#79400 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 6:38 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas are uncontrollable ... Partial Controllability ... rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > > Hi > Please. What sort of Wisdom Accumulation did Angulimala had? How much > demerit did he earn before seeing Buddha? Would someone who murdered > 999 people be endowed with wisdom far above us, who haven't murdered > even 1 person? > > +++++ Dear Alex Angulimala was one of the eighty eminent arahat disciples of the Buddha, with full matsery of jhana and superpowers. I think it is safe to say there is no one today who has accumlations of wisdom that equal his. Robert #79401 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:44 pm Subject: Re: Controlling Others Re: [dsg] Re: The Not-self strategy ... Freedom of Will upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 11/26/2007 7:11:29 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, tepsastri@... writes: Hi Howard, - It is always fun to have a conversation with you. > >T: But , Howard, don't you remember that there is no Scott? How could there be a control without a Self? It was only an uncontrollable akusala citta (belonging to nobody) that conditioned the unkind speech. > Howard: > Tep, in reality, what is there besides conditions, empty though they are? If you presume something else, can you say what it might be? What did the Buddha say was "the all"? > -------------------------------------------------- T: You answered questions with more questions !! That was tricky (like a smoke screen) and wouldn't take us anywhere. Howard. If we were in a court of law, the judge would have said : "Howard, just answer Tep's questions" ! ................................... -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I'm surprised you didn't understand me. But of course you did understand, as my meaning was clear, and nothing tricky was intended, and you're smart. I'll rephrase my answer: In reality there is nothing besides conditions, empty though they may be. I know of nothing else, and I don't believe you do either. And the Buddha said that "the all" is nothing but the phenomena that make up the five khandhas. How's that? No question format at all! ;-) ------------------------------------------------------- > >T: Sad, isn't it? > ----------------------------------------------- > Howard: > It is a mistake to use anatta as an excuse for wrong action. (I call > that "Buddhist antinomianism.) But it is no mistake, IMO, to adhere to the anatta teaching that so clearly distinguishes the Buddha's Dhamma from all other teachings. > ----------------------------------------------- T: Perhaps you meant antinominalism? --------------------------------------------------- Howard: No, that's not what I meant. I meant a Buddhist form of antinomianism. Any antinomianism is a rejecting of normal morality on the basis of religious dogma. At the Buddha's time, for example, there was a sect that believed that a human was nothing more than atoms separated by space, and concluded that there was thus nothing wrong with putting a sword through such an aggregate. As a Christian heresy, the form it took was that faith was sufficient for salvation, and thus standard morality was of no importance. A Buddhist antinomianism would be a belief that inasmuch as there is in reality no self and no person, but only impersonal dhammas arising from impersonal conditions, there is no basis for morality, for there is no one to be hurt. ----------------------------------------------------- Adherence or attachment to anything (even the Teachings) does not lead to freedom from dukkha, Howard. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Uh, yes. Did I suggest differently? --------------------------------------------------- "Understanding the Dhamma as taught compared to a raft, you should let go even of Dhammas, to say nothing of non-Dhammas." ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Sounds good to me. --------------------------------------------------- Tep ========================= With metta, Howard #79402 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question to Abhidhammikas re:Control upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 11/26/2007 7:48:01 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, tepsastri@... writes: Hi again Howard, - So, let the band play on. > > >T: I agree that deliberation, desire and so on condition/constitute > >choosing. But choosing is neither 100% impersonal nor 100% > >uncontrollable in a non-ariyan where lots of choosing occur!! > Howard: > Even in a non-ariyan, choosing is 100% impersonal in that there is > no self that chooses. What is true, however, is that the choosing > *seems* personal. > T: If a thought is not personal, then why are you the only person who knows the thought that's going on in your mind? And why only I know the thought I have, but not what is in your mind right now? Every morning you have a choice to eat a soup, or something else. That choice is yours, it does not *seem* to be yours. ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Tep, there was a time, one time, that sights, sounds, thoughts, emotions, and so on went on as usual, but there was no "me" observing them or engaged in them. "Howard" was missing entirely. The sights, sounds, thoughts, emotions, and so on were all quite impersonal then, because there was no person! I don't believe that a person has now appeared just because ignorance has re-arisen. And given that there is no person as a reality, nothing can be personal in reality. ------------------------------------------------------ > T: A wholesome mind in a worldling is not pure because of tanha and > avijja that associate with self views(attanuditthi and mana). > So the 'Self' is always there, knowingly or not. > > Howard: > A *sense* of self is there, and a *belief* in self, albeit possibly > weak, is there, but no actual self is there. T: Okay. If you insist on nit-picking. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Hah! And here I thought that I was making an important point. Oh, well, one never knows! LOLOL! ------------------------------------------------------- > -------------------------------------------------------- > T: > Ariyan Howard, Sir, pure dhamma in the ultimate sense, such as anatta, is supramundane, What you wrote is true in the ultimate sense and that is very compatible with an ariyan. > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Huh? (Oh! LOLOL!) > ----------------------------------------------------- T: No ariyan laughs out so loud ! ;-)) --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yet one more thing I disbelieve! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------------- Tep ============================ With metta, Howard #79403 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 2:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Khandhas are uncontrollable ... Partial Controllability ... upasaka_howard Hi, Phil (and Tep) - In a message dated 11/26/2007 8:19:22 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, philco777@... writes: Hi Tep Tep, you have really got to calm down on the dualities, dude. I read no further than the following before I abandoned it as the words of a fellow who is fuelled with his own fervours. > Ah, here comes another DSG Abhidhammika fully charged with energy > to preach. He is ready with programmed instructions on controllability > vs. uncontrollability, self vs no self, paramattha dhammas vs concepts, > accumulations and paramis vs practicing the Dhamma here & now for > a realization of the Four Noble Truths. This is not a skillful way to broach a dicussion, amigo. Metta, Phil ================================ I've gotta agree, Phil. (Sorry, Tep.) I only refrained from commenting before on this myself, because I was getting tired of being a self-appointed, right-speech monitor. I do wish, though, that all of us on DSG would refrain from personal "attack". (And consider the irony of Buddhists getting "personal"! LOL!) With metta, Howard #79404 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:11 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) buddhatrue Hi Dieter and Ken H., --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Do I remember correctly that a DSG > member wrote a complaint to the owner of accesstoinsight ..? > ----------------------------------- > > Yes, but it wasn't about this kind of thing. James had a discussion > with them on another matter. > I have some time today, as classes are cancelled for a big test, so I thought I would post. I wouldn't really say that I "complained" to Mr. Bullitt, editor of Access to Insight, I just pointed out to him what I saw as an obvious misrepresentation of a sutta. This is part of what I wrote to Mr. Bullitt: What disturbs me the most about Thanissaro's article is where he writes, "In fact, the one place where the Buddha was asked point- blank whether or not there was a self, he refused to answer. When later asked why, he said that to hold either that there is a self or that there is no self is to fall into extreme forms of wrong view that make the path of Buddhist practice impossible. Thus the question should be put aside." The sutta that Thanissaro is referring to is the Ananda Sutta and that isn't at all what the sutta states- and Thanissaro should know since he translated it! In that sutta, the Buddha refused to answer the question because he knew that either answer would be misunderstood. To answer yes or no to the person asking, a wandering ascetic, would have resulted in confusion because the questioner wasn't fluent in the Dhamma, he was of a different faith. The Buddha doesn't say that the question should be put aside because it "falls into extreme forms of wrong view that make the path of Buddhist practice impossible." The sutta in question doesn't state anything of the sort: Mr. Bullitt must have sent my e-mail to Thanissaro because the article in question "The Not-Self Strategy" was revised August 14, 2007 and it no longer contains the statement I found objectionable. Actually, the article has been rewritten to argue the specific point I made in my e-mail to Mr. Bullitt, that the Buddha refused to answer the question because the questioner was from a different faith. Thanissaro now writes in the new, revised article: "The first passage is one of the most controversial in the Canon. Those who hold that the Buddha took a position one way or the other on the question of whether or not there is a self have to explain the Buddha's silence away, and usually do so by focusing on the his final statement to Ananda. If someone else more spiritually mature than Vacchagotta had asked the question, they say, the Buddha would have revealed his true position. This interpretation, though, ignores the Buddha's first two sentences to Ananda: No matter who asks the question, to say that there is or is not a self would be to fall into one of the two philosophical positions which the Buddha avoided throughout his career. As for his third sentence, he was concerned not to contradict "the arising of knowledge that all phenomena are not-self" not because he felt that this knowledge alone was metaphysically correct, but because he saw that its arising could be liberating. (We will deal further with the content of this knowledge below in Point 2.)… Thus it would seem most honest to take the first dialogue at face value, and to say that the question of whether or not there is a self is one on which the Buddha did not take a position, regardless of whether he was talking to a spiritually confused person like Vacchagotta, or a more advanced person like Ananda. For him, the doctrine of not-self is a technique or strategy for liberation, and not a metaphysical or ontological position." These sentences were not in the original article; and what I quoted from the original article is now missing. I am glad that Thanissaro changed his original article because it did blatantly misrepresent what the sutta in question states. Personally, however, I still don't agree with Thanisarro's conclusions. Thanissaro writes, "This interpretation, though, ignores the Buddha's first two sentences to Ananda: No matter who asks the question, to say that there is or is not a self would be to fall into one of the two philosophical positions which the Buddha avoided throughout his career." The Buddha doesn't say anything in this sutta about `No matter who asks the question'!! It matters a great deal who asks the question! The Buddha was mainly concerned about his teaching being misinterpreted by members of other sects so he refused to answer the question. Metta, James #79405 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:24 pm Subject: Re: Question to Abhidhammikas re:Control kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > > To ScottD, RobertK, Ken, and other Abhidhamikas > Hi Alex, I might not be the Ken you were thinking of, but I'll have a go at these questions anyway. Before I start there is a bit of background information that we all should agree on: There are dhammas arising now, and they comprise our entire universe. Do we have right understanding of any of those dhammas? If the answer is no, that will be because we have not properly heard, considered and implemented the Buddha's teaching. If the answer is yes, that will be because we have properly heard, considered and implemented the Buddha's teaching. The Buddha's teaching is a description of the various conditioned namas and rupas that can potentially arise. If we have heard and studied those descriptions we might understand (at least in theory) the namas and rupas that are arising now. Virati is one of the dhammas described by the Buddha. It is a cetasika, which is a nama. When it arises it abstains from wrong speech, wrong action and/or wrong livelihood. Then it falls away again, having lasted only an indescribably brief period of time. ------------------- A: > Is there a choice between commiting rape vs abstaining? yes or no? Is there a choice between commiting 1st degree murder vs abstaining? yes or no? Is there a choice between commiting burglary vs abstaining? yes or no? Is there a choice between commiting taking intoxicants vs abstaining? yes or no? -------------------- When the required conditions for any of those misdeeds are present virati cetasika can arise and prevent their happening. If virati does not arise at that moment, then the misdeed will happen. The arising/non-arising of virati at that crucial moment will itself depend on conditions. That's my elementary understanding of the Dhamma. Corrections welcome. Ken H #79406 From: "mattroke" Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:38 pm Subject: Khandhas are uncontrollable ... Partial Controllability ... mattroke Dear Tep, TEP: Ah, here comes another DSG Abhidhammika fully charged with energy to preach. He is ready with programmed instructions on controllability vs. uncontrollability, self vs no self, paramattha dhammas vs concepts, accumulations and paramis vs practicing the Dhamma here & now for a realization of the Four Noble Truths. MATT: I don't think that I am a so called DSG Abhidhammika. If you had seen my recent post to Phil you would understand that I only look for what I can prove to be real. Do I preach? No, I rarely write on the list, although I have been a member since DSG first went on line many years ago. I am simply putting forward a point