the truth about the human being. 3. Two truths is meaningless. How do you give a definition to two truths? 3. Before the Buddha, it was God ans self soul etc. 4. Every religion (relation between man God), except the teaching of the Buddha, before the and after the Buddha made this assumption. 5. The Buddha forulated a single Truth--cattaari ariyasaccaani--about the human being. 6. During the time of the Buddha, the theists, as well as materialists retreated. 7. However, soon after the parinibbaana of the Buddha, thiests came bac in full force. 8. The concept of arahant was challenged within the first 100 years, and finally resulted in the formation of the Mahasanghika sect, the forerunners of the modern Mahayana. And the Buddha became God-well deified. 9. The theravaada response started in a more subtle way--Abhidhamma 12. There are two major Abhidhamma schools-The first, in Sanskrit is Sarvaastivaada- It postulates, dhammas perist in the three periods-past, presemt. aad future. So atta and God back 13. In the Theravaada abhidhammaa, the itroduced pa.tisandhi citta,bhavanga, and a theory of moments. This introduction took more times. Earlier texts such as Pa.tisambhidhaamagga and the canonical texts really don't clearly show this tendency 14. But by the time of the commentaries it was complete. Finally the Brahmin were happy. God was back. And attaa was back. 15. But the most unfortunate thing in the whole history of Buddhism was presentation of Dhamma to the English-speaking world. 16. I used Dhamma meaning the "Buddha-word" --closest most probably is the basic teachings of the Buddha in the Pali Suttas. 17. Rhys Davids introduced God to the teaching by calling the Buddha's sambodhi a mystery. His wife really interpreted atta as Hindu concept of atman. 18. But Rhys Davids managed to control the whole thing through the PTS and the Dictionary (PED). 19. This was carried forward by people like Sarvapalli Radakrishanan, Ananda Coomaraswamy. [Easterners] 20. In the West now, in scholarly circles people are beginning to have problems with Rhys Davids interpretation. 21. But their followers in the East, are carrying the thing forward. 22. So, the older Abhidhamma was the Brahamanic God, the new Abhidhamma is the God of the Judaic-Christian religious tradition. May you be well and happy DC D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #78958 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 10:49 pm Subject: Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) philofillet Hi again Mike > > Thanks for your feedback. I agree with what you wrote. I am > > interested in the benefits of using breath as an intentional object > > in a very crude way, but I don't think it's bhavana - could be > > helpful in setting up bhavana. > > I'm glad to read this. I'm always glad--rightly, I hope--when I see > what I take to be another's realization of the absolute enormity of > What's Wrong--the incredible pervasity of delusion in all our lives. Well, in a way, when one reflects on the depths and widths to which the vipallasas rule - another way to say "the incredible pervasity of delusion in all our lives", that is the real enormity. Any wrong view involved in "formal" meditation is minor compared to that great sea of wrong understanding. So I say go for it! It might be like that sutta in AN that says something along the lines of "if I live in a moral way and the principle of kamma is true, great - an appropriate destination awaits. And even if the principle of kamma is not true, also good - I will have still lived my life in a moral way." (I always wonder about how a sutta could even suggest that the principle of kamma is not true, so I've probably misunderstood it.) So I say if formal meditation as practiced today is right, great, it will be bhavana. And if it isn't, still good, it will condition a moral, disciplined way of life. i.e nothing to lose even if it isn't bhavana, and it will not interfere in some other kind of purer bhavana. (i.e there is no reason a formal meditator who is practicing a wrong way will not be open to a purer kind of bhavana.) I don't know if that is clear. I just know that I was reading the Samadhi section of Vism. again today and there is a lot that sounds pretty much like contemporary instruction for beginning meditators. Having said that some point I want to post some thoughts on TB's meditation method,which is in the tradition of Ajahn Lee. I tried it for a few months and found it amazingly effective in setting up a kind of ongoing conventional awareness during the day, but it involves an intentional adjusting, modifying, playing with the breath in a kind of new-agey (I think) way that I have not seen in Vism. So I stopped, a couple of months ago. It was *too* effective in a way, I thought it might become an obstacle to bhavana. But I will be looking at it more and discussing it with people here, if there are any who practice in that tradition. I could very well go back to it. Anyways, more on that later. Metta, Phil #78959 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 10:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The not-self strategy (Ken 'thoughts) rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Elaine wrote: > > Hi RobK, > > Ajahn Thanissaro is one of the most learned Pali scholars of our time, he is also a virtuous monk. I personally believe that Ajahn is an Ariya. He has not and did not say anywhere in all his essays that there is a permanent self. Dear Elaine And nor did the puggalavadins say anywhere that there is a permenent self. They were,however,ambivalent about what anatta meant. I cited another pali scholar, Bhikkhu Bodhi who specifically rejects the idea that theBuddha taught anatta as a strategy rather than a truth. If I had rejected what he says would you also be so upset, and what is your criteria for deciding to accept the strategy theory of anatta as against the literal truth version? +++++++++++++++++++ Elaine: Extreme-view people cannot see the middle-path of understanding mundane Anatta. > > If these extreme-view people want to believe that Anatta means no- control and no-person, it is Ok with them, but that is Not Buddhism. ++++++++++++++++++++ Do you agree with the statements below by Buddhghosa? Or is what he says Not Buddhism? "Those same five aggregates are anatta because of the words 'what is painful is no self' Why? Because there is NO exercising power over them. The mode of insusceptibilty to having power exercised over them is the characteristic of anatta" Yam dukkham tam anatta"ti pana vacanato tadeva khandhapañcakam anatta. Kasma? Avasavattanato; avasavattanakaro anattalakkhanam (sammohavinodani p60( dispeller of delusion). "There is no doer of a deed, or one who reaps the result. Phenomena alone flow on, no other view than this right." Visuddhimagga XIX19 "This is mere mentality-materiality, there is no being, no person" XVIII24 "The mental and material (nama rupa) are really here But here is no human being to be found, for it is void and merely fashioned like a doll" XVII31 Robert #78960 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:12 am Subject: upload of audio discussions sarahprocter... Dear Friends (& Tom W*) We've just uploaded a set of edited audio discussion with Ajahn Sujin from Bangkok (at the Foundation), August 2006 These can be found in the audio section (below the archived DSG posts) on: http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ In the audio section, scroll down until you see: Bangkok (at the Foundation), August 2006 (Jon, Sarah and friends) [It's before the Sri Lanka set] You'll also hear Azita, Sukin, Matt/Ivan, Robert K, Ven Dhammanando and other friends asking their Qus. Any comments/quotes/questions much appreciated as usual. If anyone hasn't listened to the recordings before and would like to give them a try, it may be easier to start with the top 'Erik' series which is less detailed. [If anyone would like to share in some dana by burning c.d.s and mailing them out to a few people who have trouble downloading, pls let us or DSG know. We try to avoid trips to the Post Office here as much as possible. For those who visit Bangkok, we always give one master c.d. to the Foundation and one to Sukin when we visit, so copies can also be obtained there.] Metta, Sarah (& Jon) p.s Tom, many thx for posting the video clip of the Agra discussion in the links section. Little did we know that after the long journey from Delhi we were being filmed for the world to see! Anyway, a good idea to have some video. Probably just as well not to mention it in advance:-) Any impressions from the trip that we can persuade you or Bev to share? ============== #78961 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:27 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 206-208, and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga, Ch XVII, 206, 207, 208. Intro: In the following sections mentality, naama (cetasikas), is taken separately as conditioning factor for the sixth base, the mind- base, which is the citta it accompanies. --------- Text Vis. 206: Herein what follows illustrates the meaning. [(1) Mentality as Condition] In immaterial rebirth And life the mind alone will come In seven ways and six to be Condition at the minimum. -------- N: In the aruupa-brahma planes there is only naama, no ruupa. Here naama, cetasikas, condition only the sixth base, manaayatana, which is the citta they accompany. --------- Text Vis. 207: How? In rebirth-linking, firstly, mentality is a condition in seven ways at the minimum, as conascence, mutuality, support, association, kamma-result, presence, and non-disappearance conditions, for the sixth base. ------- N: As we have seen, mentality, naama, stands here for the cetasikas accompanying the rebirth-consciousness which is vipaakacitta. These cetasikas are also vipaaka. They condition the sixth base, manaayatana, the mind-base, which is the citta they accompany. The conditions mentioned here are those that pertain to conascent dhammas. Kamma-result is mentioned, because naama and the mind-base are here in this context both vipaaka. The rebirth-consciousness is vipaaka. Association-condition is mentioned because the conditioning dhammas and the conditioned dhamma are naama-dhammas that are associated, sampayutta. Different from dissociation-condition, vippayutta-paccaya, that pertains to naama and ruupa. ------- Text Vis.: Some mentality, however, is a condition, as root-cause condition [that is, greed, etc.,] and some as nutriment condition [that is, contact and mental volition]. ------- N: A cetasika that is a root, hetu, conditions the mind-base, the citta it accompanies by way of root-condition.The cetasikas that are the mental nutrition of cetanaa, volition, and contact, phassa, condition the accompanying mindbase, citta, by way of nutrition- condition, ahaara-paccaya. The rebirth-consciousness that is vipaakacitta may be accompanied by sobhana hetus and these hetus condition this citta by way of root- condition. Akusala hetus do not arise with vipaakacitta, they arise in the course of life and condition the akusala citta they accompany by way of root-condition. --------- Text Vis.: So it is also a condition in other ways. It is by the [two latter] that the maximum and minimum should be understood. In the course of an existence, too, resultant mentality is a condition as already stated. ------- N: Thus, in the seven ways as stated above, pertaining to cetasikas and citta which are vipaaka. -------- Text Vis.: But the other [non-resultant] kind is a condition in six ways at minimum, as the aforesaid conditions except for kamma-result condition. ------ N: Here the text refers to citta and cetasika that are not vipaaka. In this case, the conascent conditions mentioned before operate, except vipaaka-condition. That is why it is said: ‘ in six ways’, instead of in seven ways. --------- Text Vis.; Some, however, is a condition, as root-cause condition, and some as nutriment condition. So it is also a condition in other ways. It is by these that the maximum and minimum should be understood. ----------- N: When the cetasikas that are hetus are included or the cetasikas that are mental nutriment, there are more ways by which naama conditions the mind-base. The text mentions the maximum amount and the minimum amount of conditions that operate and the Tiika elaborates on the amount of the different conditions that operate. ******* Text Vis. 208. In five-constituent becoming At rebirth, mind in the same way Acts as condition for the sixth, And for the others in six ways. --------- N: In the planes where there are five khandhas, naama and ruupa, naama (cetasikas) conditions the sixth base, the accompanying mind- base, citta, by way of the same types of conditions as mentioned before. In the following section it will be explained how naama conditions the other five bases (the aayatanas of eyesense, etc.) in six ways. ******** Conclusion: Many details about conditions are given in this section and in the following sections. We cannot learn enough about the different conditions. Because of ignorance we fail to understand that we have to see, we have to hear, because there are conditions, no “I” who can cause their arising. If we do not consider this again and again we cannot understand the meaning of anattå. **** Nina. #78962 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The not-self strategy dcwijeratna Dear Ken H Bhikkhu Thanissaro's statement I checked at ATI [I wanted to read the full article]. It is given below: "Books on Buddhism often state that the Buddha's most basic metaphysical tenet is that there is no soul or self. However, a survey of the discourses in the Pali canon — the earliest extant record of the Buddha's teachings — suggests that the Buddha taught the anatta or not-self doctrine, not as a metaphysical assertion, but as a strategy for gaining release from suffering: If one uses the concept of not-self to dis-identify oneself from all phenomena, one goes beyond the reach of all suffering & stress. As for what lies beyond suffering & stress, the Canon states that although it may be experienced, it lies beyond the range of description, and thus such descriptions as "self" or "not-self" would not apply." Here is my analysis of the passage. 1. "the Buddha's most basic metaphysical tenet." The sutta evidence is that Buddha always veered away from metaphysical questions. He consistently refused to answer such questions. So if somebody asserts metaphysical tenets to the Buddha, there is no need to discuss it. 2. "anatta or not-self DOCTRINE...strategy for gaining release," The word doctrine--a belief or a set of beliefs [Oxford dictionary], would imply that the Buddha was not "Enlightened" or the Buddha had no realization. I personally think this was a mistake because I am sure Bhikkhu Thanissaro, would not think that the Buddha was not "Enlightened." 3. "As for what lies beyond suffering & stress, the Canon states that although it may be experienced, it lies beyond the range of description, and thus such descriptions as "self" or "not-self" would not apply." I am little bit concerned here with "it lies beyond..." I would infer from these words, that Bhikkhu Thanissaro, thinks that there is some "it" out there. Further, "it may be experienced ..." For us, traditional Buddhists, this something difficult to accept. We hear daily "nibbanti dhiiraa yathaa yam padiipo" extinguished like the flame of a lamp, from Ratana sutta. For us anatta means no-atta--the sense of I, me and mine. According to the Dhamma it is possible to train oneself to give up this sense, by completely training one self in tisikkhaa-siila, samaadhi, pa~n~naa. And when you do so, you are totally at peace with the world. 4. I do not wish to comment on Bhikkhu Thanissaro status. That would be totally against the Buddha's teachings, since I don't know about it, and people who are discussing wouldn't know his mind either. 5. Finally, one can understand the Buddha's teaching only by travelling the path. No other way. That is why it is called the only way, sole way etc. Those who are trying to talk about the teachings of the Buddha are like the famous blind-men and the elephant [the story is in Udaana, I think] Kind regards, D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #78963 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:53 am Subject: Q. re Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 3, no 6 nilovg Dear Tep, your questions are to the point. I have a page full of red flags! I also have work at my Pali list and sometimes correspondance from outside our list. I will be away four days from this Thursday. ---------- Tep quotes: N: There is no person who is good or bad, wholesomeness and unwholesomeness are particular cetasikas arising because of conditions that perform their functions in a wholesome way or in an unwholesome way. T: The idea that there is no one practices, or controls an outcome of his/her action, has been made known here thousands of times at least. But your following sutta quote clearly indicates control in terms of restraining/guarding of the sense faculties. > "... On seeing a visible object with the eye.... he enters upon the way of > its restraint, he guards the eye faculty, undertakes the restraint of > the eye faculty. ... ... T; The guarding and restraining of one's eye faculty is obviously a willed action that controls the sensing to affect non-arising of an akusala citta. What is your thought about this? If you say only citta restrains and guards the sense faculties, then what is the difference between your reply and the non-Buddhist belief that any restraining/guarding of human's sense faculties is done by the brain, and there is no such things called 'citta and cetasikas'? -------- N: The non-Buddhist does not understand anattaa. Details about citta and cetasika that arise because of conditions and perform their functions can help us to see that our life is actually citta, cetasika and ruupa. They arise just for a moment and are gone immediately. Now you are seeing, then hearing, then thinking. In the same process when seeing arises already kusala cittas or akusala cittas arise. When the objective is not daana, siila or bhaavanaa, these cittas are akusala, and mostly rooted in lobha. We are attached to seeing, to sense impressions. That shows us that the intoxicants, aasavas, arise before we notice it. They have already arisen and nobody can do anything about it. There is no time! How is it then that sometimes we can tell ourselves: do not give in to anger and that this works? Also such moments of reminding ourselves and guarding the doorways arise because of conditions. We have read and considered the suttas and understood the disadvantage of anger, and this can condition kusala, restraint. We believe that this is willed by a self, but in reality there are only dhammas arising because of conditions. We may fail to see conditions. If we do not penetrate deeply enough to the real causes and effects we just have a superficial outlook on life. That is why the Visuddhimagga hammers in all the details of conditions as you will see from Larry's postings. To conclude: when reading a text about control that seems to be done by a self, this is not confusing. We can talk and think about paramattha dhammas in conventional terms. At the same time we can be anchored to what the Buddha taught about anattaa. We should never forget the anatta lakkhana sutta nor all the other suttas where the Buddha explains about phenomena devoid of self. Nina. #78964 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 1:12 am Subject: Re: The Fallacy of Ultimate Vs Conventional Vedantist add onto Buddhist teaching christine_fo... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, DC Wijeratna wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > I fully support your position. And I add one or two comments. > > 1. There is only one truth. > 2. That is the truth about the human being. > 3. Two truths is meaningless. How do you give a definition to two truths? Hello Alex, DC, all, I'm not quite certain what you are arguing against. I have always understood that the Buddha clearly taught Relative and Absolute or Ultimate Truth. I thought you may like to read this about "Levels of Truth" by Maurice Walshe in the Introduction of his translation of the Digha Nikaya: :Levels of Truth: An important and often overlooked aspect of the Buddhist teaching concerns the levels of truth, failure to appreciate which has led to many errors (see n. 220). Very often the Buddha talks in the Suttas in terms of conventional or relative truth (sammuti- or vohaara- sacca), according to which people and things exist just as they appear to the naive understanding. Elsewhere, however, when addressing an audience capable of appreciating his meaning, he speaks in terms of ultimate truth (paramattha-sacca), according to which 'existence is a mere process of physical and mental phenomena within which , or beyond which , no real ego-entity nor any abiding substance can ever be found' (Buddhist Dictionary under Paramattha). In the Abhidhamma, the entire exposition is in terms of ultimate truth. It may also be observed that many 'Zen paradoxes' and the like really owe their puzzling character to their being put in terms of ultimate, not relative truth. The full understanding of ultimate truth can, of course, only be gained by profound insight, but it it possible to become increasingly aware of the distinction. There would seem in fact to be a close parallel in modern times in the difference between our naive world-view and that of the physicist, both points of view having their use in their own sphere. Thus, conventionally speaking, or according to the naive world-view, there are solid objects such as tables and chairs, whereas according to physics the alleged solidity is seen to be an illusion, and whatever might turn out to be the ultimate nature of matter, it is certainly something very different from that which presents itself to our senses. However, when the physicist is off duty, he or she makes use of solid tables and chairs just like everyone else. In the same way, all expressions as 'I', 'self' and so on are always in accordance with conventional truth, and the Buddha never hesitated to use the word atta 'self' (and also with plural meaning: ''yourselves'', etc.) [5] in its conventional and convenient sense. In fact, despite all that has been urged to the contrary, there is not the slightest evidence that he ever used it in any other sense except when critically quoting the views of others, as should clearly emerge from several of the Suttas here translated. In point of fact, it should be stressed that conventional truth is sometimes extremely important. The whole doctrine of karma and rebirth has its validity only in the realm of conventional truth. That is why, by liberating ourselves from the viewpoint of conventional truth we cease to be subject to karmic law. Objections to the idea of rebirth in Buddhism, too, are sometimes based on a misunderstanding of the nature of the two truths. As long as we are unenlightened 'worldlings', our minds habitually operate in terms of 'me' and 'mine', even if in theory we know