of view and if people do not agree with it that's fine by me. However Tep, you are a preacher. You are charged with energy to write often on DSG, opposing other peoples' views and preaching what you think is the right understanding, and with some degree of aversion it would seem. Sometimes we don't see in ourselves what we criticize in others. Matt #79407 From: "mattroke" Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:39 pm Subject: Khandhas are uncontrollable ... Partial Controllability ... mattroke Dear Alex, ALEX: Please. What sort of Wisdom Accumulation did Angulimala had? How much demerit did he earn before seeing Buddha? Would someone who murdered 999 people be endowed with wisdom far above us, who haven't murdered even 1 person? MATT: You are obviously judging the man on that one life and yourself on this life. Do you know how many people you have killed in your countless lives? Angulimala's wisdom accumulations came from his countless previous lives. The fact that there were conditions for him to kill many people prior to meeting the Buddha, does not negate his accumulated wisdom. If he became enlightened and we are not, then his wisdom accumulations were far superior to what ours are now. Matt #79408 From: "mattroke" Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:53 pm Subject: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) mattroke Dear Phil, PHIL: What do you mean by "intellectually experience?" Interesting expression. Could be an oxymoron, but maybe not. MATT: Both "conceptually" and "intellectually" are just thinking. However, the latter may indicate that there has been some rational thinking involved. If there is no insight into the true nature of realities then there are only concepts, so we can't say that we experience that which is real. We can only understand it conceptually or intellectually. Even a person who may have had experiences of a moment with weak panna would still be conceptualizing. Even though they may have a better understanding that there are only dhammas and not just a continuous flow of concepts that creates the delusion that there is a self and the world. Matt #79409 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Khandhas are uncontrollable ... Partial Controllability ... lbidd2 Hi Tep, Tep: "1. Shouldn't it rather be : "The Buddha's argument is that if there is no COMPLETE control over a dhamma the dhamma cannot be self." ? Larry: So if there is partial control over a dhamma the dhamma is self? 2. Shouldn't it rather be : "Therefore the wrong view is that there _is_ control over a dhamma when that dhamma is taken to be NOT self." ? Larry: Wrong view doesn't consider not self. The Buddha's argument is that if you think rupa, for example, is self then you must be able to control that rupa. Self and control are linked. How so? By the nature of control. What I control is mine. What is mine is who I am. The purpose of control is happiness. So the insight is to find something you think is self (body, feeling, thoughts etc.) and see if you control it. Dukkha is a clue. Just as wholesome acts of body speech and mind are still dukkha, so self control in various endeavors is ultimately uncontrolled. It is not that one should relinquish self control or not make disciplined efforts with noble intentions, but rather that one might see that control is uncontrolled. One might also see that one's best efforts at self control are encapsulated in pride and self view. And one might see that that pride and self view is without support. It's not a pretty picture, but it's fresh ;-) Larry #79410 From: mlnease Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Khandhas are uncontrollable ... Partial Controllability ... m_nease Matt, mattroke wrote: > Angulimala's wisdom accumulations came from his countless previous > lives. The fact that there were conditions for him to kill many > people prior to meeting the Buddha, does not negate his accumulated > wisdom. > > If he became enlightened and we are not, then his wisdom > accumulations were far superior to what ours are now. Thank you, thank you, thank you. mike #79411 From: mlnease Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Khandhas are uncontrollable ... Partial Controllability ... m_nease Hi Matt, Hear, hear again. Thank you so much. mike mattroke wrote: > However Tep, you are a preacher. You are charged with energy to write > often on DSG, opposing other peoples' views and preaching what you > think is the right understanding, and with some degree of aversion it > would seem. > > Sometimes we don't see in ourselves what we criticize in others. #79412 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 8:07 pm Subject: Controlling Others Re: [dsg] Re: The Not-self strategy ... Freedom of Will scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Thanks for your excellent reply regarding: [Dear Elaine, Regarding: "Dear Alex, You are a true Dhamma friend (kalyanamitta). Thank you!! (((HUGS))) :-))May we get a glimpse of Nibbana in this very life." Scott: Have you ever had the experience of being shushed in a library? I think that Alex is simply the current leader of the necessary crew of respondents who subtly and not so subtly have to oppose and run counter to the stated goals of the list. No need to get all caught up in it, in my curmudgeonly opinion. Its good for the discussion (you know, different views to consider and all) but I hope that the emotional excess isn't contagious. I find it detracts from a calm consideration of Dhamma Sincerely, Scott.] Scott: Yours, good Howard, is the only reply in this current tempest I intend to respond to. Why? One, my comments don't apply to you. You were here when I arrived and are a fixture here. We don't agree on things and yet remain co-discussants. A Howardless DSG would be weird. And two, who can speak to the wind? H: "Scott, are you part of the library management? And is it your opinion that Alex doesn't have a valid library card? As for Elaine's exuberance, is your specific position at the library that of Emotion Policeman or Enthusiastic-Speech Security Guard?" Scott: Just an opinion, Howard. Of course I'm not part of 'library management'. I'm just exercising the free discussion option. No one has to give one hoot about it. Personally though, I happened to hit a nerve, if you'll note by the reaction. I think Dhamma discussion is the highest form of discourse. If the True Librarians sanction me, because I'm a guest and have the highest regard for the integrity of this list, I'd take whatever lumps happily, even to the point of expulsion. It is my opinion that Alex represents one of a series of discussants who lead the DSG opposition. In this sense this isn't about Alex, its about anti-group leaders and its about communication style. This is the way it is in any active group of anyone with anything as an organising aim. I merely state the obvious. I have no interest in controlling anything. I do have an interest seeing a reduction the superfluous cheerleading that clutters up other lists, and don't appreciate respondents who come only to disagree and preach. I do have the opinion that this seriously reduces the quality of discussion - and the quality of discussion here is quite high. I can choose to leave but the potential for the highest quality of Dhamma discussion available is still too great to have to do that. So, these are my opinions, and I know they remain just that. H: "I can hardly imagine a post more chilling of free discussion than this post of yours, Scott. Your question to Elaine "Have you ever had the experience of being shushed in a library?" is something I find shocking." Scott: As you can see, my opinion has in no way impeded 'free discussion'. I don't find the majority of replies and reactions to be worth the time of day, yours aside. Judge for yourself. These reactions are, again in my opinion, just petulant demands to prove something. That isn't Dhamma discussion. That's just plain old undesirable behaviour in any group. Don't you find the blatant cheerleading to be clamourous? Don't you find the blatant argumentativeness to detract from a peaceful discussion? I do. But again its just an opinion. H: "It seems to me that you and a few others here who consider yourselves the 'chosen cadre' view others here as interlopers who you wish would just leave, or at least would, as was expected of children in bygone days and is still expected in some dysfunctional families of today, be seen but not heard. As I see it, that is not at all the perspective of the list owners nor of that kindly servant of the Dhamma, Nina." Scott: I see your point. I consider myself unambiguously adherent to the 'DSG orthodoxy'. No apologies. I'm here to learn as deeply from that 'tradition' as I can. No doubt about it. Other opinions are fine. I see Alex, and this is not about Alex, to be like the next gunfighter coming to take a crack at the resident sheriff. DSG aside, it is Dhamma that we come to discuss. H: "It is a saving grace on your part, however, that you recognize your being curmudgeonly at the moment. :-)Let me be clear, Scott: I am not angry at you, my friend. In fact I am fond of you, and I respect your keen intelligence and amazingly fast grasp of the Dhamma - really astounding. But I see you as attempting something that you don't even believe in - control. If one is to attempt to exert control, wouldn't it be best to restrict the attempt at control to oneself rather than to try to control others?" Scott: Well said, Howard. I appreciate your clear, well-reasoned, and direct reply. As I said, my comments were not directed at you. I don't think that a comment on communication style is the same as a fascistic crack-down on free speech. There are other fora where the level of discourse is evangelical, rhetorical, histrionic, and self-congratulatory. I eschew and shun these lists like I eschew and shun religion. The fact that I wish this was taken elsewhere will only remain my wish. DSG has been, until recently, thankfully free of these incumbrances. I hope I have satisfied your kind and honest approach to me, my friend. Sincerely, Scott. #79413 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 8:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Khandhas are uncontrollable ... Partial Controllability ... lbidd2 Hi Matt, Matt: "Excuse me for butting in. I agree that there is no control over dhammas, however, I do not think that people take dhammas for self. People have concepts about dhammas, but they do not experience dhammas. If there were any insight into dhammas then there would be a clearer understanding that there are only dhammas, there would be greater appreciation of the fleeting nature of dhammas and there would be no taking of dhammas to be self. It is because there is no insight into dhammas that people take concepts to be real. And it is concepts that give the delusion that there is "me" and "mine" and that there can be control over dhammas" Larry: Since no one knows what a concept is let's just say concepts are words. If we do that we can forget about concepts. When you say people have concepts about dhammas we could change that to people have perceptions views and consciousnesses of dhammas. The difference between getting it right and getting it wrong depends a lot on how wrapped up in desire we are. That desire is desire for real stuff. No one wants to eat a bunch of words. Larry #79414 From: "Robert" Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 8:44 pm Subject: Controlling Others Re: [dsg] Re: The Not-self strategy ... Freedom of Will avalo1968 Hello Kel, Howard, Scott, and anyone else who is interested, I am sorry if I am asking someone to repeat themselves, but I would be interested in reading a description of the basic tenent of the group, if anyone would care to offer one. Most of the description on the main page would apply to any Theravada group, except for the reference to Khun Sujin. Is this a group to discuss the teachings of Khun Sujin or is there interest in discussions of Theravada Buddhism beyond her teachings? Clarifying this point may make things smoother. With metta, Robert A. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kelvin_lwin" wrote: > > > I actually couldn't agree more with Scott. If people understands > the basic tenent of the group then we can cut through a lot of > discussion. > > - Kel > #79416 From: "colette" Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 5:23 pm Subject: Re: Perfections Corner (15) ksheri3 Tep, in the few seconds I have on the computer let me say: There you go, you are doing the exact thing that everybody has been discussing, rationalizing and debating: Anatta being Not-Self. >BTW with my neck soooooo stretched out and soooo thin like that, cnaces are I might NOT LAST that long. colette: I don't mind jokes and joking around, humor can be and is one of the best medicines in sticky situations however this is really not a joking matter since you've blatantly told everybody that YOU CLING TO A SELF, SOME KIND OF A SELF, AND WE CAN'T BE SURE THAT IT IS A SELF THAT RELATES AT ALL TO WHO YOU ARE. toddles, coletter #79417 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 5:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy dcwijeratna Hi, Collette Thank you for e-m addressed to Charles and me. I will make my post brief as possible. You mentioned: The concept of no-self is strictly, IMO, applied to remove a person's tendencies toward "CLINGING" and "CRAVING" and "DESIRE" and, ... the fundamental principle's that Buddhism is built upon and built through. It seems like an "objective" strategy, a "goal oriented" strategy. A strategy can be a "standard operating procedure" or a process of achieving a goal, et al." I refer to "The concept of no-self is strictly,". In the Teaching of the Buddha 'no-self' is not a concept. It is a statement of a fundamental fact. "All dhammas are no-self (anatta)." Concept according to the New Oxford Dictionary is: an abstract idea; a general notion. Any attempt to characterize 'anatta' as a strategy is not to understand that fundamental postulate of the teaching of the Buddha. Three fundamental characteristics of the world (loka, sabba) according to Buddhism are: anicca, dukkha, and anatta (I leave the Pali words as they are). They are characteristics as observed; not mere concepts. According to the Teaching of the Buddha, the truth or validity of 'concepts' cannot be established by discussion. Many thanks again. [D. G. D. C. Wijeratna] #79418 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 9:03 pm Subject: Reminder Time: Trimming & Salutations dsgmods Dear Friends, Just a couple of reminders. Trimming When replying to another member’s post, please remember to delete any part of the other post that is not necessary for your reply. If it was a recent messeage, you can assume it has been read. Salutations Please make it clear whom your post is addressed to (even if it's 'All'), and sign off at the end of every post with your name. Please also review the rest of the guidelines from time to time. They can be found here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ Thanks for your co-operation. Jon and Sarah PS As usual, any comments on this - off-list only. Thanks. #79419 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 4:20 pm Subject: Re: Controlling Others Re: [dsg] Re: The Not-self strategy ... Freedom of Will upasaka_howard Dear Scott - What a kind reply. I thank you for it. We still disagree on this matter, however. ;-) In a message dated 11/26/2007 11:08:10 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Thanks for your excellent reply regarding: [Dear Elaine, Regarding: "Dear Alex, You are a true Dhamma friend (kalyanamitta). Thank you!! (((HUGS))) :-))May we get a glimpse of Nibbana in this very life." Scott: Have you ever had the experience of being shushed in a library? I think that Alex is simply the current leader of the necessary crew of respondents who subtly and not so subtly have to oppose and run counter to the stated goals of the list. No need to get all caught up in it, in my curmudgeonly opinion. Its good for the discussion (you know, different views to consider and all) but I hope that the emotional excess isn't contagious. I find it detracts from a calm consideration of Dhamma Sincerely, Scott.] Scott: Yours, good Howard, is the only reply in this current tempest I intend to respond to. Why? One, my comments don't apply to you. You were here when I arrived and are a fixture here. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: LOL! Stuffed and mummified? ;-)) ----------------------------------------------------- We don't agree on things and yet remain co-discussants. A Howardless DSG would be weird. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: That may be a minority opinion, Scott, but, of course, sweet to hear. Thank you. :-) ---------------------------------------------- And two, who can speak to the wind? H: "Scott, are you part of the library management? And is it your opinion that Alex doesn't have a valid library card? As for Elaine's exuberance, is your specific position at the library that of Emotion Policeman or Enthusiastic-Speech Security Guard?" Scott: Just an opinion, Howard. Of course I'm not part of 'library management'. I'm just exercising the free discussion option. No one has to give one hoot about it. Personally though, I happened to hit a nerve, if you'll note by the reaction. I think Dhamma discussion is the highest form of discourse. If the True Librarians sanction me, because I'm a guest and have the highest regard for the integrity of this list, I'd take whatever lumps happily, even to the point of expulsion. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Nothing you said would come remotely close to meriting expulsion, IMO. I strongly take exception to what you wrote to Elaine, though, as you already well know. -------------------------------------------------------- It is my opinion that Alex represents one of a series of discussants who lead the DSG opposition. In this sense this isn't about Alex, its about anti-group leaders and its about communication style. This is the way it is in any active group of anyone with anything as an organising aim. I merely state the obvious --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I see Alex as merely presenting his understanding of the Dhamma, much as we all do. I certainly think that portraying him as some sort of insurgent is wildly off the mark. He simply has positions that differ in various respects from Khun Sujin's. So do a number of folks here, including me. There is no belief litmus test for DSG membership, the only presumed requirements being a genuine interest in Theravada Buddhism and a commitment to serious and respectful discussion of the Dhamma. ----------------------------------------------------- . I have no interest in controlling anything. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Good. :-) ------------------------------------------------- I do have an interest seeing a reduction the superfluous cheerleading that clutters up other lists, and don't appreciate respondents who come only to disagree and preach. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Saying that you don't enjoy "sadhu x 3" posts is different from calling for silence on the part of others. If there were abusive or foul language, it would be justified to request its cessation and for the list owners to insist on its cessation, but "having an interest" in the reduction of voiced approvals and of disagreeing with positions one favors doesn't justify calling for silence on the part of those whose writings are found not to one's liking. To call for silence in such cases goes way too far, as I see it. -------------------------------------------------------- I do have the opinion that this seriously reduces the quality of discussion - and the quality of discussion here is quite high. I can choose to leave but the potential for the highest quality of Dhamma discussion available is still too great to have to do that. So, these are my opinions, and I know they remain just that. H: "I can hardly imagine a post more chilling of free discussion than this post of yours, Scott. Your question to Elaine "Have you ever had the experience of being shushed in a library?" is something I find shocking." Scott: As you can see, my opinion has in no way impeded 'free discussion'. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Calling for silence certainly chills free speech. ----------------------------------------------- I don't find the majority of replies and reactions to be worth the time of day, yours aside. Judge for yourself. These reactions are, again in my opinion, just petulant demands to prove something. That isn't Dhamma discussion. That's just plain old undesirable behaviour in any group. Don't you find the blatant cheerleading to be clamourous? Don't you find the blatant argumentativeness to detract from a peaceful discussion? I do. But again its just an opinion. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't enjoy argumentativeness at all, whatever the source - it is wearisome, and I see a lot of it from all quarters. ------------------------------------------------------ H: "It seems to me that you and a few others here who consider yourselves the 'chosen cadre' view others here as interlopers who you wish would just leave, or at least would, as was expected of children in bygone days and is still expected in some dysfunctional families of today, be seen but not heard. As I see it, that is not at all the perspective of the list owners nor of that kindly servant of the Dhamma, Nina." Scott: I see your point. I consider myself unambiguously adherent to the 'DSG orthodoxy'. No apologies. I'm here to learn as deeply from that 'tradition' as I can. No doubt about it. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: That's fine! ---------------------------------------------------------- Other opinions are fine. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Excellent to hear! :-) -------------------------------------------------------- I see Alex, and this is not about Alex, to be like the next gunfighter coming to take a crack at the resident sheriff. -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: It sure seems like it is "about Alex"! As for gunfighters and sheriffs, that's quite the scenario you have in mind! I never much liked Western films, myself! LOL! ----------------------------------------------------- DSG aside, it is Dhamma that we come to discuss. H: "It is a saving grace on your part, however, that you recognize your being curmudgeonly at the moment. :-) Let me be clear, Scott: I am not angry at you, my friend. In fact I am fond of you, and I respect your keen intelligence and amazingly fast grasp of the Dhamma - really astounding. But I see you as attempting something that you don't even believe in - control. If one is to attempt to exert control, wouldn't it be best to restrict the attempt at control to oneself rather than to try to control others?" Scott: Well said, Howard. I appreciate your clear, well-reasoned, and direct reply. As I said, my comments were not directed at you. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Actually, I didn't think they were, though maybe that fact is a sign of ego on my part! ;-) -------------------------------------------------- I don't think that a comment on communication style is the same as a fascistic crack-down on free speech. There are other fora ( Howard: Hah! A Latin scholar! ;-) where the level of discourse is evangelical, rhetorical, histrionic, and self-congratulatory. I eschew and shun these lists like I eschew and shun religion. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: You don't think of Buddhism as religion? Is it sort of a Far East Ethical Culture Society? ;-) ---------------------------------------------------- The fact that I wish this was taken elsewhere will only remain my wish. DSG has been, until recently, thankfully free of these incumbrances. I hope I have satisfied your kind and honest approach to me, my friend. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Scott, I truly appreciate the very warm tone and truly kind words you are using with me. (But spread it around, man! Remember that metta is universal. :-) --------------------------------------------------------- Sincerely, Scott. ============================= With metta, Howard #79420 From: han tun Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 9:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) hantun1 Dear James, You wrote to Dieter and Ken H with regard to Venerable Thanissaro Bhikkhu’s article on The Not Self Strategy: [Mr. Bullitt must have sent my e-mail to Thanissaro because the article in question "The Not-Self Strategy" was revised August 14, 2007 and it no longer contains the statement I found objectionable. Actually, the article has been rewritten to argue the specific point I made in my e-mail to Mr. Bullitt, that the Buddha refused to answer the question because the questioner was from a different faith. Thanissaro now writes in the new, revised article:] And then you gave your personal views on the revised article: [Personally, however, I still don't agree with Thanisarro's conclusions. Thanissaro writes, "This interpretation, though, ignores the Buddha's first two sentences to Ananda: No matter who asks the question, to say that there is or is not a self would be to fall into one of the two philosophical positions which the Buddha avoided throughout his career." The Buddha doesn't say anything in this sutta about `No matter who asks the question'!! It matters a great deal who asks the question! The Buddha was mainly concerned about his teaching being misinterpreted by members of other sects so he refused to answer the question.] -------------------- Han: I do not have enough knowledge to notice whether Venerable Thanissaro Bhikkhu’s article is right or wrong, but I have my highest respect for him, because he had accepted the criticism and revised his article accordingly. If he knew your above-mentioned disagreement he might still consider revising the article again. It is a reminder and a lesson for me, because I tend to be stubborn and I stick to my gun on many occasions. Thank you, James. Respectfully, Han #79421 From: Elaine Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:53 pm Subject: Re: Controlling Others Re: [dsg] Re: The Not-self strategy ... Freedom of Will shennieca Dear Scott, Don't be angry. You don't have to be agitated anymore. I'll leave the library. With metta and karuna, Elaine #79422 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Reminder Time: Trimming & Salutations lbidd2 No control. Larry #79423 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Kin~ncana lbidd2 Hi Scott, The notes to MN43 say the following: There are 12 immeasurable deliverances of mind: 4 brahmaviharas, 4 paths, 4 fruits The unshakable deliverance of mind is the fruit of arahantship. There are 9 deliverances through nothingness: the base of nothingness and the 4 paths and fruits. There are 13 signless deliverances of mind: insight, because it removes the signs of permanence, pleasure, and self; 4 immaterial attainments (jhanas), because they lack the sign of material form; and the 4 paths and fruits, because of the absence of the sign of defilements. There is no mention of how many deliverances of mind through voidness there are. Generally speaking, there are 2 kinds of deliverance: deliverance of mind and deliverance through wisdom Deliverance of mind has to do with attainments of concentration as tranquility and deliverance through wisdom has to do with attainments of insight. Apparently there are 8 deliverances of mind but I couldn't find a list anywhere, nor could I find out how many deliverances through wisdom there are. In this sutta (MN43) just these 4 are mentioned and deliverance through voidness isn't included in the summing up and seems to be more a matter of insight than tranquility. Larry #79424 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Brief Introduction nilovg Dear Peter, welcome and thanks for your introduction. Op 26-nov-2007, om 15:38 heeft Peter Bowen het volgende geschreven: > Unfortunately, much of what he has to say I just can't understand. > Perhaps one day .... ------- N: One remedy: just ask, ask. We are in a forum and thus several people can take part of a dialogue. Can you elaborate about what you did not understand? Nina. #79425 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:25 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) buddhatrue Hi Han, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Han: > I do not have enough knowledge to notice whether > Venerable Thanissaro Bhikkhu's article is right or > wrong, but I have my highest respect for him, because > he had accepted the criticism and revised his article > accordingly. James: Yes, I agree. It does take a big person to do that. If he knew your above-mentioned > disagreement he might still consider revising the > article again. James: I wouldn't think he would revise it again; and I don't intend to ask him to. I am satisfied with the revision; even though I don't agree with Ven. Thanissaro's interpretation. In the original article, he just mentions the Ananda Sutta (and not even by name) and then paraphrased it in a way which was very misleading about its content. In his revision, he provides the text of the original sutta and then offers his interpretation- now it is up to the reader to agree with him or not. I happen to not agree with him but perhaps others do. However, I think the revision is satisfactory because it can't be viewed as misleading. > > It is a reminder and a lesson for me, because I tend > to be stubborn and I stick to my gun on many > occasions. James: Really? I haven't seen a lot of evidence of that, but I will take your word on it. ;-)) > > Thank you, James. > > Respectfully, > Han Metta, James #79426 From: han tun Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) hantun1 Dear James, > > Han: It is a reminder and a lesson for me, because I tend to be stubborn and I stick to my gun on many occasions. > James: Really? I haven't seen a lot of evidence of that, but I will take your word on it. ;-)) Han: You won’t see the evidence, because I am stubborn in a silent way. In Burma, we say “no back-talk, no do.” A person who does not argue back, but who won’t do what he was asked to do either:>). Respectfully, Han #79427 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 12:24 am Subject: Re: Controlling Others Re: [dsg] Re: The Not-self strategy ... Freedom of Will sarahprocter... Dear Elaine, --- Elaine wrote: > Dear Scott, > > Don't be angry. You don't have to be agitated anymore. I'll leave the > library. .... Sarah: As another regular library visitor, I'd be very disappointed if you were to leave, Elaine! You are a valued member of the library