better. It is not until this tendency has been completely eradicated that full enlightenment can dawn. At Sa.myutta Nikaaya 22.89 the Venerable Khemaka, who is a Non-Returner, explains how 'the subtle remnant of the 'I'-conceit, of the 'I'-desire, an unextirpated lurking tendency to think: 'I am'', still persists even at that advanced stage. Probably the best account of the Buddha's attitude to truth is given by Jayatilleke in The Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge (1963, 61ff). It may be mentioned that for those who find this work hard going, his second, posthumous book, The Message of the Buddha (1975), makes for easier reading. Jaatilleke has been attacked for equating the philosophy of Buddhism too closely with the moder school of logical positivism. In this connection it is perhaps best to let him speak for himself: The Buddha, again, was the earliest thinker in history to recognise the fact that language tends to distort in certain respects the nature of reality and to stress the importance of not being misled by linguistic forms and conventions. In this respect, he foreshadowed the modern linguistic or analytical philosophers. (The Message of the Buddha, 33). It seems hard to find any fault with that. Jayatilleke goes on: He was the first to distinguish meaningless questions and assertions from meaningful ones. As in science he recognised perception and inference as the twin sources of knowledge, but there was one difference. For perception, according to Buddhism, included extra-sensory forms as well, such as telepathy and clairvoyance. Science cannot ignore such phenomena and today there are Soviet as well as Western scientists, who have admitted the validity of extra-sensory perception in the light of experimental evidence. Probably most readers will concede the possibility that the Buddha knew a few things which modern science is only now beginning to discover, or accept." metta Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- #78965 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 1:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg]To Sarah: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (7) sarahprocter... Hi Tep (& Rob M), You were asking about the Patisambhidamagga, usually attributed to Sariputta. --- Tep Sastri wrote: > > Sorry, I am on the road, so I do not have my texts with me. It was > > something along the lines of the "original Abhidhamma" (before the > > breakup of the 18 schools) having four main texts which roughly map > > into: > > 1. The Suttana explanation in the Vibhanga > > 2. The Abhidhamma explanation in the Vibhanga > > 3. The Dhatukatha and Patthana > > 4. The Patisambhidamagga > > > > It has been a few months since I read this, so I am not sure of the > > details. > > > > T: That is inline with my thinking too. ... S: There is a lot of detail in Warder's introduction to the Patisambhidamagga as Rob M said. Here are a couple of quotes from it which I see I've marked before and which may be of interest: "Except for the Treatise on the Discriminations, Patisambhidamagga treatises on the same topics seem to supplement rather than to duplicate the chapters of the Vibhanga, in other words they appear to presuppose the Vibhanga (or its constituent sections) in some form. Treatise X1X (on the balas) seems to make up a deficiency in the Vibhanga by discussing one of the original matika topics strangely missing from te early Abhidhamma. As already noted, Treatises 1 and 111 in their present form appear to quote descriptions or definitions from the Dhammasangani. But the work does not seem to be acquainted with the fully elaborated system of triads and dyads (only the 'first triead', which is very ancient) and some of the other sophistications of the Dhammasangani. Since the descriptions of dhammas may be older than the final Dhammasangani text, a substantial part of the Patisambhidamagga may have been elaborated in the same period, parallel to it and using some of its contents in the earlier form. This would mean the latter part of the 3rd century B.C." **** "All these bits of evidence seem to confirm that the whole of the Tipitaka existed and was closed by the middle of the 1st century B.C. or earlier.......This appears to establish tht the last main stage of composition of the Patisambhidamagga...took place in the early or mid-2nd century B.C. Only the Treatise on 'Convergence' (abhisamaya, XX111) and possibly contemporary with the Buddhavamsa (late 2nd century B.C.?) and Apadana (early 1st century B.C.?). The Buddhavamsa, incidentally, mentions the 'seven pakaranas', evidently the seven books of the Abhidhamma as codified by the 2nd century B.C. (XX1V.6)." ***** In any case, whatever the dates the various texts were codified, what is according to the Truths is Buddha vacana. Metta, Sarah =========== #78966 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 2:01 am Subject: India 3. nilovg Dear friends, this is another part of the discussions in India. We discussed about the difference between the moments of awareness and the moments that there is no awareness. Sujin: "Pa~n~naa knows when awareness arises. It knows the difference between moments with awareness and moments without awareness. We touch things and body-consciousness experiences hardness without awareness. But sometimes when hardness presents itself there is awareness of hardness. The object is then exactly the same. Reality presents itself now but ignorance cannot understand it. When visible object appears we do not have to call it visible object. It appears and awareness can be aware of it, it does not move away from it. Pa~n~naa can begin to see it as a reality. It takes time to become detached from the story about visible object, from thinking about the name, or about the theory. The development of pa~n~naa can be proven when the effect is letting go, even for a moment, of clinging to visible object. Pa~n~naa passes on to another object, instantly, naturally. Otherwise one may cling with thinking or trying to understand the object. When pa~n~naa develops it can understand instantly and become detached instantly. It is such a short moment and then other realities appear and pa~n~naa can understand these.” Kh Sujin explained several times that if we think about the reality that appears or name it, that there is no opportunity for awareness of a next reality. I understand, because then there is thinking and thinking and thinking. Kh Sujin spoke about the stages of insight, vipassana~naa.na: "There should be no expectation for the arising of stages of insight. The object of insight at such moments is unpredictable. Only one reality is experienced at a time. In the Tipi.taka it is said that that particular object which appears at such moments is known thoroughly, because it is very clear. The moments of vipassana ~naa.na arise in a mind-door process, after the cittas of a sense- door process have fallen away. At this moment there are many mind-door processes of cittas but these do not appear. " N: Kh. Sujin explained that visible object is experienced through the eye-door and after that visible object is experienced by cittas arising in a mind-door process. At this moment we do not know what a mind-door process is, but at the moment of vipassanaa ~naa.na it is known. The second stage of insight is direct understanding of realities as conditioned dhammas. She said: "Even conditions can be understood without having to think of words. Now there cannot be seeing without visible object, and there cannot be hearing without sound. Whenever sound appears there must be hearing; sound is the object of hearing. Object-condition, aaramma.na- paccaya, can be directly understood without having to use words. But the second stage of insight cannot arise without further development of pa~n~naa after the first stage has arisen. " ******* Nina. #78967 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 2:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Rhinoceros Horn! sarahprocter... Dear Ven Samahita & all, --- Bhikkhu Samahita wrote: <..> > Source: Sutta-Nipata I.3 v35-75 > > Such is it: > Without periods of solitary seclusion > one lacks completion of mindfulness; > With muddled mindfulness, > one cannot complete any investigation of wisdom.. .... S: Or, without wisdom and mindfulness, there cannot be any development of calm or solitary seclusion, i.e seclusion or detachment from sense impressions at this very moment. When we appeciate that all dhammas are conditioned, there won't be any attempt to look for calm or solitary seclusion anywhere/anytime else. Metta, Sarah ========== #78968 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 3:04 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy kenhowardau Hi Howard, Phil, Dieter, Elaine, Tep, Alex (and all others interested), Howard, I am glad you have joined this thread. It was quite a while ago when you and I first spoke about TB's "unfortunate choice of words." I said at the time we could no longer use that as an excuse. In my opinion TB chose his words carefully. You were not so sure, but I think you will at least agree with me that there is a *suggestion* of atta-belief in the opening sentences of "The Not-self Strategy." Won't you? Phil, you bought into this too. What do you say? Please don't wimp out now! :-) And Dieter, I am sorry, but I can't tell from what you have said if you are still interested in continuing this discussion (even though it was at your instigation). You and Elaine have warned against slandering a monk, but there is no need for slander. Let's just find out what TB is trying to tell us. Tep, I gather you and Alex are sticking to your guns and still maintaining there is no "suggestion" of atta belief. So, where do we go from here? Have RobK's posts changed your minds? I was very pleased to read them. The one written by Ven Santii pieced together for me a lot of snippets of information I had heard over the years. And Bhikkhu Bodhi clearly rejects TB's theories. Perhaps some of you are convinced now. If there is still some doubt, I say we should continue reading The Not-self Strategy. Quote: "The evidence for this reading of the Canon centers around four points: 1 The one passage where the Buddha is asked point-blank to take a position on the ontological question of whether or not there is a self, he refuses to answer." (end quote) We can discuss the Vacchagotta Sutta if anyone wants to. However, I would like to concentrate on the suggestion inherent in BT's teaching that he believes in a self. I believe the Buddha continually addressed the question, 'Is there a self?' Even so, it might be true that there is only one passage in the Canon where he was asked it point blank. I don't know. But I do know that no ordinary Dhamma teacher would refer to that fact without giving an explanation. Wherever there is any suggestion at all of atta-belief in the Pali Canon, a true Dhamma teacher will immediately dispel it. Does TB make any attempt to dispel the suggestion? No. He says that the Buddha 'refused to take a position either way.' That's not good enough. Ken H PS: (Skipping ahead a bit) TB writes, "In the first, Vacchagotta asks the Buddha to take a position on the question of whether or not there is a self, and the Buddha remains silent. In the second, Mogharaja asks for a way to view the world so that one can go beyond death, and the Buddha speaks, teaching him to view the world without reference to the notion of self. This suggests that, instead of being an assertion that there is no self, the teaching on not-self is more a technique of perception aimed at leading beyond death to Nibbana — a way of perceiving things with no self-identification, no sense that 'I am,' no attachment to 'I' or 'mine' involved." (end quote) How much evidence do you people need? :-) #78969 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 3:24 am Subject: Re: The Fallacy of Ultimate Vs Conventional Vedantist add onto Buddhist teaching christine_fo... Hello all, A little more: In the Digha Nikaya 9 the Buddha says: "These, Citta, are merely names, expressions, turns of speech, designations in common use in the world. And of these a Tathagata makes use indeed, but he does not misapprehend them" Note 224: An important reference to the two truths referred to in DA as 'conventional speech' (sammuti-kathaa) and 'ultimately true speech' (paramattha-kathaa). See Introduction, p. 31f. It is important to be aware of the level of truth at which any statements are made. In MS (ad MN 5: Anagana Sutta), the following verse is quoted (source unknown): Two truths the Buddha, best of all who speak, declared: Conventional and ultimate - no third can be. Terms agreed are true by usage of the world; Words of ultimate significance are true In terms of dhammas. Thus the Lord, a Teacher, he Who's skilled in this world's speech, can use it, and not lie. metta Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- #78970 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Fallacy of Ultimate Vs Conventional Vedantist add onto Buddhis... upasaka_howard Hi, DC - In a message dated 11/19/2007 11:59:27 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, dcwijeratna@... writes: 22. So, the older Abhidhamma was the Brahamanic God, the new Abhidhamma is the God of the Judaic-Christian religious tradition. =============================== Sarvastivadin Abhidhamma is certainly substantialist and tends towards eternalism. But this isn't at all so of the Theravadin Abhidhamma, nor am I aware of any tendency within it in that direction. I've heard Theravadin Abhidhamma, more the commentaries actually [It isn't clear to me that momentarism and its "cure" in bhavangasota was much in eveidence in the Abhidhamma itself], criticized as seeming to promote a discrete pluralism of momentary self-existent realities, reifying dhammas (though certainly not the "the person"), but I've never ever heard of a theistic accusation hurled at either the Abhidhamma or the commentarial tradition. That is something new to me. I can't imagine how that position could be seriously defended. That "God" business really confuses and perplexes me, DC. With metta, Howard #78971 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:39 am Subject: Levels of Truth Versus Levels of Speech/Very Brief Comment upasaka_howard Hi, Chris (and Alex, DC, and all) - As I understand the Dhamma, and as I believe, there is but one truth - "the truth". Things are exactly as they are, and not otherwise - the "facts on the ground". But there are varying levels of speech, and the truth can be pointed to relatively figuratively (by sammuti-sacca) or relatively literally (by paramattha-sacca). With metta, Howard #78972 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/20/2007 6:04:42 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, Phil, Dieter, Elaine, Tep, Alex (and all others interested), Howard, I am glad you have joined this thread. It was quite a while ago when you and I first spoke about TB's "unfortunate choice of words." I said at the time we could no longer use that as an excuse. In my opinion TB chose his words carefully. You were not so sure, but I think you will at least agree with me that there is a *suggestion* of atta-belief in the opening sentences of "The Not-self Strategy." Won't you? ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I will. I'm simply not certain where he stands. That extremely important issue aside, I do admire him greatly for his extraordinary contributions to the Dhamma. ------------------------------------------------ ========================= With metta, Howard #78973 From: Dieter Möller Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 5:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy moellerdieter Hi Ken H , Howard, Phil, Elaine, Tep, Alex , Robert and all others interested, you wrote: 'And Dieter, I am sorry, but I can't tell from what you have said if you are still interested in continuing this discussion (even though it was at your instigation). You and Elaine have warned against slandering a monk, but there is no need for slander. Let's just find out what TB is trying to tell us. ' D: I am missing still any evidence showing clearly that your claim is more than a suspicion on your side. As Howard put it : ' If Ken thinks there is evidence that Ven T has self-view and wishes to promote self-view, Ken needs to provide it, clearly and unambiguously,' and explained to you in a further message , what the Venerable may have in mind, concluding ' Because of this, I do not presume that Ven Thanissaro had a heterodox belief. He *may* have, but I don't know this as fact.' So far I don't have much to add incl. other comments and don' t think it is very useful to discuss what one may read into his wording in order to support your view. This considered you statements ( totally ridiculous / heterodox teaching) are indeed - mildly said - inappropriate . We both discussed before that there is a 'reality ' of I/Self delusion ( a process explained by the links of D.O.) and until this delusion is replaced by wisdom with the help of deep insight and understanding of the nature of khanda attachment, there is a self .. As it it said in S.N. 22 , 79 : 'Happy are the Perfect Ones, no craving is found in them, rooted out is the I conceit, the net of delusion burst through'. It seems to me that the Abhidhammic stand to speak from the ultimate point of view , influences you to suspect strategies applied for detachment being introductions of the self through the backdoor .(?) with Metta Dieter #78974 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 5:55 am Subject: Preservation of the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 3, no 7. nilovg Dear friends, We read in the “Visuddhimagga” (I, 54): “ ‘Apprehends neither the signs’: he does not apprehend the sign (nimitta) of woman or man, or any sign that is a basis for defilement such as the sign of beauty, etc.: he stops at what is merely seen. ‘Nor the particulars’ (anubyañjana): he does not apprehend any aspect classed as hand, foot, smile, laughter, talk, looking ahead, looking aside, etc., which has acquired the name ‘particular’ because of its particularizing defilements, because of its making them manifest themselves. He only apprehends what is really there...” Further on the “Visuddhimagga” (I,56) explains: “He enters upon the way of its restraint: he enters upon the way of closing that eye faculty by the door-panel of mindfulness.” Understanding of realities should be naturally developed, we should not force ourselves to ignore concepts and try to know realities such as seeing or hearing. When we are listening to music we may try to know the reality that is just sound, different from the concept of a whole, of a melody, but this is not the way to develop right understanding naturally. Then there would be attachment that obstructs the development of paññå. Direct understanding of a characteristic of a reality is already developed paññå, and how can we expect to have developed paññå in the beginning? ****** Nina. #78975 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 5:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] upload of audio discussions nilovg Dear Sarah and Jon, anumodana and thank you very much. I am just downloading them. Nina. Op 20-nov-2007, om 9:12 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > We've just uploaded a set of edited audio discussion with Ajahn > Sujin from > Bangkok (at the Foundation), August 2006 #78976 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 6:15 am Subject: Re: upload of audio discussions scottduncan2 Dear Sarah and Jon, S: "We've just uploaded a set of edited audio discussion with Ajahn Sujin from Bangkok (at the Foundation), August 2006..." Scott: Thank you very much. Sincerely, Scott. #78977 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 6:29 am Subject: Abh. Q. to Elaine, no 1. nilovg Dear Elaine, ------- E quotes: Nina: When seeing or hearing arises, these are vipaakacittas without sati. Elaine: I have heard that seeing and hearing are vipaka citta (resultant consciousness). Why is it seeing or hearing are without sati? Without sati (mindfulness), is it possible to see or hear? ----- N: These vipaakacittas are without roots, without sobhana (beautiful) cetasikas. They are merely vipaka and have apart from seeing, hearing and the other sense-cognitions, no other activity. Sati is a sobhana cetasika that accompanies sobhana citta. There is sati of daana, of siila and of bhaavanaa. Sati has nothing to do with seeing. -------- E quotes Nina: We lead our daily life and it is in daily life that understanding of naama and ruupa is to be developed, very naturally. Elaine: Will this mundane daily life understanding of nama-rupa develop naturally until it reaches the tender stages of Insights? Will it be that, one day I suddenly or gradually get enlightened because I read so much and talked so much about nama and rupa? Is this a Buddhist belief? ------ N: Not suddenly. The right conditions have to be developed, life after life. Reading and discussing Dhamma help to get more intellectual understanding and this can lead to direct awareness and understanding of realities. Many conditions are needed. Also kusala of former lives, association with the right friend in dhamma. This is also in the suttas: the four Wheels, for example, and other suttas. The perfections have to be developed life after life. Patience, perseverance are needed. -------------- Nina: Also akusala citta that arises has to be known as only a dhamma, otherwise it cannot be eradicated. Elaine: How do you define a dhamma in the above sentence? Can you give an example of an akusala citta and the ‘moment of knowing’ it, by using conventional language? --------- N: When you hear unpleasant talk you may have irritation. This irritation falls away immediately. Then another process of cittas may arise and in that process there may be kusala cittas with sati and pa~n~naa that attend to the characteristic of dosa that has just fallen away. Cittas arise and fall away so fast and awareness can come in between like a flash. -------------------- Nina: At the moment of akusala citta there is no mindfulness, but when it has just fallen away its nature can be known as it is: as is a conditioned dhamma that is not mine. Then there is kusala citta with sati and pa~n~naa that have as object akusala dhamma. Elaine: The above sentence is true and theoretical. I hope to understand/experience it someday. --------------- N: Yes, at first it is more thinking than awareness. It can be thinking with kusala citta that sees the benefit of kusala. --------- Nina: When pa~n~naa is fully developed it is very fast. Do not worry, it depends on pa~n~naa to perform its function. Nobody should try and catch the different cittas. But pa~n~naa has to be developed from the beginning on. Elaine: You say nobody should try and catch the different cittas, but how do you notice this kusala and akusala citta that you always talk about? ------ N: When using the word 'nobody' I speak in conventional language, this is unavoidable to explain things. We can learn the difference between metta and anger. They arise at different moments. Metta is