scene. I'm sure this isn't what Scott was intending either. We all have to remember a little tolerance and patience when the library is full and begins to get a tad noisy:-). I think you have a lot to contribute here and I look forward to more of your challenging questions and discussions on different topics in your own style. Metta and hugs, Sarah ======== #79428 From: "colette" Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:48 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy ksheri3 Hi DC, Thanx for taking the time to reply eventhough it's a bit late and water under the bridge, now. Your thoughts are still welcomed. the computer I'm at now doesn't have many word processing capabilities so you'll have to go down to my next part since I don't have a "cut, paste, copy" capability here. > Thank you for e-m addressed to Charles and me. I will make my post brief as possible. You mentioned: > The concept of no-self is strictly, IMO, applied to remove a person's > > tendencies toward "CLINGING" and "CRAVING" and "DESIRE" and, ... the > > fundamental principle's that Buddhism is built upon and built > > through. It seems like an "objective" strategy, a "goal oriented" > > strategy. A strategy can be a "standard operating procedure" or a > > process of achieving a goal, et al." colette: That said, I would like to remind you that I work from a very time constrained position at the library. I'm given a certain amount of time and ten pages free. That means that I've gotta read the posts, and then answer what I can answer in a very short period of time. I also have to reserve part of the time for my own personal research which also takes time. When I do an analysis of MY OWN WORK I get the raw, unrefined, emotion and the true wisdom that I've gained. For instance I can go back and re-read something I wrote and see what it was that my mind was doing or thinking and how it translated into my words with the community. It also clearly shows the grasp I have of buddhism and what "concepts used in Dhamma" are well grounded and what needs more work. I can easily see my failures in many pali and sanskrit words, I have difficulty with the papers I'm reading now since they apply so many Chinese and Confuscian words that get translations and ho-boy does my head spin sometimes. What I do, I guess, is what a cat does when it falls: it runs systems checks, checks on it's systems, internal and external, so as to land on it's feet or paws. This keeps it orientated properly as it decends. Do Ya get my drift, or jist of what I'm trying to express here. I don't mind if you tell me that you need clarifications, just be specific since most of the time it's neophytes trying to confound and confuse me while I'm in a concentrated state of consciousness. This is a result of their own ego and desire to/for masturbation but that's their problem. Now let me address your reply since you've misinterpreted my meaning. I AM IN FULL AGREEMENT THAT THE CONCEPT OF NO-SELF IS A FUNDAMENTAL FACT. It is very clear and a very reasonable view to take. NO QUESTIONS ASKED, IT'S SIMPLE. > I refer to "The concept of no-self is strictly,". In the Teaching of the Buddha 'no-self' is not a concept. It is a statement of a fundamental fact. "All dhammas are no-self (anatta)." colette: this dictionary part is gonna come in VERY HANDY, thank you. Concept according to the New Oxford Dictionary is: an abstract idea; a general notion. ------------------------------------------- Any attempt to characterize 'anatta' as a strategy is not to understand that fundamental postulate of the teaching of the Buddha. colette: HOLD IT RIGTH THERE BUDDY! lol I never had much of anything to do with that roundabout discussion on "strategy" that's been going around the msg. board lately. As for the Buddha himself, he certainly admitted to a strategy of how he taught and what he taught to certain individuals or groups. BUT that strategy is strictly confined to the way the Buddha delivered his msg. in words to his "listeners". That stategy of deliverence or delivering the msg. IS NOT PART OF THE MSG. ------------------------------------------ Three fundamental characteristics of the world (loka, sabba) according to Buddhism are: anicca, dukkha, and anatta (I leave the Pali words as they are). They are characteristics as observed; not mere concepts. colette: Absolutely no need to convince me of anything here, I AM A FIRM BELIEVER IN THE ABHIDHARMA and am a firm believer in Carl Gustav Jung. Sigmund Frued can stay with the masturbators for all I care. But that's what happens to Obsessive Compulsive Disorders in homosexual fraternities that refuse to admit the phallic adoration. ------------------------------------------------- According to the Teaching of the Buddha, the truth or validity of 'concepts' cannot be established by discussion. colette: that's a "cherry" thought you just gave me, Thank You. May I add that "concepts" have no substance and therefore can only remain in the Nama realm, they, concepts can never touch the Rupa realm. Good Speaking with you, thanx for thinking of me. toodles, colette #79429 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 1:01 am Subject: Re: Doing Asubha to combat lust kenhowardau Hi Phil, ----- <. . .> Ph: >(As always, when looking at those instructions, I have to wonder how on earth anyone could believe the ancient texts don't teach meditation!!!!) ------ I don't expect you to agree with the hard line, minority, DSG perspective, but I would love to know what you understand it to be. I think you have gone beyond thinking it means "do nothing." So, if you could spare the time to sum up the no-control-no-formal-meditation understanding of, say, those Visuddhimagga "instructions" I would appreciate it. Ken H #79430 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:54 am Subject: Re: Khandhas are uncontrollable ... Partial Controllability ... philofillet Hi Tep > Will you be kind enough to elaborate a bit what you meant by > dualities, fervours, and not skillful discussion? In particular, > what's wrong with my post? Be more clear. I am not going to be easily > upset. ;-)) Oh not to worry, I wasn't really upset. By dualities I didn't mean dualities in the deep Dhamma sense but just the usual drawing of lines between one group of people and the rest. You do it more often than anyone. True, the people who are students of AS in the sense of going to her talks regularly can be identified and do have shared characteristics in terms of their approach to Dhamma. But if a post starts off with a declaration about the other person's views as though they were fixed...well, assuming someone's views are fixed is not a good way to approach discussion maybe? Something like that? Don't worry about it, please. I know you were just being playful. But I do find there is a kind of fervour at work on the board these days. For some reason I can't read posts when they are fervent. (fervid?) Well, I can read them, but the Dhamma just doesn't settle in. Give me the calm, diplomatic tone of Han! But that is just my taste and my needs so never mind. I'll be asking you for feedback about breath meditation in a few days, so please don't hold this little blip against me. Metta, Phil #79431 From: "mattroke" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:54 am Subject: Khandhas are uncontrollable ... Partial Controllability ... mattroke Dear Larry, LARRY: Since no one knows what a concept is let's just say concepts are words. If we do that we can forget about concepts. MATT: As far as I am concerned a concept is many moments of thinking. Each thought moment is a dhamma (a reality), but the concepts that come about because of those dhammas is not real. LARRY: The difference between getting it right and getting it wrong depends a lot on how wrapped up in desire we are. That desire is desire for real stuff. No one wants to eat a bunch of words. MATT: Desire is not just for real stuff, there can be desire for concepts as well. If there were no attachment to concepts this forum would not exist. We cling to concepts (beliefs and opinions) and we take them to be mine. Because of this attachment, whatever concepts come to mind we tend to think that they are right or because of mana, we want them to be right. Getting it right or wrong can depend a great deal on how wrapped up in desire we are for those concepts. Matt #79432 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:59 am Subject: Controlling Others Re: [dsg] Re: The Not-self strategy ... Freedom of Will scottduncan2 Dear Elaine, Thanks for the reply: E: "Don't be angry. You don't have to be agitated anymore. I'll leave the library." Scott: Well, anyone can do that. And I don't recall ever feeling angry. Its okay if you are. I'd be more interested in whether you wanted to discuss Conditionality. Remember when you asked me all those questions? And I asked if you really wanted to discuss? Rather than leave, why don't we just start looking at this whole amazing aspect of the Dhamma? I want to learn more about it and that's the only reason I discuss things - or would like to discuss things - to learn. I don't care if you agree or disagree, but wouldn't disagreement make more sense if one understood at least something of what one disagrees with before learning about it? Think about it, Elaine, if you please. It would be worth it to get into the seventh volume of the Abhidhamma - if only to know more about something you don't want to know more about... Sincerely, Scott. #79433 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:01 am Subject: Re: Doing Asubha to combat lust philofillet Hi Ken > Ph: >(As always, when looking at those instructions, I have to wonder > how on earth anyone could believe the ancient texts don't teach > meditation!!!!) > ------ > > I don't expect you to agree with the hard line, minority, DSG > perspective, but I would love to know what you understand it to be. I > think you have gone beyond thinking it means "do nothing." So, if you > could spare the time to sum up the no-control-no-formal-meditation > understanding of, say, those Visuddhimagga "instructions" I would > appreciate it. Sorry Ken, can't go there. Covering the explicit meditation instructions in Vism would take weeks! (And of course I couldn't explain them, only list them.) Perhaps someone with the time will start a study corner for the samadhi section of vism. That list of impediments would certainly bear close attention! Metta, Phil #79434 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:42 pm Subject: Re: Controlling Others Re: [dsg] Re: The Not-self strategy ... Freedom of Will upasaka_howard Hi, Elaine - In a message dated 11/27/2007 1:54:08 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, shennieca@... writes: Dear Scott, Don't be angry. You don't have to be agitated anymore. I'll leave the library. With metta and karuna, Elaine ============================== Please do not unsubscribe! I for one, one of many I'm completely certain, would consider that a big loss. Out of kindness alone, please stay. You have every right to be here, Elaine, and I think you would be unfair to yourself to leave under perceived duress. I'm sure you would say the same to others, and why shouldn't metta and karuna apply to oneself as well as to others! With metta, Howard #79435 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Reminder Time: Trimming & Salutations upasaka_howard Hi, Larry - In a message dated 11/27/2007 1:57:06 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: No control. Larry ============================ LOLOLOL!! Wonderful, Larry! ;-)) With metta, Howard #79436 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:51 am Subject: Controlling Others Re: [dsg] Re: The Not-self strategy ... Freedom of Will scottduncan2 Dear Sarah (Elaine), Just a wee note: Sarah: "...I'm sure this isn't what Scott was intending either. We all have to remember a little tolerance and patience when the library is full and begins to get a tad noisy:-)." Scott: No of course I wasn't intending anyone leave. We're adults here, right? I agree that patience is definitely worth cultivating. Thanks again for your constant patience! Sincerely, Scott. #79437 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:53 am Subject: Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) philofillet Hi Matt > Even a person who may have had experiences of a moment with weak > panna would still be conceptualizing. Even though they may have a > better understanding that there are only dhammas and not just a > continuous flow of concepts that creates the delusion that there is a > self and the world. OK, thanks. Conceptualizing about dhammas and conceptualizing about concepts are different. I recall there is material in the book on "Concepts and Realities" about different kinds of concepts in this sense. I am a big fan of concepts. Maybe because I write stories, I am prone to approach the Dhamma using a lot of narratives about myself and other people. Fortunately, I am feeling my interest in studying paramattha dhammas intellectually is being rekindled, so I feel safe about continuing to play with concepts because I will be developing understanding of the underlying dhammas, something like that. Matt, you've got lots of threads underway so I'll drop this one now. I'll be back to you on "spice" in a couple of days, probably. Thanks. Metta, Phil #79438 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:23 am Subject: Controlling Others Re: [dsg] Re: The Not-self strategy ... Freedom of Will scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "What a kind reply. I thank you for it. We still disagree on this matter, however. ;-)" Scott: As it should be, my good man. Sincerely, Scott. #79439 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:32 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Kin~ncana scottduncan2 Dear Larry, Thanks for your search: L: "The notes to MN43 say the following: There are 12 immeasurable deliverances of mind: 4 brahmaviharas, 4 paths, 4 fruits The unshakable deliverance of mind is the fruit of arahantship." Scott: I think the Sammohavinodanii quotes were dealing with the brahmaviharas. L: "There are 9 deliverances through nothingness: the base of nothingness and the 4 paths and fruits." Scott: Here's that distinction you also mention below: 'deliverance' perhaps as a function of the suppression of hindrances related to jhaana, and then Path and Fruition. L: "...Generally speaking, there are 2 kinds of deliverance: deliverance of mind and deliverance through wisdom Deliverance of mind has to do with attainments of concentration as tranquility and deliverance through wisdom has to do with attainments of insight. Apparently there are 8 deliverances of mind but I couldn't find a list anywhere, nor could I find out how many deliverances through wisdom there are...In this sutta (MN43) just these 4 are mentioned and deliverance through voidness isn't included in the summing up and seems to be more a matter of insight than tranquility." Scott: Yes, thanks. The distinction is reiterated between concentration mediated deliverance and wisdom mediated deliverance. I'll see if I can find more on the voidness thing. This is anatta in a way, right? Sincerely, Scott. #79440 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:37 am Subject: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 4 A Long Way to go Paramattha dhammas, ultimate realities, are all that appears now. Seeing, visible object, hearing, sound, and the other sense- cognitions that experience sense objects appear in our daily life, also at this moment. They each have their own characteristic that is unchangeable and that is true for everybody. We can verify this when they appear and this is what the Buddha taught time and again. We read in the “Kindred Sayings” (IV, Salåyatana vagga, Kindred Sayings on Sense, Third Fifty, Ch 5, §152, Is there a method) that the Buddha said: “Is there, monks, any method by following which a monk, apart from belief, apart from inclination, apart from hearsay, apart from argument as to method, apart from reflection on reasons, apart from delight in speculation, could affirm insight thus: ‘Ended is birth, lived is the righteous life, done is the task, for life in these conditions there is no hereafter’?” “For us, lord, things have their root in the Exalted One... Hearing it from him the monks will remember it.” “There is indeed a method, monks, by following which a monk...could affirm insight... And what is that method? Herein, monks, a monk, seeing an object with the eye, either recognizes within him the existence of lust, malice and illusion, thus: ‘I have lust (råga), malice (dosa) and illusion (moha),’ or thus: ‘I have not lust, malice and illusion.’ Now as to that recognition of their existence or non-existence within him, are these conditions, I ask, to be understood by belief, or inclination, or hearsay, or argument as to method, or reflection on reasons, or delight in speculation?” “Surely not, lord.” “Are not these states to be understood by seeing them with the eye of wisdom?” “Surely lord.” “Then, monks, this is the method by following which, apart from belief... a brother could affirm insight thus: ‘Ended is birth... for life in these conditions there is no hereafter.’ Again, as to hearing a sound with the ear... smelling a scent with the nose, tasting a savour with the tongue... contacting a tangible with the body... cognizing a mental object with the mind.... is that recognition to be understood by belief, or inclination, or hearsay, or argument as to method, or reflection on reasons, or delight in speculation? Are not these states to be understood by seeing them with the eye of wisdom?” “Surely lord.” “Then, monks, this is the method by following which a monk, apart from belief... affirm insight.” Insight refers here to arahatship, according to the Commentary, the “Såratthappakåsiní”. One can attain arahatship with this method, that is, developing understanding of realities appearing through the senses and the mind-door. ******* Nina. #79441 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings nilovg Hi Alex, Sakkaayadi.t.thi is the cause of all other kinds of wrong view. There are twenty kinds, four in respect to each of the five khandhas. Nina. Op 27-nov-2007, om 1:44 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Is the wrong view due to the fact that we think in terms of "I am", "I > exist", "You exist" ?? #79442 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 12:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 1. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - Nina, thank you for quoting the following sutta. I find it excellent! :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/27/2007 8:38:03 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: We read in the “Kindred Sayingsâ€? (IV, SalÃ¥yatana vagga, Kindred Sayings on Sense, Third Fifty, Ch 5, §152, Is there a method) #79443 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (40) nilovg Dear Phil, Op 27-nov-2007, om 2:26 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > 'Keen pa~n~naa is intent on what is beneficial. > > It can abandon lust that has arisen within you. > > For what benefit do you have pa~n~naa, > > if you cannot dispel sinful thoughts.' " > > Sick people generally depend on medicine. Evenso, keen pa~n~naa is > like a medicine, it is intent on what is beneficial and it can cure > us from lust that has arisen. > A question - When "abandon" is used, what is the Pali? Does it not > usually refer to something permanent, or is there an appreciation of > momentary/provisional little abandonments, if you will. In this > quotation it seems like the latter. ------- N: I do not know the Pali of abandoning here. It cannot be complete eradication in the beginning, it must be temporary. When there is lobha and after that right understanding of lobha as a conditioned dhamma, lobha does not occur at that moment. Kusala citta arises instead of akusala citta. One begins to see that lobha is not everything in the world, that it is an insignificant dhamma that appears and then falls away immediately. One learns to see it as an element, but such understanding has to grow. Only an anaagaami has eradicated lust. Nina. #79444 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Khandhas are uncontrollable ... Partial Controllability ... nilovg Hi Howard, Op 27-nov-2007, om 4:07 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I do wish, though, that all of us on DSG would refrain from personal > "attack". (And consider the irony of Buddhists getting "personal"! > LOL!) -------- N: And taking things personally ;-)) More LOL. Nina #79445 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:23 am Subject: Re: Khandhas are uncontrollable ... Apology & Withdrawal... buddhistmedi... Hi Matt (Phil and Howard), - I appreciate your calm demeanor in this reply. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "mattroke" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > TEP: Ah, here comes another DSG Abhidhammika fully charged with > energy to preach. He is ready with programmed instructions on > controllability vs. uncontrollability, self vs no self, paramattha > dhammas vs concepts, accumulations and paramis vs practicing the > Dhamma here & now for a realization of the Four Noble Truths. > > MATT: I don't think that I am a so called DSG Abhidhammika. If you > had seen my recent post to Phil you would understand that I only look > for what I can prove to be real. > > Do I preach? No, I rarely write on the list, although I have been a > member since DSG first went on line many years ago. I am simply > putting forward a point of view and if people do not agree with it > that's fine by me. > > However Tep, you are a preacher. You are charged with energy to write often on DSG, opposing other peoples' views and preaching what you think is the right understanding, and with some degree of aversion it would seem. > > Sometimes we don't see in ourselves what we criticize in others. > > Matt > T: You are right on every count except "some degree of aversion" that you thought you saw. It was only 'patigha' or slight annoyance, not an unfriendly action. Then because of that annoyance I was too personal with a self view ! Please accept my apology and I promise to keep the self demon in check from now on. Phil and Howard, you were right. I appreciate your reprimand. Thanks. Tep ==== #79446 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (39) nilovg Dear Han, I have been thinking of your post. I am glad you bring up this point. And the story about the monkey is piercing through the heart! Op 24-nov-2007, om 0:22 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > It is said that in the course of his long training > for enlightenment over many lives, a bodhisatta can > break all the moral precepts except the pledge to > speak the truth. --------- N: The Buddha penetrated the truth of all dhammas and in all aspects at the time he became a Sammasambuddha. As a Bodhisatta he had to accumulate the perfection of truthfulness to the highest degree in order to become the sammaasmabuddha in his last life. There are many aspect to truthfulness. It includes, as we discussed before, to act in accordance with one's speech. And also: to always speak the truth, never to deviate from true speech. He had to be a sincere seeker of the truth, how could he tell a lie? We can learn from the Harita Jataka. Even the Bodhisatta had his weaknesses. But still, he could develop right understanding of realities from life to life so that he could become a Buddha. For us, ordinary people, this should be encouraging. Even though full of weak points, it is still possible to develop right understanding, also of akusala dhammas, so that once enlightenment can be attained. Nina. #79447 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings truth_aerator Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Alex, > Sakkaayadi.t.thi is the cause of all other kinds of wrong view. There > are twenty kinds, four in respect to each of the five khandhas. > Nina. > Op 27-nov-2007, om 1:44 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > > > Is the wrong view due to the fact that we think in terms of "I am", "I > > exist", "You exist" ?? >>> Quick clarification: Is Sakkayaditthi a mental (or verbal) misunderstanding? For example when someone says "I, You" and thinks that "I" or "You" really exists as an atta? Thanks Lots of Metta, Alex #79448 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:41 am Subject: Re: Khandhas are uncontrollable ... Partial Controllability ... buddhistmedi... Hi Phil, - You explain very well. I see the point you made. And by agreeing with you, it helps me to abandon that fault. So I appreciate your good intention. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi Tep > > > Will you be kind enough to elaborate a bit what you meant by > > dualities, fervours, and not skillful discussion? In particular, > > what's wrong with my post? Be more clear. I am not going to be easily > > upset. ;-)) > > > Oh not to worry, I wasn't really upset. By dualities I didn't mean > dualities in the deep Dhamma sense but just the usual drawing of lines between one group of people and the rest. You do it more often than anyone. True, the people who are students of AS in the sense of going to her talks regularly can be identified and do have shared > characteristics in terms of their approach to Dhamma. But if a post > starts off with a declaration about the other person's views as though > they were fixed...well, assuming someone's views are fixed is not a > good way to approach discussion maybe? Something like that? Don't worry about it, please. I know you were just being playful. > > But I do find there is a kind of fervour at work on the board these > days. For some reason I can't read posts when they are fervent. > (fervid?) Well, I can read them, but the Dhamma just doesn't settle in. > Give me the calm, diplomatic tone of Han! But that is just my taste and > my needs so never mind. > > I'll be asking you for feedback about breath meditation in a few > days, so please don't hold this little blip against me. > > Metta, > > Phil > T: How could I be upset by your good advice? On the contrary I am thankful for the "little blip", Phil. Concerning breath meditation, I am just a beginner. And as such I am not sure how much benefit can be gained by asking for my opinion. Tep ==== #79449 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:49 am Subject: Re: Khun Sujin's explanations. nilovg Dear Robert A, Your question is very understandable. The point is this: can we speak of Kh Sujin's *teachings*? Did she invent what she says all by herself? It would be best to find this out, but everybody has to find this out for himself. In how far is what she explains based on the Tipitaka and the ancient commentaries? This means that we have to study all the texts, not just part of them, very earnestly. Then we can compare and see whether what she explains is in conformity with the Tipitaka or not. Nina. Op 27-nov-2007, om 5:44 heeft Robert het volgende geschreven: > Is this a group to discuss the teachings of Khun Sujin or is there > interest > in discussions of Buddhism beyond her teachings? #79450 From: han tun Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 7:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (39) hantun1 Dear Nina, I thank you very much for your comments. I know that there are many aspects of truthfulness. Not to tell lies, to tell only the truth, to act as one speaks (to keep one’s promise) etc. But I am not very happy with Haarita Jataka. First, he should think of the King who trusted him and provided him with food and shelter for twelve years. In my monkey simile, if one looks at the monkey’s face in the situation I have described, a person may not wish to kill and eat the monkey. So also, if he thought of the King he would not have the will to violate his wife, however much she was attractive to him. Secondly, when the King asked him he admitted. He had to admit because according to the Text, his misconduct was already rumoured throughout the whole city. He had no choice but to admit. Thirdly, despite this sin, when he died he entered the Brahma plane (of course, after correcting himself!). Anyway, if you can condone him for this sin just because he told the truth, I have nothing more to say. Respectfully, Han #79451 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 7:39 am Subject: Re: Angulimala truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" > wrote: > > > > Hi > Please. What sort of Wisdom Accumulation did Angulimala had? > How much > > demerit did he earn before seeing Buddha? Would someone who > murdered > > 999 people be endowed with wisdom far above us, who haven't > murdered > > even 1 person? > > > > +++++ > Dear Alex > Angulimala was one of the eighty eminent arahat disciples of the Buddha, > with full matsery of jhana and superpowers. I think it is safe to say there is > no one today who has accumlations of wisdom that equal his. > Robert > What you have said about Angulimala was after his conversion. I asked about, what was his wisdom like Before. Wisdom that made him go and murder 999 people? Lots of Metta, Alex #79452 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 7:41 am Subject: Re: Khandhas are uncontrollable ... Partial Controllability ... truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "mattroke" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > ALEX: Please. What sort of Wisdom Accumulation did Angulimala had? > How much demerit did he earn before seeing Buddha? Would someone who > murdered 999 people be endowed with wisdom far above us, who haven't > murdered even 1 person? > > MATT: You are obviously judging the man on that one life and yourself on this life. >>>> Well if he had such extraordinary high accumulations from his past lives - why did he in this life commited such horrible deeds? And not once or twice, but 999 times? > Angulimala's wisdom accumulations came from his countless previous > lives. The fact that there were conditions for him to kill many > people prior to meeting the Buddha, does not negate his accumulated > wisdom. >>>> The murders he did was simply due to conditions? Or was it a volitional choice. > If he became enlightened and we are not, then his wisdom > accumulations were far superior to what ours are now. > > Matt > Or maybe it is because we are doing something wrong. Lots of Metta, Alex #79453 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:22 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (71) nichiconn Dear Friends, Part 5 14. Ti.msanipaato 1. Subhaajiivakambavanikaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 386. "Apathena payaatumicchasi, canda.m kii.lanaka.m gavesasi; meru.m la"nghetumicchasi, yo tva.m buddhasuta.m maggayasi. 387. "Natthi hi loke sadevake, raago yatthapi daani me siyaa; napi na.m jaanaami kiiriso, atha maggena hato samuulako. 