very gentle and anger is so harsh. But then they are not known yet as mere dhammas that are conditioned. This can only be realized when pa~n~naa is more developed. --------- E: I am interested in talking about nobody. Let’s say, there is this nobody called A and another nobody called B - why and how do A and B become different in characters, ignorance and wisdom? ----- N: They are different individuals, that is to say: the cittas have accumulated different accumulattions. Some beings have more dust in their eyes, others less. --------- E: What makes the avijja and panna, which cannot be controlled in conceptual people (which are nobody according to the abhidhamma) become developed or eradicated? If A’s and B’s mind and matter cannot be controlled, and if A gets understanding faster than B, why and how the conditions for A became better than B’s? What is the explanation for this? ------ N: Kamma conditions us to be born in this or that place, which may be favorable for hearing Dhamma or not. When we consider hearing of true Dhamma, hearing is vipaaka, conditioned by kamma. How openminded to the Dhamma or ready for the Dhamma are different people? This depends on accumulations also in past lives which condition their inclinations. It is all very complex. What depends on the proper conditions cannot be made to arise at will. ****** Nina. #78978 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 6:38 am Subject: Perfections Corner (38) nichiconn Dear All, This is the continuation of Chapter 7: The Perfection of Truthfulness, 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. ------------------------------ Only pa~n~naa can understand the true nature of each dhamma. However, the development of pa~n~naa is conditioned by listening to the Dhamma, and by considering it in all details. One should develop pa~n~naa gradually, stage by stage. We still have defilements, but we listen to the Dhamma and we have taken refuge in the Dhamma during this life. This shows that we are following the way to develop pa~n~naa, so that the characteristics of realities that are appearing now can be penetrated. We should follow in the footsteps of the Bodhisattas and accumulate the perfections. People say that they want to practise the Dhamma. The practice of the Dhamma is the abandoning of akusala: of lobha, dosa and moha. Lobha should be abandoned when it arises, that is the practice of the Dhamma. If someone wants to apply the Dhamma he should not delay this. When anger arises, one should abandon it so that there is non-hate, that is the practice of the Dhamma. When jealousy, stinginess or other kinds of akusala arise one should abandon them, that is the practice of the Dhamma. However, defilements cannot be eradicated according to our wishes or expectations. Even the Bodhisatta who had accumulated the perfections during innumerable lives was still susceptible to the power of akusala, because he had not yet eradicated defilements. We should reflect on the Bodhisatta who accumulated the perfections in order to realize the noble Truths. He wanted to understand the truth of the four paramattha dhammas, of citta, cetasika, ruupa and nibbaana. We should develop pa~n~naa in order to realize the truth of Dhamma, we should see the benefit of sacca, of the truth. The paramattha dhammas which are the true dhammas have inalterable characteristics. We should find out what the true characteristic is of citta, cetasika, and ruupa, which are not self, not a being or person. We should find out what the true nature of nibbaana is, the dhamma that is different from citta, cetasika and ruupa. If someone seeks the truth, he wants to penetrate it and hence he can see the benefit of the truth. He should develop all degrees of truthfulness, beginning with truthfulness in speech. ..to be continued, connie #78979 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 7:15 am Subject: Abh Q. to Elaine, second part. nilovg Dear Elaine, -------- Nina: First the difference between reality and concept has to be known. And also the difference between the moments there is no sati and the moments with sati. Only pa~n~naa can realize this. It is of no use to think of stages of vipassana and to think about it who has attained it. Elaine: I would like to share with you my understanding of realities and concepts. Rising and falling of the abdomen is a concept. When the reality of rising and falling are known, then it becomes Insight. ------- N: The first stage of insight first: direct understanding of the different characteristics of nama and rupa, thus, of paramattha dhammas. Only at the third stage of insight the arising and falling away of nama and rupa is realized. The arising and falling of the abdomen is not arising and falling of realities, it is just an idea one may think of. This is different from mindfulness of breath but some teachers find it useful. ---------- E: Even if an enlightened person tells me what the realities of rising and falling are, it won’t help me because I won’t get enlightened by hearing it. I have to experience these pathavi, apo, tejo and vayo for myself. When a person finally realizes the difference between a concept and a reality with direct understanding, it becomes a very special moment. Do you agree? ------- N: Tejo cannot be experienced through the bodysense, but the other three Elements are tangible object. Gradually their charactreistics can be known when they appear, provided there is no clinging to them or to ideas about them. When a moment of sati arises that is aware of just one dhamma as it appears through one doorway, the difference can be known between concept and reality. It is just a beginning, not a special moment. Ignorance hides the truth, and gradually the truth can be discovered. ------- E: I think normal people can understand reality and concept by memorizing them. If they have memorized what realities are, then the other things in this world are concepts. ----------------------- N: it is not a matter of memorizing, but a matter of understanding, even if it is only intellectual understanding, not yet direct understanding. ---------- Elaine: Can you please explain how you develop the understanding of these realities as they appear in daily life? What are the realities that you experience? Can you please give an example? Nina: How to develop understanding is your question. Attending to the characteristics of dhammas that appear, but pa~n~naa and sati perform their functions, not we. The right attitude is very important. Elaine: You didn’t answer my question by giving an example. When you are doing the laundry, what is the citta like? How many kusala and akusala citta have gone by while doing the laundry? I hope you can please give real life examples like this. I think it is easier to learn Buddhism by using real life examples. ------ N: Do not expect too much from me. I am an ignorant worldling who has not attained vipassanaa ~naanas. I listened to Kh Sujin for more than forty years and I appreciate what I learn and like to share this with others. Your laundry example: what are the objects of awareness? visible object, seeing, hearing, sound, hardness, lobha, dosa, metta, etc. Any dhamma that appears, kusala or akusala. Now in another situation: in the kitchen, at the computer: seeing is always seeing, hardness is always hardness, there is no difference when we change the situation. Thus now you may see that it does not matter what we are doing, where we are. One thing is sure: there are many, many akusala cittas and kusala cittas are very rare. Kusala cittas with pa~n~naa are even rarer. These are the facts of life. I think I mentioned that Ann and I were interviewed in India. The reporter asked us what we had achieved after so many years, and we both answered: very little. We also said that we did not think this discouraging since we know the amounts of ignorance we accumulated in innumerous lives. We feel fortunate to have come across the Dhamma so that we can at least begin to develop understanding. ------ Nina: If 'we' try very hard and want to have continuous mindfulness, this is motivated by an idea of self. That is the wrong way. Our aim is developing more understanding, detachment from the idea of self. Elaine: When you use 'we' then it contradicts the whole essence of Abhidhamma. When you say there is this 'we' that is try to do anything, it is not the 'we's' fault. It was the cittas that come and goes in that 'we'. If that 'we' have an idea of 'self', it cannot be helped because that 'we' don't have a say in the arising of understanding (wisdom). You know what I'm trying to say? ------ N: I put we between brackets. Again: a conventional term to explain things. Implied is: citta and cetasika. ------- E: If we try hard to have continuous mindfulness, this trying hard is not decided by a we. If someone did try hard, it was because the conditions for trying hard has arisen. ----------- N: The wanting or wishing was motivating this trying. That is what I wanted to point out. But I agree, all this is conditioned. The Buddha spoke about detachment to help people. ------ E:I want to explain something from a conventional point of view. From my experience, when we study Chemistry, we cannot see the actual molecules and atoms with our naked eyes.... These are charts that can be seen with the naked eyes because it gives some patterns and spikes. This is how scientists learn about things- using our eyes, ears, thoughts, etc (salayatana and ayatana). That's why, I think Buddhism should be taught by using conventional language and by giving examples as well. If you use words like panna and citta, it is difficult for me to imagine / guess what this panna and citta are. If I don’t know what they are, then it is impossible for me to learn. What is your opinion on this? ------------- N: I do not see anything in using examples taken from science, the Dhamma is a completely different subject. The Dhamma deals with detachment. Science does not. If you and others do not understand pa~n~naa and citta the solution is Dhamma discussion. It is good to hear explanations from different people, from different angles. It is said in the suttas: listening, asking questions are important. Considering what you hear, weighing it up. -------- Nina: When sati arises it does so because of its own conditions. It arises unexpectedly. Elaine: Sati arises on its own conditions. Yes. ----------------- Nina: One follows the wrong Path if one tries to have sati. There is nobody who can control sati, induce sati. Elaine: If sati arises, it does so, on its own. If the wrong path is followed, there is also no ‘one’ on the wrong path, it is too bad that the sati did not arise for that 'one'. See? You cannot say someone tries to have sati, that ‘trying’ and ‘forcing’ happens because it appears on its own and it was not a ‘one’ who did it. So, if someone went and meditate, it wasn’t because ‘he’ or ‘she’ tried to, it is because the conditions for meditation has arisen. He didn't force himself to meditate, that meditation practise came to him. Do you agree? ------ N: I agree that whatever one is doing is conditioned. But hearing a warning that wanting and trying with an idea of self is counterproductive may be of help to certain persons. It can be another favorable condition not to deviate from the right Path. Or it may not help at that time, but later on. Rob K had a story: someone rejected what he got from Kh Sujin's explanations but after ten years he phoned Rob and had changed his mind. We never know. Nina. #78980 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 7:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: upload of audio discussions nilovg Dear Scott, Shall we listen to the same one and then discuss it? I find it helpful to have a discussion with you. But it will be next week, after Tuesday, since I go away for a few days this week. Nina. Op 20-nov-2007, om 15:15 heeft Scott Duncan het volgende geschreven: > S: "We've just uploaded a set of edited audio discussion with Ajahn > Sujin from Bangkok (at the Foundation), August 2006..." > > Scott: Thank you very much. #78981 From: Ken O Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 7:39 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy ashkenn2k Hi interested party "The evidence for this reading of the Canon centers around four points: 1 The one passage where the Buddha is asked point-blank to take a position on the ontological question of whether or not there is a self, he refuses to answer." (end quote) KO: I believe we should look at the context of this was asked. I remember this was asked by an wanderer in which Buddha refused to answer. Because at that time, if I recall, it was not beneficial to answer as the wanderer is not ready and would be confused if Buddha would to explain it. Sorry just can't recall which sutta. Kind regards Ken O #78982 From: Dieter Möller Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 8:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy moellerdieter Hi DC .... Ken H , Tep, Howard ,friends .. I just recognised that I missed to address you as well, sorry . Recently - I remember - you pointed out what should be in the center of Self (Not Self) - discussion: the 5 khanda attachment ( and by that the D.O.). That is very true! When we talk about ' The not-self strategy ' , it is obvious , that like any other strategy a plan is needed , based on the situation it intends to change Now we know by what the situation is descríbed : The Law of Dependent Origination and the plan presented by the 8fold Noble Path. Teachings refering to 'the Not-self strategy ' not corresponding to above in this way or that way , are not of special interest to me (not concerning my refuge) . Perhaps, in such view, one should read the article in discussion again... what do you think? with Metta Dieter . #78983 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 8:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The not-self strategy (Ken 'thoughts) truth_aerator Dear Robertk, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear Elaine > And nor did the puggalavadins say anywhere that there is a permenent > self. They were,however,ambivalent about what anatta meant. I cited > another pali scholar, Bhikkhu Bodhi who specifically rejects the idea that > theBuddha taught anatta as a strategy rather than a truth. If I had > rejected what he says would you also be so upset, and what is your > criteria for deciding to accept the strategy theory of anatta as against > the literal truth version? >>>> What the suttas teach is what is correct. What the commentaries teach is acceptable ONLY if it is inline with the suttas. In fact I think we should put commentaries aside: a) There was a case where SARIPUTTA gave a wrong subject of meditation for a student. The Student tried hard but failed. Buddha gave the opposite strategy and the student reached Arahatship. So even when it is said by Sariputta (a wisest disciple to ever live) we must check against the Buddha Suttas. Nothing to mention about later "thinkers". In Buddha's teaching, the truth isn't something to be found on the shelves. IT IS TO BE PRACTICED! > +++++++++++++++++++ > Do you agree with the statements below by Buddhghosa? Or is what he > says Not Buddhism? > > "Those same five aggregates are anatta because of the words 'what is painful is no self' Why? Because there is NO exercising power over > them. The mode of insusceptibilty to having power exercised over them is the characteristic of anatta" >>> This needs clarification. There IS an element of choice (volition) to take things personally or to let go. While strait control is not possible, indirectly it is. Please be careful not to fall into fatalism. > > "There is no doer of a deed, or one who reaps the result. Phenomena > alone flow on, no other view than this right." > Visuddhimagga XIX19 > > "This is mere mentality-materiality, there is no being, no person" > XVIII24 > > "The mental and material (nama rupa) are really here > But here is no human being to be found, for it is void and merely > fashioned like a doll" > XVII31 > Robert >>>>> Above 3 are blunt COMMENTARIAL quotes which are different from what is said in the suttas. I don't say that they are 100% wrong, all I am saying is that Buddha didn't put it that way. May everyone realized Anatta as an experience! Lots of Metta, Alex #78984 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 8:32 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy truth_aerator Dear Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Hi interested party > > "The evidence for this reading of the Canon centers around four > points: > 1 The one passage where the Buddha is asked point-blank to > take a position on the ontological question of whether or > not there is a self, he refuses to answer." (end quote) > > KO: I believe we should look at the context of this was asked. I > remember this was asked by an wanderer in which Buddha refused to > answer. Because at that time, if I recall, it was not beneficial to > answer as the wanderer is not ready and would be confused if Buddha > would to explain it. Sorry just can't recall which sutta. > > > Kind regards > Ken O Buddha could have then told Ananda (who being a Sotapanna would understand), "There is NO self" . But he didn't. #78985 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 8:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Fallacy of Ultimate Vs Conventional Vedantist add onto Buddhis... dcwijeratna Deat Howard, You have written: " but I've never ever heard of a theistic accusation hurled at either the Abhidhamma or the commentarial tradition. That is something new to me. I can't imagine how that position could be seriously defended. That "God" business really confuses and perplexes me, DC." I am sure you would never have heard of it. Theravada Abhidhamma is considered to the highest flower of Buddhist thought in Theravaada countries. It would be a sacrilege to utter a word against that. Here is my argument. It may be very simplistic. 1. I am a follower of the Buddha. 2. I believe in the Enlightenment of the Buddha. 3. There is only one truth. That is the Four Noble Truth or its corollaries. 4. All religions one way other assume a self and a sacred (God), but not the teaching of the Buddha. 5. There is no historical evidence that the abhidhamma pi.taka was expounded by the Buddha. 6. There is a myth associated with the origin of Abhidhamma. That is that it was preached by the Buddha in the world of the devas. In contrast, the Mahaayana texts had been taken from Naagaloka. 8. Usually I associate "Myths" with religions--worship, supplication etc. of 9. Therefore, Abhidhamma is theistic. 10. Isn't it curious that the Dhamma, which was preached by the Buddha was preserved in the form of real world dialogues while the abhidhamma texts had to be written later by 'scholars.' 11. I use the word 'theistic' on the basis of atta/anatta. Anatta Dhamma; atta thiesitic. 12. And since the origin of abhidhamma is a myth, it has to be theistic. 13. This may not sound very hi-fi 14. There is another important characteristic of a religion in Abhidhamma: It has been changing. I am not referring to. Really, that is another big issue. Would the truth change like that? But then you know it is the case with religions. D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #78986 From: Ken O Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 8:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) ashkenn2k Hi Dieter > > D: ' :-) ' ?? KO: it is just a smile, a language I learn from messaging > D: yes but there 2 kinds of (right) understanding, the mundane and > the supramundane one. ...the latter starting with the Streamenterer > > which you seemingly do not accept.. so I suggest you have a look > at Nyanatiloka's definition of magga, respectively read e.g. MN > 117 > KO: I was saying one have to start from mundane understanding first. there is supramundane, but it is only those have become streamenterer. Maybe I do not get what you mean, do you like to explain more - thanks Cheers Ken O #78987 From: Ken O Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 9:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy ashkenn2k Hi Alex We have to look at sutta in which context it was written. I was mentioning that this question was put by the wanderer to Buddha > Buddha could have then told Ananda (who being a Sotapanna would > understand), "There is NO self" . But he didn't. KO: Could you point to me which sutta you are refering to? I have to read it as I do not wish to speculate. Thanks Kind regards Ken O #78988 From: Dieter Möller Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 9:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) moellerdieter Hi Ken O, you wrote: ('D: ' :-) ' ??) KO: it is just a smile, a language I learn from messaging D: nothing at all against a smile ..but it should fit , shouldn't it? ;-) KO: I was saying one have to start from mundane understanding first.there is supramundane, but it is only those have become streamenterer. Maybe I do not get what you mean, do you like to explain more - D: let us have a closer look of our previous exchange: I wrote: D: yes but there 2 kinds of (right) understanding, the mundane and the supramundane one. ...the latter starting with the Streamenterer you replied by 'smiling objection ': KO: Stream enterer they also start from mundane :-) Now you write ' there is supramundane, but it is only those have become streamenterer, can you imagine my confusion ? ;-) with Metta Dieter . #78989 From: Elaine Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 9:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Fallacy of Ultimate Vs Conventional Vedantist add onto Buddhis... shennieca Hi Howard, all, When the Abhidhammikas say there is 'no-control', do you feel like there is a God-like essence in it? Like if you cannot control your own thoughts from arising, then it is something else / someone else that is controlling it, isn't it? How about conditions? How do they come about? They say it is Natural Law, do you sometimes feel that Natural Law is God? The more I read what the Abhidhammika says, the more I believe in God. I used to believe in myself- that if I do good, then I get good results, vice-versa. But ever since I got to know about no freewill, that I cannot control whether I do good or bad, I have started believing in God. I think, it is Ok to believe in God because we are very small human beings and the universe is so big. There must be some bigger force out there that is controlling us. These are my personal thoughts, I know it is not what the real Abhidhammika thinks. Sincerely, Elaine ----------------- #78990 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 9:58 am Subject: Re: The Fallacy of Ultimate Vs Conventional Vedantist add onto Buddhist teaching truth_aerator Dear Christine, --- dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" wrote: I have always understood that the Buddha clearly taught Relative and Absolute or Ultimate Truth. >>>> No, that is LATER Vedantist Hindu concept. There is NO sutta (as far as I am aware, and I've read most of them) that speaks about it. There are suttas that some scholars use to infer the 2 truths, but if we analyze them - it is clearly misinterpretation (slandering of the Buddha). The 2 truths doctrine is found in Hindu schools with "Brahman" (not the Brahma god) as ultimate reality and "Maya" as illusionary world where we live in. --- 1st Case: DN#9 "Citta, these are the world's designations, the world's expressions, the world's ways of speaking, the world's descriptions, with which the Tathagata expresses himself but without grasping to them." Ven. TB commentary: The Commentary takes this is as the Buddha's affirmation of the idea — which in later centuries became current in all schools of Buddhism — that he spoke truth on two levels: conventional and ultimate. In context, though, the Buddha seems to be referring merely to the fact that he has adopted the linguistic usages of his interlocutors simply for the sake of discussion, and that they should not be interpreted out of context. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.09.0.than.html#t-10 --- 2nd Case: Dn#15 This is the extent to which there are means of designation, expression, and delineation. This is the extent to which the sphere of discernment extends, the extent to which the cycle revolves for the manifesting (discernibility) of this world — i.e., name-and-form together with consciousness. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.15.0.than.html ------ 3rd case: In Samyutta Nikaya (Ven. BB tran) there is a sutta regarding 3(!) pathways of language that Buddha has told to be irrefutable even by heretics. #1) What has been cannot be said to exist now, and will be . #2) What is cannot be said "was" or "will be" #3) What "will be" cannot be said "was, or is" In other words there is difference of "Past, present, future". Can't remember which sutta number it is... If somebody finds it, please tell me. ----- In brief what I want to say is that Buddha taught NOT TO CLING to anything (including Dhamma & Nibbana MN#1, MN#22). He freely used ordinary words, the only thing is that he didn't speculate on them. He directly knew their uses and limitations. The worldly concepts can be used to guide to a non-conceptual state where one has DIRECT knowledge that goes beyond linguistics (and their limitations). Lots of Metta, Alex #78991 From: Elaine Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 10:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The not-self strategy (Ken 'thoughts) shennieca Dear RobK, If you want to believe in Buddhaghosa and the commentaries, it is up to you. Everything is conditioned and I am not yet conditioned for understanding the commentaries. Thank you for your input. Regards, Elaine --------------------------------------- #78992 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 10:54 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy truth_aerator Dear Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Hi Alex > > > We have to look at sutta in which context it was written. I was > mentioning that this question was put by the wanderer to Buddha > > > Buddha could have then told Ananda (who being a Sotapanna would > > understand), "There is NO self" . But he didn't. > > KO: Could you point to me which sutta you are refering to? I have > to read it as I do not wish to speculate. Thanks > > > > Kind regards > Ken O http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn44/sn44.010.than.html Oh by the way, in the sutta before this one Buddha mentioned Antara- Bhava (being passing from one birth to another). But lets not talk about Antara-Bhava for now. --- ""And at the moment when a being sets this body aside and is not yet reborn in another body, what do you designate as its sustenance then?" "Vaccha, when a being sets this body aside and is not yet reborn in another body, I designate it as craving-sustained, for craving is its sustenance at that time." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn44/sn44.009.than.html --- Buddha has said that he would be siding with ANIHHILATIONISTS if he were to declare "There is NO self". --- This samyutta is organized around questions that the Buddha left unanswered. Most of the discourses here focus on questions in a standard list of ten that were apparently the hot issues for philosophers in the Buddha's day: Is the cosmos eternal? Is it not eternal? Is it finite? Is it infinite? Is the body the same as the soul? Is the body one thing and the soul another? Does the Tathagata exist after death? Does he not exist after death? Both? Neither? MN 72 lists the reasons why the Buddha does not take a position on any of these questions. In each case he says that such a position "is a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. It is accompanied by suffering, distress, despair, & fever, and it does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation; to calm, direct knowledge, full awakening, Unbinding." These reasons fall into two categories. The first concerns the present drawbacks of taking such a position: It is accompanied by suffering, distress, despair, and fever. The second category concerns the effects of such a position over time: It does not lead to awakening or Unbinding. AN 10.93 further explores the first category of reasons. MN 63 further explores the second. Some of the discourses in this samyutta explore a third category of reasons for why the Buddha does not take a position on any of these questions: Such a position is based on attachment to and misunderstanding of the aggregates and sense media. When one sees these things for what they are, as they're actually present, the idea of forming them into any of these positions simply does not occur to one. Of the discourses here, SN 44.1 and SN 44.10 are special cases. SN 44.1 focuses specifically on the questions that try to describe the status of the Tathagata after death, and explains that, having been released from the classification of the aggregates, the Tathagata defies description, in the same way that the sands of the river Ganges cannot be numbered, and the waters of the oceans cannot be calculated in gallons. The Commentary to this passage tries to fathom the Tathagata's infathomability, but its attempt is controversial. See the note to that sutta. Even more controversial is SN 44.10, which addresses an issue not included in the standard list of ten undeclared questions: Is there a self? Is there no self? Many scholars have been uncomfortable with the fact that the Buddha leaves this question unanswered, believing that his statement that "all phenomena are not-self" implicitly states that there is no self. Thus they have tried to explain away the Buddha's silence on the existence or non-existence of the self, usually by pointing to the fourth of his reasons for not answering the question: his bewildered interlocutor, Vacchagotta, would have become even more bewildered. Had the Buddha been asked by someone less bewildered, these commentators say, he would have given the straight answer that there is no self. However, these commentators ignore two points. (1) The Buddha's first two reasons for not answering the questions have nothing to do with Vacchagotta. To say that there is a self, he says, would be siding with the wrong views of the eternalists. To say that there is no self would be siding with the wrong views of the annihilationists. (2) Immediately after Vacchagotta leaves, Ven. Ananda asks the Buddha to explain his silence. Had the Buddha really meant to declare that there is no self, this would have been the perfect time to do so, for bewildered people were now out of the way. But, again, he did not take that position. One peculiarity of this approach to the Buddha's silence on this issue is that many commentators, noting the Buddha's desire not to bewilder Vacchagotta, assume somehow that their readers and listeners at present would not be bewildered by a doctrine that there is no self, and feel free to jump into the breach, stating baldly what they believe the Buddha was simply too reticent to say. Another attempt to explain the Buddha's silence on this issue focuses on the second reason for his silence, saying that the annihilationists had laid claim to the slogan that there is no self, so — because the Buddha did not want his own doctrine of no self to be confused with theirs — he avoided their slogan. This explanation, however, is not supported by the Canon. The doctrines of the annihilationists are presented in a fair amount of detail in the Canon, and nowhere are they quoted as saying outright that there is no self. Thus there is no basis for saying that it was their slogan. Second, there are many instances where the Buddha, when asked a categorical question concerning an issue where he wanted to give a nuanced answer, showed himself perfectly capable of rephrasing the question in more nuanced terms before giving his reply. Had he held a nuanced doctrine that there is no self, he could have easily rephrased Vacchagotta's question before answering it. The fact that he chose not to do so, either in Vacchagotta's or Ven. Ananda's presence, indicates that he felt that this issue, too, was a thicket of views based on a misunderstanding, accompanied by suffering, and not leading to awakening. So how is the statement "all phenomena are not self" to be taken? As a path to awakening. According to Dhp 279, when one sees this fact with discernment to the point of becoming disenchanted with stress, it forms the path to purity. Here the term "phenomena" covers fabricated and unfabricated phenomena. The fabricated phenomena encountered along the path include the aggregates, elements, and sense media. The unfabricated phenomenon, encountered when these fabricated phenomena cease, is the deathless. AN 9.96, however, points out that it is possible, on encountering the deathless, to feel a dhamma-passion and dhamma-delight for it, thus preventing full awakening. At this point the realization that all phenomena are not- self would be needed to overcome this last obstacle to total release. And once there is release, one becomes, like the Tathagata, indescribable: "deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the ocean." At that point, the path is abandoned, like a raft after it has been used to cross a river, and positions that "there is a self" and "there is no self" would not apply. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn44/sn44.intro.than.html --- Lots of Metta, Alex #78993 From: Elaine Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 11:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy shennieca Dear KenH, If anyone does not understand Ajahn Thanissaro, then I think they don't understand Buddhism. First level of understanding Not-self means understanding Non-Attachment to the sense of Self. People talk about anatta like this and that, yet they are so attached to their sense of self ! Everytime someone say this is me, this is mine - it is already Not notself. Not-self starts with No Self-Identification. What is your interpretation of not-self, KenH? Does No-control means not-self, but everything else is me and mine? People have to LET GO of their sense of self before they can really understand not-self, and this is exactly what Ajahn is teaching. Ajahn says that the teaching on not-self is aimed at leading beyond death to Nibbana, it is a way of perceiving things with No Self-Identification, no sense that 'I am,' no attachment to 'I' or 'mine' involved. About Vacchagotta. You expect Ajahn to say " Yes, there is absolutely No-self" when the Buddha Himself did not reply to Vacchagotta that way? When asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer, at point-blank, is there a self or not - the Buddha kept quiet. After Vacchagotta left, Ven. Ananda asked the Buddha about Buddha's stance for not replying. In the answer Buddha gave to Ananda, Buddha did not tell Ananda, "Yes, there is absolutely No-self". Wouldn't that BE a really good time to tell Ananda and the world that there is Absolutely No-self whatsoever? What is the reason the Buddha did not tell Ananda that there is Not-self ? Was the Buddha afraid to confuse both Vacchagotta and Ananda? Ananda was already a Sotapanna then, if I'm not mistaken. KenH, do you expect the answers from the Buddha to Vacchagotta to be "Yes, there is No self !". Can you give your reasons why, the Buddha did not reply to Vacchagotta that way? Can you please share your opinion? Thank you. Sincerely, Elaine #78994 From: Elaine Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 11:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma reading materials - to Rob M shennieca Hi Rob M, Thank you for providing the weblink to Nina's books and DSG archived folders. I'll take some time to read them. Please tell us your experience in teaching Abhidhamma class in Brickfields. What are the most frequent questions your students ask? Like the FAQs. :-)) Take your time to reply. Thank you. Warmest regards, Elaine -------------------------- #78995 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 11:23 am Subject: heresy of instanteneous changing "mind moments" truth_aerator Stream of Changes. There is a heretical idea that every moment everything totally changes. While Buddha has talked regarding impermanence in observable, emperical AND THINGS THAT CONCERN US (lit. birth, lit. aging, lit. death) WAY, later scholars developed unverifiable (and debunked by Buddhist and non-Buddhists alike) notion of continuous flux of changes, where every mind moment is totally different. Not only is it impossible to observe (how many billions of consciousness per second?) it goes totally against emperical validity. 1st) A mind moment has to last more than 0 seconds. If it is 0 then it doesn't matter how many of them happen, none of them would last more than 0. 0+0 = 0. If they are >0, then they aren't indivisible basic blocks of reality and are conditioned just like anything else. And as such aren't worth the title of "Ultimate" categories. 2nd) If moment B is different from previous moment (A), then HOW DO WE KNOW THAT A IS CAUSE OF B? It is called "post hoc ergo propter hoc" logical fallacy. Instanteneous change has its paradoxes. If everything changes, then why does the chair appear the same? I can sit on it now and hour later (unless it breaks down). What keeps the continuity? Lets say we see an apple that suddenly changed into a Banana. Did an apple change into Banana? No. We haven't seen apple changing. In order for an apple to change into banana we need to have a series of long and GRADUAL changes with SOMETHING remaining the same (for a certain period of time of course) in order to say that "apple is changing into banana". Ex: 1st moment 100% Apple, 0% Banana. 2nd moment 99% Apple, 1% Banana .... pre last moment: 1% Apple, 99% Banana final moment: 0% Apple, 100% Banana. In place of Apple or Banana you can substitute anything else. Also all of this needs to happen in a certain spatio-temporal way. If one thing disappears from here, and appears somewhere else - How can we know that the two events are related? Another example: Green Leaf is turning into yellow leaf. The form remains pretty constant (for a period of time before it shivers) but the colour changes. The constant is the shape and perhaps the place of the leaf: the changing is its colour. In other words: there must be a general outline remaining the same (for a certain time), while the contents of it change. --- "And which is the carrier of the burden? 'The person,' it should be said. This venerable one with such a name, such a clan-name. This is called the carrier of the burden.A burden indeed are the five aggregates, and the carrier of the burden is the person. Taking up the burden in the world is stressful. Casting off the burden is bliss. Having cast off the heavy burden and not taking on another, pulling up craving, along with its root, one is free from hunger, totally unbound. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.022.than.html --- Buddha has called it a Person (Pudgala?). What you do matters! It won't be totally different person who reaps what has been sown. Lots of Metta, Alex #78996 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 6:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Fallacy of Ultimate Vs Conventional Vedantist add onto Buddhis... upasaka_howard Hi, DC - In a message dated 11/20/2007 11:53:08 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, dcwijeratna@... writes: Deat Howard, You have written: " but I've never ever heard of a theistic accusation hurled at either the Abhidhamma or the commentarial tradition. That is something new to me. I can't imagine how that position could be seriously defended. That "God" business really confuses and perplexes me, DC." I am sure you would never have heard of it. Theravada Abhidhamma is considered to the highest flower of Buddhist thought in Theravaada countries. It would be a sacrilege to utter a word against that. Here is my argument. It may be very simplistic. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: There is a flaw in it, IMO, which I will point out. ------------------------------------------------------ 1. I am a follower of the Buddha. 2. I believe in the Enlightenment of the Buddha. 3. There is only one truth. That is the Four Noble Truth or its corollaries. 4. All religions one way other assume a self and a sacred (God), but not the teaching of the Buddha. 5. There is no historical evidence that the abhidhamma pi.taka was expounded by the Buddha. 6. There is a myth associated with the origin of Abhidhamma. That is that it was preached by the Buddha in the world of the devas. In contrast, the Mahaayana texts had been taken from Naagaloka. 8. Usually I associate "Myths" with religions--worship, supplication etc. of 9. Therefore, Abhidhamma is theistic. ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: # 9 doesn't follow from the foregoing. That *you* associate myth with theistic religions says something about you, but nothing about myth or Abhidhamma. There are all sorts of myth, and not all pertain to deities. Nowhere in the Abhidhamma pitaka is there even a hint of theism. Moreover, if some sorts of myth occur in religions that are theistic, and if some sorts of myth (actually different sorts, though even that is unimportant) are associated with Abhidhamma, it does not follow in the slightest that Abhidhamma is theistic. The logic is invalid. The form of the argument would be as follows: [(ForAll r) (T(r) --> M(r)] ---> [(ForAll r) ---> (M(r) --> T(r))] i.e., If every theistic religion (e.g. Brahmanism) involves a myth, then any religion involving a myth (e.g. Abhidhamma) is theistic. Moreover, Abhidhamma itself involves no myth. There are myths associated with it, but none that are a part of it. ------------------------------------------------------ 10. Isn't it curious that the Dhamma, which was preached by the Buddha was preserved in the form of real world dialogues while the abhidhamma texts had to be written later by 'scholars.' 11. I use the word 'theistic' on the basis of atta/anatta. Anatta Dhamma; atta thiesitic. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: What does that have to do with a god? -------------------------------------------------- 12. And since the origin of abhidhamma is a myth, it has to be theistic. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: As I pointed out, that is an invalid conclusion. Moreover, that some people have associated a myth of origin with Abhidhamma says something about those people, not about Abhidhamma. -------------------------------------------------- 13. This may not sound very hi-fi 14. There is another important characteristic of a religion in Abhidhamma: It has been changing. I am not referring to. Really, that is another big issue. Would the truth change like that? But then you know it is the case with religions. D. G. D. C. Wijeratna =============================== With metta, Howard #78998 From: Elaine Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] heresy of instanteneous changing "mind moments" shennieca Hi Alex, Not only the apple and bananas changes. Our mind is one moment kusala and the next moment akusala and then it becomes kusala again - and the worst thing is, ALL of these are uncontrollable and this uncontrollability is called anatta. Is it really true? Life's like that? C'est la vie. Warmest regards, Elaine P/S: Resend, due to the last e-m has an attachment of Alex's e-m. #78999 From: "colette" Date: Tue Nov 20, 2007 8:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The not-self strategy (Ken 'thoughts) ksheri3 Good Morning Robert, As I scanned the Msg. Board I ran into Alex's reply to this post, which is why I had to look for it and reply directly to you: > And nor did the puggalavadins say anywhere that there is a permenent > self. They were,however,ambivalent about what anatta meant. I cited > another pali scholar, Bhikkhu Bodhi who specifically rejects the idea that > theBuddha taught anatta as a strategy rather than a truth. If I had > rejected what he says would you also be so upset, and what is your > criteria for deciding to accept the strategy theory of anatta as against > the literal truth version? > colette: The Buddha is well known to have taught that "the dharma is empty" which implies that there is no svabhava in the dharma, to the dharma, it is meaningless OTHER THAN THE FACT that it substantiates the doctrine of DEPENDENT ORIGINIATION. You or I or any other student of the Mysteries could not possibly REALIZE the fullness and richness of the Dharma without these Suttas and Sutras and ... since no matter how much is written it will never be enough to encompass it's entirety. I recall the Buddha specifically saying that the dharma will pass away like the ship used to cross a river. Once you get to the other side it's pretty hard to justify carrying that ship further since it has served it's purpose, no? This said, THEN, I suggest that whatever Alex or Ken H. or Howard or even Nina and Connie and... whatever they say it will all turn into nothing, in the long run, of course. You either get it or you don't. You can try to get it. You can try to place into position the building blocks to achieve the understanding but in the long run it will turn out to be nothing more than spinning the wheel of life and hoping that Vanna can turn one of the letters around (buying a vowel is a different story, lol). You either get it or you don't get it. Millions of Tibetans spend their lives just to attend one of the Dhalia Lama's Kalachacra ceremonies since they know that their chances for re-birth are much better and more enhanced by attending the ceremony, SO THEY ALL TRY TO ATTEND AT LEAST ONE OF THE CEREMONIES. They get it. They understand and don't worry about it. This is loss of stress, the peace, tranquility, in knowing that they are following the doctrines accordingly. thanx for letting me rant on ya. Maybe it worked maybe it didn't. Alex will probably have something to say anyway. In my past experiences with people named Alex in discussing buddhist doctrine I've found that the Alex model is very hostile to my position and doesn't accept much of my words, thoughts, studies, etc. so I'm seeing how this Alex looks in that light, no? toodles, colette