388. "I"ngaalakuyaava ujjhito, visapattoriva aggito kato; napi na.m passaami kiiriso, atha maggena hato samuulako. 389. "Yassaa siyaa apaccavekkhita.m, satthaa vaa anupaasito siyaa; tva.m taadisika.m palobhaya, jaananti.m so ima.m viha~n~nasi. 390. "Mayha~nhi akku.t.thavandite, sukhadukkhe ca satii upa.t.thitaa; sa"nkhatamasubhanti jaaniya, sabbattheva mano na limpati. 391. "Saaha.m sugatassa saavikaa, magga.t.tha"ngikayaanayaayinii; uddha.tasallaa anaasavaa, su~n~naagaaragataa ramaamaha.m. [Subhaa Jivakambavanikaa:] 384. You wish to go by way of the wrong path. You seek the moon as a plaything. You wish to jump over Mount Meru, you who have designs upon a child of the Buddha. 385. For I do not now have any object of desire anywhere in the world, including the devas. Whatever sort it might be, it has been smitten root and all by the [eightfold] path. 386. It is made to be like a fire that has jumped out of a charcoal pit, like a bowl of poison. Whatever sort it might be, it has been smitten root and all by the [eightfold] path. 387. It should be someone who has not closely examined [phenomena], or it should be [someone] who has not served the Teacher; you should seduce someone like that. [If you seduce] one who knows you, you will suffer distress. 388. For my mindfulness is established in the midst of both reviling and praise, happiness and pain. Knowing that conditioned states are disgusting, my mind does not cling to anything at all. 389. I am a disciple of the Sublime One, travelling in the eightfold vehicle that is the path. With my dart drawn out, without taints, gone to a place of solitude, I rejoice. RD: 'Lo! thou art wanting to walk where no path is; thou seekest to capture Moon from the skies for thy play; thou would'st jump o'er the ridges of Meru, *392 Thou who presumest to lie in wait for a child of the Buddha! (384) Nowhere in earth or in heaven lives now any object of lust for me. Him I know not. What like is he? Slain, root and branch, through the Noble Path. (385) Hurled as live coal from the hand, and rated as deadly as poison-cup, Him I see not. What like is he? Slain, root and branch, through the Noble Path. (386) Tempt thou some woman who hath not discerned what I say, or whose teacher Is but a learner; haply she'll listen; tempt thou not Subhaa; She understandeth. And now 'tis thyself hast vexation and failure. (387) For I have set my mind to be watchful in whatso befalls me - Blame or honour, gladness or sorrow - and knowing the principle: - 'Foul are all composite things,' nowhere the mind of me clings to them. (388) Yea, the disciple am I of the Welcome One; onward the march of me Riding the Car of the Road that is Eightfold. Drawn are the arrows Out of my wounds, and purged is my spirit of drugging Intoxicants. So I am come to haunts that are Empty. *393 There lies my pleasure. (389) *392 The mythical central mountain of the universe, called also Sineru. *393 Su.n.na, for the earnest Buddhist, connoting both solitude and the ejection of the Ego-delusion. Cf. Ps. xxxi. 46. ==to be continued, connie #79454 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:26 am Subject: Re: Perfections Corner (40) philofillet Hi Nina > One begins to see that > lobha is not everything in the world, Ph: This reminds me of AS talking about the hole in the dome of lobha that covers everything. I'm glad the aversion I had to certain aspects of her approach is receding enough to allow me to appreciate the helpful points. that it is an insignificant > dhamma that appears and then falls away immediately. Ph: Ah, this is perhaps one of the aspects that I find aversive. Yes, true of lobha that is so commmon being "insignificant", but not so of akusala which is a transgression. It was that talk in which she spoke of transgression in this way ("falling away" therefore don't sweat it kind of thing) that turned me off her approach. One learns to > see it as an element, but such understanding has to grow. Only an > anaagaami has eradicated lust. Ph: Thanks Nina. It makes me happy to be discussing dhammas in this way with you again. :) Metta, Phil #79455 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:29 am Subject: Re: Khandhas are uncontrollable ... Partial Controllability ... philofillet Hi Tep Thanks for your very calm and friendly response to my little wristslap. :) Metta, Phil > You explain very well. I see the point you made. And by agreeing with > you, it helps me to abandon that fault. So I appreciate your good > intention. #79456 From: "shennieca" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:20 am Subject: Controlling Others Re: [dsg] Re: The Not-self strategy ... Freedom of Will shennieca Hi Howard, Scott, Sarah, all, I'm still here! :-)) You have to kick me very hard to get me out of the library. J/K. :D :-)) I'll read your posts but I have to cut down on my Internet time. My dear hubby calls my yahoo group friends my online BFs! lol. :>) May we be well and happy. May we be free from physical sufferings and mental sufferings. And may we take care of ourselves happily. With metta, Elaine #79457 From: Dieter Möller Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 11:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Not-self strategy .. Comprehending the Burden .. moellerdieter Hi Tep and all interested.. you wrote: I like to carefully comment on an important statement you made regarding the relative importance of anatta to anicca and dukkha : >Dieter: "Without (anicca and ) dukkha nobody would care for anatta". T: That is not just a coincidence with what good friend Swee and I talked about in message # 79285. D: you may consider the importantance slightly different from the context I had in mind please compare with my recent exchange with Jon quote: Jon: 'I think we agree on the basics, namely (a) that anatta as a characteristic of conditioned dhammas gradually becomes known as insight is developed, and (b) that the characteristic of anatta is not *fully* penetrated until arahantship is attained. D: yes Jon: (As I understand it, the situation is the same regarding the other 2 characteristics of conditioned dhammas: anicca and dukkha.) 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 ? unquote You go ahead now :(T: That phrase is absolutely critical for us to answer RobertK's belief of absolute uncontrollabily of the khandhas. Yes, Swee, 'be thus/not be thus' centers upon the 'anicca' characteristic rather than 'anatta', which is the consequence of aniica --> dukkha and dukkha --> anatta in that order.) So, Dieter, you and Swee and I are talking about the same thing. Isn't that a good enough evidence that we see some truth that is not yet seen ..snip I have still to ponder about your conclusion ..and there are many aspects we need to talk about.. Considering the D.O. , our influence (control might be not the ideal word) seems to me limited at the tanha -upadana level , i.e. to say No to attachment. The program is provided in particular by habitual tendencies ( an interesting translation of sankhara khanda I first heard from Nina) , with the background of avijja -sankhara , What we face is the scenario of contact-feeling and there dispassion is aimed by the path training in order to break the chain. The insight that e.g. the body/form is not (our self ) is supported by that it can not be changed at will ( may it not be subject to decay). Hence I am inclined to agree to Ken's statement, that the khandas are beyond our control ..leaving aside a question I still have in mind : the relation between sankhara and sankhara khanda ..( subconscious will and ego ) ? The Buddha mentioned that without old age and death (anicca and its related suffering) there would be no teaching .. and so , in conclusion, no anatta doctrine .. T: You talked about a "room for discussion" based on Bhikkhu Bodhi's "Abhidhammic point of view" that ' It is the dhammas alone that possess ultimate reality..'. And you seemed to say that such property of the dhammas AND the strategic approach of Ven. TB should not be considered as mutually exclusive. Am I understanding you correctly? D: yes , as far as I understand both aspects are valid ... without belief /thesis in an ultimate truth 'Not-Self' , there would be no effort/motivation to detach from 'that I am, that is mine ' ( by the training /penetration by insight). The pure assumption of anatta as a law however tends to annihilation. .................................... T (>Dieter: Further discussion and clarification of Ven. Thanissaro's essay , in particular the context of provided sutta sources, seems to me benefitial ..... if we find interest .... ;-) Sure, further discussion of TB's article(s) as well as the "context of provided sutta sources" is always beneficial and interesting, at least to me. D: looking forward .. ;-) with Metta Dieter #79458 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 11:07 am Subject: Overpowering obsession with Form & Flesch! bhikkhu0 Numerical Sayings - AÅ„guttara NikÄ?ya I [1-2] Form - RÅ«pa The Obsessed Mind - CittaPariyÄ?dÄ?na This have I heard: On one occasion the Blessed One was living near Savatthi, in Jeta's park, staying in Anathapindika's monastery. There indeed the Exalted One called upon the Bhikkhus: 'Bhikkhus!'. 'Venerable Sir!' answered the Bhikkhus. The Blessed One then explained this: Bhikkhus, I see no other single form, that even so keeps captivating a man's mind as the form of a woman. The male mind, Bhikkhus, remains obsessed with the female form. Bhikkhus, I perceive no other single sound, that even so remains entrancing a man's mind as the sound of a woman. The male mind, Bhikkhus, remains overwhelmed by the female voice. Bhikkhus, I know of no other single smell, that even so persists tempting a man's mind as the fragrance of a woman. The male mind, Bhikkhus, remains enslaved by the female scent. Bhikkhus, I cannot think of any other single taste, that even so continues to entice a man's mind as the flavour of a woman. The male mind, Bhikkhus, remains ensnared by the female savour. Bhikkhus, I cannot comprehend any other single touch, that even so keeps overpowering a man's mind as the soft touch of a woman. The male mind, Bhikkhus, remains addicted to the female sensation. Bhikkhus, I see no other single form, that even so keeps captivating a woman's mind as the form of a man. The female mind, Bhikkhus, remains obsessed with the male form. Bhikkhus, I perceive no other single sound, that even so remains entrancing a woman's mind as the sound of a man. The female mind, Bhikkhus, remains dominated by the male voice. Bhikkhus, I know of no other single smell, that even so persists tempting a woman's mind as the fragrance of a man. The female mind, Bhikkhus, remains enslaved by the male scent. Bhikkhus, I cannot think of any other single taste that even so continues to entice a woman's mind as the flavour of a man. The female mind, Bhikkhus, remains ensnared by the male savour. Bhikkhus, I comprehend no other single touch, that even so keeps overpowering a woman's mind as the touch of a man. The female mind, Bhikkhus, remains addicted to the male sensation. http://What-Buddha-Said.net/Canon/Sutta/AN/AN.I.1-2.html Comments: No wonder that the porn industry is blooming! Addiction to Sex is a comic monkey-business… Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka * .... #79459 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:40 pm Subject: To Rob M re letter to grieving person philofillet Hi Rob (or anyone who knows) Rob, I'd like to re-read the letter you wrote to the person who had lost a loved one. I couldn't find it through the search function, so if you wouldn't mind posting it again, if you remember what I am referring to. (Or anyone else who happens to know the post.) Thanks. Metta, Phil #79460 From: "Robert" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:01 pm Subject: Re: Khun Sujin's explanations. avalo1968 Hello Nina, Thank you very much for your reply. Can we speak of Khun Sujin's teachings? I think we can. There is a large body of literature, which is the Theravada canon and then there are many different interpretations of those texts, of which Khun Sujin's is one. I could rephrase my questions to be - is DSG a group to discuss Khun Sujin's interpretation of the Pali texts? Thank you, Robert A. #79461 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:41 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,209 Vism.XVII,210 Vism.XVII,211 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XVII 209. Besides the immaterial states, also in the five-constituent becoming that resultant mentality, in association with the heart-basis, is a condition in seven ways at the minimum for the sixth, the mind base, in the same way as was said with respect to the immaterial states. But in association with the four primaries, it is a condition in six ways, as conascence, support, kamma-result, dissociation, presence, and non-disappearance conditions, for the other five beginning with the eye base. Some, however, is a condition as root-cause condition, and some as nutriment condition. It is by these that the maximum and minimum should be understood. 210. Result is for result condition During a life in the same ways; While non-result the non-resultant Sixth conditions in six ways. 211. For, as in rebirth-linking, so also in the course of an existence in the five constituent becoming, resultant mentality is a condition in the seven ways at minimum for the resultant sixth base. But non-resultant mentality is a condition in six ways at minimum for the non-resultant sixth base, leaving out kamma-result condition. The maximum and minimum should be understood in the way already stated. *************************** 209. aaruppato hi a~n~nasmimpi pa~ncavokaarabhave ta.m vipaakanaama.m hadayavatthuno sahaaya.m hutvaa cha.t.thassa manaayatanassa yathaa aaruppe vutta.m, tatheva avaka.msato sattadhaa paccayo hoti. itaresa.m pana ta.m pa~ncanna.m cakkhaayatanaadiina.m catumahaabhuutasahaaya.m hutvaa sahajaatanissayavipaakavippayuttaatthiavigatavasena chahaakaarehi paccayo hoti. ki~nci panettha hetupaccayena, ki~nci aahaarapaccayenaati eva.m a~n~nathaapi paccayo hoti, tassa vasena ukka.msaavaka.mso veditabbo. 210. pavattepi tathaa hoti, vipaaka.m vipaakassa paccayo. avipaaka.m avipaakassa, chadhaa cha.t.thassa paccayo.. 211. pavattepi hi pa~ncavokaarabhave yathaa pa.tisandhiya.m, tatheva vipaakanaama.m vipaakassa cha.t.thaayatanassa avaka.msato sattadhaa paccayo hoti. avipaaka.m pana avipaakassa cha.t.thassa avaka.msatova tato vipaakapaccaya.m apanetvaa chadhaa paccayo hoti. vuttanayeneva panettha ukka.msaavaka.mso veditabbo. #79462 From: mlnease Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:05 pm Subject: Re: Controlling Others Re: [dsg] Re: The Not-self strategy ... Freedom of Will m_nease Hi Scott, Scott Duncan wrote: There are other fora where the level of discourse is evangelical, rhetorical, histrionic, and self-congratulatory. I eschew and shun these lists like I eschew and shun religion. The fact that I wish this was taken elsewhere will only remain my wish. DSG has been, until recently, thankfully free of these encumbrances. Better articulated than I could've done--that is to say, my sentiments more or less exactly, thanks. mike #79463 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:13 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy dacostacharles On a quik note : the Buddha's messages are strategies (medicine for the sick and suffering) (preventive medicine to .) Charles DaCosta _____ #79464 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 7:28 pm Subject: Re: Angulimala rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > --------------------- > What you have said about Angulimala was after his conversion. I asked > about, what was his wisdom like Before. Wisdom that made him go and > murder 999 people? > > Lots of Metta, > ++++++++++++++++++++++ Dear Alex Angulimala had developed the parami to a degree that he could become one of the eighty leading disciples. I believe that he had accumulated wisdom to an unimaginably high degree over aeon and aeons, much higher than I will ever achieve in any life. You feel your wisdom is higher- perhaps it is - who am I disagree. robert #79465 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] To Rob M re letter to grieving person sarahprocter... Hi Phil, --- Phil wrote: > Rob, I'd like to re-read the letter you wrote to the person who had > lost a loved one. I couldn't find it through the search function, so if > you wouldn't mind posting it again, if you remember what I am referring > to. (Or anyone else who happens to know the post.) ... S: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/73087 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/73170 [See these and more under 'Death - Mourning & Grief' in 'Useful Posts'.] Please share more of your reflections on the topic, Phil. Any recent loss of a loved one? If so, my heart-felt condolences. Metta, Sarah ======== #79466 From: "Sachin Sarate" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Angulimala sachudear Before enlightenment there was no wisdom... it was sheer ignorance... there was only darkness. If light enters a dark room... the darkness has to leave... So as enlightenment generates in a mind... ignorance has to leave... no need to get converted to Buddhism... follow the Dhamma!!! --Metta. On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 rjkjp1 wrote : <...> >Dear Alex >Angulimala had developed the parami to a degree that he could become >one of the eighty leading disciples. I believe that he had accumulated >wisdom to an unimaginably high degree over aeon and aeons, much >higher than I will ever achieve in any life. >You feel your wisdom is higher- perhaps it is - who am I disagree. >robert #79467 From: "Sukinder" Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 10:46 pm Subject: Re: Regarding Khandas, anatta & Control. sukinderpal Hi Alex, I got the impression that you do not want to continue this discussion. But there seems to be some misunderstanding which others may also share, so I would like to try and clarify. ============= Alex: How are "Ultimate terms" anything other than simply pompous conventions? Sukin: I think you may have in mind a meaning of "ultimate" quite different from the way I use it. "Reality" is something I contrast with "concept". Concepts include ideas about people, things, situations, time, or any object of consciousness which goes beyond the fundamentals of experience, namely paramattha dhammas. Say, when I see this "computer screen", not only is this a concept, but also those parts that define outline, shape, depth and so on, beyond mere "visible object", are concepts. Visible object on the other hand, is an example of "reality" and is the only true object of "seeing". Other examples of realities include hearing, hardness, feeling and the "thinking" which produces the idea of "computer screen". These have characteristics, individual and general and are irreducible. It is in reference to this that I regard them also as "ultimate". This and the fact that developed wisdom has only these as object of study / insight, and never of concepts such as people, things, postures etc. ============= Alex: Since everything is impermanent, there can't be ultimacy found anywhere. Sukin: This seems to be similar to the Mahayana / Nagarjuna arrival at the idea of Emptiness. This latter imo, is just the result of armchair philosophy, a misuse of the concept of conditionality / D.O. and impermanence. Because conditioned, therefore no sabhava, because impermanent, therefore no ultimacy. But that's just papanca in the philosopher's mind. How could Nagarjuna make any distinction about anything if there was no distinct Sabhava that would differentiate one moment of experience from another? The fact that many different dhammas each with distinct characteristics, function and cause arise together and condition one another does not mean the individual nature of each is borrowed. In the same way, the fact that dhammas arise and fall away instantly does not negate their being `ultimately real'. ============= Alex: Ultimate reality needs to have an ultimate observer for it to be Ultimate Reality. Reality can't simply be somewhere without being felt, perceived, or cognized in any way. Sukin: I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at. But the wisdom of Vipassana which insights and knows reality as reality, dhammas, ayatanas, khandhas, this itself is just another conditioned ULTIMATE reality. ============= Alex: "Reality, What a concept!" - forgot who said this. Sukin: Probably just another armchair philosopher. ;-) ============= > of "meditation". I wasn't asking for explanations, as you have given > so far, in terms of yet other conventional ideas, but to actually know > about how certain mental realities function and which of these you > refer to when you speak of Meditation, Jhana and Vipassana. Alex: Have you percieved "certain mental realities" ? yes/no ? Sukin: If you mean by this, "has there been any insight into nama and rupa?", then the answer is a big NO. If you are also asking, "how do I then make a statement about these mental realities?" the answer is: I understand intellectually for example, that perception, feeling, consciousness, thinking are Namas. I have no reason to doubt this to be true, since for example, I know there is seeing, thinking, feeling etc. now as I type this. Except that from the standpoint of Dhamma, the way these are known thus far, is with `ignorance, craving and wrong view', and never with any developed wisdom. ============== > Of course I ask because I sense that you are mistaken and therefore > hope to be able to correct you. There is nothing wrong with using > conventional designations and to speak in terms of I, me, we and you > etc. However you and most meditators when it comes to actual > experience, Alex: When actual experience comes, I try not to think about it while it is happening. Sukin: But isn't "trying not to think", just more thinking? ============== > and the need most crucially to apply the understanding, > seem to be unable / unwilling to distinguish between reality and > concept. Alex:: How is reality more than a certain concept? Name me even ONE WORD that isn't a concept. Sukin: It is concept when we think about it for sure. But thinking about people and things is different to thinking about seeing, visible object, loving kindness etc. The former do not exist and therefore cannot be distinguished by any characteristics. The latter unlike the former, have distinguishable characteristics knowable directly by panna. In other words there are concepts about the real and concepts about the unreal. But real is real no matter there is thinking about it or not. ============== > Alex: > Ultimately out of all of this discussion, regardless of the answer, the only thing that matters is: > > WHAT TO DO? Do you sit on the coach watching TV or develop N8P? > > Sukin: See, you have taken the N8FP to be associated with certain > conventional activity, >>>> Alex: A wonderful, smart, educated, well thought excuse not to follow the N8P. Do you think the Buddha was being figurative when he was teaching this crucial path? Sukin: You are over reacting. My statement does not say what you think it says. The 4NT is the Truth as DC has pointed out in another thread, of which the N8FP is one. You do seem to equate or at least to some extent identify, the N8FP with this idea of meditation. Doesn't it look like that it is you who is trying to fit one of the Noble Truths with some `conventional idea'?! ============== > which I presume is "meditation". Were you to > understand as I do, that the N8FP is a reference to a moment of > consciousness accompanied by 5, 6 or 8 specific mental factors and > that this like any other conditioned reality is not dependent on > concepts of time, place and posture, you will not make the kind of > statement you have made. Alex: See above. Another smart, logical, educated, "beated on anvil of logic", explanation not to follow Sila-Samadhi-Panna. Sukin: One thing a correct intellectual understanding of the Dhamma leads to, is to come to better recognize what the Wrong Paths might be. Apparently what you take to be the Right Path, this to me is an example of the Wrong Path. So from my pov, it is you rather who is *not* following the Buddha's Path. Sorry. As regards being logical etc., I'm sure that you are much more intelligent than I am. ============== > The N8FP being Satipatthana / Vipassana / Magga (but leaving out > this for the moment), has conditioned realities as object, Alex: All reality is CONDITIONED. It has to be FELT (or percieved, or cognized) in order to be Real. Otherwise we could say that giant green goblins are a reality that exist on this earth, but we just don't see them. Sukin: Isn't seeing, hearing, sound, hardness, feeling, anger etc. real? Even a schizophrenic will be able to make rightly the distinction between these and the idea of `green goblins'. The problem for him as is for us, is that we do not *understand* these to be mere elements but "know" them largely by way of concepts only. But then we study the Buddha's teachings to know that these experience that do occur all day are in fact only elements and anatta, as against "I see", "my feelings", "that table is hard" etc. With Dhamma we begin to distinguish between `seeing and the idea of self', `feeling and the idea of this belonging to me' and `hardness and the concept of table'. In other words we begin to distinguish reality from concept and what are but mere elements from the idea of "self" that follow. Not so complicated isn't it? And surely no need for any concentration or Jhana practice, but just to patiently develop better and better understanding of?? Besides aren't such concepts as Jhana and `sphere of neither perception nor non perception' which you so readily talk about and try to convince others of, aren't these SO far removed from experience? ============== > It is purely because of misunderstanding of the Path (Wrong View), > that one thinks that time, place, posture Alex: There is nothing magical about time, place, posture - except that some of them are more helpful and some are less. Sukin: But there is hardly any difference is there, between believing in a magical place and time, and stating that there is `better' place and posture? In both cases its belief in a `concept' at the expense of understanding that `there are only conditioned realities to be known'. Both takes us away from understanding the present moment. ============== and the need to choose an > object is necessary. The latter can ever be a "concept" only, Alex: Tell me one thing that ain't a concept! For worldlings even Nibbana is a concept. Sukin: The worldling is swimming in the ocean of concepts. But on hearing the dhamma he begins to distinguish, conceptually at first for sure, the difference between reality and concept. However to know only concept due to lack of wisdom is one thing, this is the function of Avijja, to choose to concentrate on a concept with the aim of developing understanding is another, this latter is a function of Miccha Ditthi. And there is no excuse for this! ============== > Therefore as far as I'm concerned, the N8FP can arise while > discussing, watching TV or being in the middle of any conventional > activity, as long as the understanding is there, that in fact there > are only fleeting dhammas arising and falling away. The question of > choosing "WHAT TO DO?" therefore has no place and would be a wrong > question. Alex: So one doesn't have to observe ethics, do the hard work in the trenches (meditation). This is nice! Sukin: If "one does" means `self view' is at work, and if "one doesn't" is a reaction to the recognition of that, can this be bad? ;-) Yes, we need to recognize the value of kusala over akusala dhammas. Of the latter, the worse is "self view" and this in fact is what needs to be dealt with first before one can expect the others to develop to any extent. "I" must do kusala, "I" must have Sila, "I" must meditate, etc these seem to be examples of the Wrong View. And so in discouraging them, why would it follow that one is then discouraging kusala in general? =============== Alex: Ajahn Chah (a GREAT MONK!!!! ) said to study one's heart, not the books. Considering that he was in Thai forest tradition, it meant mindfulness & samadhi. Sukin: Yes, A. Chah was my favorite until I met A. Sujin. I think he also said something like; "If sitting could lead to understanding, then chickens who sit all day, they would be well on their way to enlightenment". ;-) But seriously, I would ask A. Chah the same questions as I asked you. ================ > If you are so interested in making an "effort" to know directly > the nature of reality, why no effort NOW?! One reason is; that you > are lost in wrong ideas about "practice". Alex: Read about 4 right efforts? They are part of Samadhi. Sukin: No, these are reference to moments of satipatthana / vipassana highlighting four functions of Viriya. Alex, you may respond to this if you like. However unless I see a willingness to discuss in terms of dhammas and their functions, I think we should drop this discussion. Perhaps when I do see an opening, in other threads, I might want to discuss with you again. But for now, please allow me to bow out of this. I'm sure you wouldn't miss anything especially given my looong posts. ;-) As for me, it has been very useful to reflect on the different points brought up, and for this I thank you. Metta, Sukin #79468 From: mlnease Date: Tue Nov 27, 2007 11:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Angulimala m_nease Hello, Sachin(?), And welcome. Do your comments below refer to anything in particular in the PÄ?ḷi Tipiá¹? If so, could you please cite the text? If not, may I ask why you post them here? Thanks in Advance, mike Sachin Sarate wrote: > Before enlightenment there was no wisdom... it was sheer ignorance... > there was only darkness. > > If light enters a dark room... the darkness has to leave... > So as enlightenment generates in a mind... ignorance has to leave... no > need to get converted to Buddhism... follow the Dhamma!!! > > --Metta #79469 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 1:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings nilovg Dear Alex, Op 27-nov-2007, om 15:36 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Quick clarification: Is Sakkayaditthi a mental (or verbal) > misunderstanding? ------- Di.t.thi is wrong view. An unwholesome mental factor accompanying akusala citta. As we read in the suttas (for example S III, 1.1.1.) one may consider each of the five khandhas as self, or the self as possessing these, or containing them, or as contained within them. Thus there are twenty wrong views. The khandhas are actually nama and rupa, paramattha dhammas. At this moment there may be an idea of I see, I hear. One can only find out for oneself whether there is here the view of an abiding ego or not. Ven. Bodhi explains wrong views very well in his intro to the Muulapariyaaya Sutta, the Root of Existence. The person with sakkaayadi.t.thi next speculates about the future destination of his ego: I will be, believing in eternalism, or I will not be, believing in annihilationism. Personality belief can lead to many other kinds of wrong view. -------- > A:For example when someone says "I, You" and thinks > that "I" or "You" really exists as an atta? -------- N: The matter is more complex. One may cling to a self with only craving (not accompanied by wrong view), or with conceit or with wrong view. The conceit of I am (asmi maana) is not wrong view. Conceit does not arise together with wrong view. One finds oneself so important and then there may be conceit without wrong view. At a funeral, someone may think: I am alive, I exist, I am not like that dead person. I heard someone saying that. One cannot tell about someone else whether there is conceit or wrong view when he speaks about I or self. Moreover, wrong view and conceit can alternate very quickly. Nina. #79470 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 4:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Khun Sujin's explanations. jonoabb Hi Robert (and Nina) Robert wrote: > I could rephrase my questions to be - is DSG a group to discuss Khun > Sujin's interpretation of the Pali texts? > A fair question. Speaking for myself, I think the answer is a clear 'No'. I personally don't think in terms of a "Khun Sujin interpretation" (although I can see why others would), but only in terms of the details to be found in the texts and ancient commentaries (sometimes called the orthodox commentarial interpretation). It is perhaps because nowadays Khun Sujin is about the only acknowledged "teacher" who espouses the commentarial position that the two have become so closely associated. There is also the fact that many of us have known and studied the Dhamma with her for many years, and meet her from time to time for discussion, and feel she has a far better understanding of the teachings than anyone else we have come across, so of course this will mean more references on the list to her and to things she has said. But no-one is suggesting that anything she (or anyone) says should be accepted without being tested against the Tipitaka and ancient commentaries. So to answer your original question, yes, there is interest in discussion of Buddhism beyond her "teachings". Members may (and do) cite other modern-time "teachers", so please feel free to do so if that is a concern. (My own preference, though, is to to discuss by reference to the Tipitaka and ancient commentaries themselves, without reference to third-party "interpretations", as far as that is possible). Jon #79471 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 4:44 am Subject: Re: To Rob M re letter to grieving person philofillet Hi Sarah (and Rob) Thanks for the link. No, no recent loss - but I'll store your condolences for future use! I just need some inspiration for something a character in my novel is going through... Metta, Phil > Please share more of your reflections on the topic, Phil. Any recent loss > of a loved one? If so, my heart-felt condolences. #79472 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 5:49 am Subject: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, In all the holy sites we visited Acharn Sujin explained about the way to develop understanding of the realities that appear at this moment. She stressed the difference between thinking of terms and words denoting realities and the direct awareness of nåma and rúpa, the development of satipatthåna. She reminded us that we need patience to listen to the Dhamma, to consider it and to develop right understanding of realities. We have a long way to go in order to see realities as they are. On the basis of her explanations and our discussions I would like to deal with some points stressed by Acharn Sujin and often raised by others. We may know in theory that seeing sees what is visible, visible object, but it seems that we see people all the time. We usually think of concepts with ignorance and clinging, we are totally absorbed in them. Only through the development of direct awareness of realities can we prove that what the Buddha taught about the phenomena of our life is the truth. However, we need a firm foundation knowledge of paramattha dhammas so that we can verify the truth of these phenomena. Acharn Sujin stressed many times that there are three levels of the understanding of the Dhamma: the level of study, pariyatti, the level of practice, patipatti and the level of direct realization of the truth, paìivedha. Pariyatti is the firm foundation knowledge that can be a condition for patipatti, the practice or development of direct understanding. If we only think about it that citta, cetasika and rúpa are impermanent and that they arise and fall away, it is theoretical understanding that stems from listening to the teachings. Through the development of satipatthåna, which is the practice, the truth of what the Buddha taught can be directly realized. The aim of the study of the teachings should be direct understanding of the dhammas appearing at this moment. We should understand what satipatthåna is and what the objects of satipatthana are. Satipatthåna is the development of insight, vipassanå, the direct understanding of all realities of our life, of citta, cetasika (mental factors arising with the citta) and rúpa. Only one citta at a time arises and experiences one object. It seems that we see and hear at the same time, but when visible object is experienced, sound cannot be experienced at the same time. ******* Nina. #79473 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 6:28 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (71) nichiconn Dear Friends, Part 6 14. Ti.msanipaato 1. Subhaajiivakambavanikaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 392. "Di.t.thaa hi mayaa sucittitaa, sombhaa daarukapillakaani vaa; tantiihi ca khiilakehi ca, vinibaddhaa vividha.m panaccakaa. 393. "Tamhuddha.te tantikhiilake, vissa.t.the vikale parikrite; na vindeyya kha.n.daso kate, kimhi tattha mana.m nivesaye. 394. "Tathuupamaa dehakaani ma.m, tehi dhammehi vinaa na vattanti; dhammehi vinaa na vattati, kimhi tattha mana.m nivesaye. 395. "Yathaa haritaalena makkhita.m, addasa cittika.m bhittiyaa kata.m; tamhi te vipariitadassana.m, sa~n~naa maanusikaa niratthikaa. 396. "Maaya.m viya aggato kata.m, supinanteva suva.n.napaadapa.m; upagacchasi andha rittaka.m, janamajjheriva rupparuupaka.m. 397. "Va.t.taniriva ko.tarohitaa, majjhe pubbu.lakaa sa-assukaa; pii.lako.likaa cettha jaayati, vividhaa cakkhuvidhaa ca pi.n.ditaa. 390. For I have seen well-painted puppets or wooden amrionettes, dancers in various ways, fastened by strings and sticks. 391. If these strings and sticks are removed, thrown away, mutilated, scattered, could not be found, broken into pieces, what would one's mind fix on there? 392. These limbs of mine, being of such a kind, do not exist without these phenomena. As [the body] does not exist without phenomena, what would one's mind fix on there? 393. Just as you might see a picture painted on a wall, smeared on with yellow orpiment, your view of this is wrong. The perception they are human beings is groundless. 394. You blind one! You run after an empty thing, like an illusion placed in front of you, like a golden tree in a dream, like silver [coins] in the midst of people. 395. [An eye is] like a little ball set in a hollow, having a bubble in the middle, with tears. Eye secretion is produced here, too. Various sorts of eyes are rolled into balls. RD: Oh! I have seen it - a puppet well painted, with new wooden spindles, Cunningly fastened with strings and with pins, and diversely dancing. (390) But if the strings and the pins be all drawn out and loosened and scattered, So that the puppet be made non-existent and broken in pieces, Which of the parts wilt thou choose and appoint for thy heart's rest and solace? (391) Such is the manner wherein persist these poor little bodies: Take away members and attributes - nothing surviveth in any wise. Nothing surviveth! Which dost thou choose for thy heart's rest and solace? (392) E'en as a fresco one sees drawn on a wall, painted in ochre, [Giveth us naught of the true and the real, save in the seeming ;] *394 Thou herein with vision perverted [canst not distinguish; Judgest with] wisdom of average human, fallible, worthless. (393) O thou art blind! thou chasest a sham, deluded by puppet shows Seen in the midst of the crowd; thou deemest of value and genuine Conjurer's trickwork, trees all of gold that we see in our dreaming. (394) What is this eye but a little ball lodged in the fork of a hollow tree, Bubble of film, anointed with tear-brine, exuding slime-drops, Compost wrought in the shape of an eye of manifold aspects?' *395 (395) *394 I have filled up the somewhat elliptical style of the text from the Commentary. *395 Cf. Balzac's philosophe: 'Tiens,' dit-il, en voyant les pleurs de sa femme, 'j'ai de'compose' les larmes. Elles contiennent un peu de phosphate, de chaux, de chlorure de sodium, du mucus et de l'eau.' - La Recherche de l'Absolu. === to be continued, connie #79474 From: "Robert" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 6:32 am Subject: Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 1. avalo1968 Hello Nina, Thank you very much for your very readable and helpful summary of the explaination you received from Khun Sujin on developing understanding of the realities that appear at this moment. Nina: She stressed the difference between thinking of terms and words denoting realities and the direct awareness of nåma and rúpa, the development of satipatthåna. Robert A: I think this is a very important point - to go beyond words and concepts. Nina: We may know in theory that seeing sees what is visible, visible object, but it seems that we see people all the time. We usually think of concepts with ignorance and clinging, we are totally absorbed in them. Robert A: So what we are doing when we follow the Buddhist Path is developing the skill of being unabsorbed by them? Nina: Acharn Sujin stressed many times that there are three levels of the understanding of the Dhamma: the level of study, pariyatti, the level of practice, patipatti and the level of direct realization of the truth, paìivedha. Pariyatti is the firm foundation knowledge that can be a condition for patipatti, the practice or development of direct understanding. If we only think about it that citta, cetasika and rúpa are impermanent and that they arise and fall away, it is theoretical understanding that stems from listening to the teachings. Through the development of satipatthåna, which is the practice, the truth of what the Buddha taught can be directly realized. The aim of the study of the teachings should be direct understanding of the dhammas appearing at this moment. Robert A: Is there a sutta reference you can cite that describes the three levels of understanding as you have above? You said above that pariyatta can be a condition for patipatti. Are there other conditions for patipatti besides pariyatta, and if so, is there a sutta that describes all of them? In your description above, you said that satipatthana is the practice. Is there a pali word that you are translating when you use the word 'practice', and it is true that satipatthana is the practice or part of the practice? Sorry to deluge you with so many questions. Thank you, Robert A. #79475 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 6:37 am Subject: Vism.XVII,209 Vism.XVII,210 Vism.XVII,211 nichiconn dear friends, Aaruppato hi a~n~nasmimpi pa~ncavokaarabhave ta.m vipaakanaama.m hadayavatthuno sahaaya.m hutvaa cha.t.thassa manaayatanassa yathaa aaruppe vutta.m, tatheva avaka.msato sattadhaa paccayo hoti. Itaresa.m pana ta.m pa~ncanna.m cakkhaayatanaadiina.m catumahaabhuutasahaaya.m hutvaa sahajaatanissayavipaakavippayutta-atthi-avigatavasena chahaakaarehi paccayo hoti. Ki~nci panettha hetupaccayena, ki~nci aahaarapaccayenaati eva.m a~n~nathaapi paccayo hoti, tassa vasena ukka.msaavaka.mso veditabbo. 209. Besides the immaterial states, also in the five-constituent becoming that resultant mentality, in association with the heart-basis, is a condition in seven ways at the minimum, for the sixth, the mind base, in the same way as was said with respect to the immaterial states. But in association with the four primary elements, it is a condition in six ways, as conascence, support, kamma-result, dissociation, presence, and non-disappearance, conditions, for the other five beginning with the eye base. Some, however, is a condition as root-cause condition, and some as nutriment condition. It is by these that the maximum and minimum should be understood. {PoP p.676} For in another existence of the five constituents the resultant name becoming friendly with the heart-basis is at least a sevenfold cause of the sixth sense, the mind, as it has been said in the formless. Of the other five senses, that is, the eye and so on, it is a cause in six ways by way of co-existence, dependence, result, dissociation, presence, non-absence, after becoming friendly with the four great primaries. Here also some kind is cause through condition, some through sustenance. Thus the cause is also in other ways. In this way is the highest and the lowest number to be understood. Pavattepi tathaa hoti, paaka.m paakassa paccayo; apaaka.m avipaakassa, chadhaa cha.t.thassa paccayo. 210. Result is for result condition During a life in the same ways; While non-result the non-resultant Sixth conditions in six ways. {PoP p.676} So also at procedure the result Is cause of the result, the non-result Is sixfold cause of non-resultant sixth. Pavattepi hi pa~ncavokaarabhave yathaa pa.tisandhiya.m, tatheva vipaakanaama.m vipaakassa cha.t.thaayatanassa avaka.msato sattadhaa paccayo hoti. Avipaaka.m pana avipaakassa cha.t.thassa avaka.msatova tato vipaakapaccaya.m apanetvaa chadhaa paccayo hoti. Vuttanayeneva panettha ukka.msaavaka.mso veditabbo. 211. For as in rebirth-linking, so also in the course of an existence in the five-constituent becoming, resultant mentality is a condition in the seven ways at minimum for the resultant sixth base. But non-resultant mentality is a condition in ways at minimum for the non-resultant sixth base, leaving out kamma-result condition. The maximum and minimum should be understood in the way already stated. {PoP p.676} At procedure also as at rebirth in existence of the five constituents the resultant name is at least sevenfold cause of the resultant sixth sense. And by leaving out the resultant cause therefrom the non-resultant is at least sixfold cause of the non-resultant sixth. The highest and the lowest number is to be understood as said above. ===peace, connie #79476 From: "Robert" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 6:39 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Khun Sujin's explanations. avalo1968 Hello Jon, Thank you for your reply. Jon: There is also the fact that many of us have known and studied the Dhamma with her for many years, and meet her from time to time for discussion, and feel she has a far better understanding of the teachings than anyone else we have come across, so of course this will mean more references on the list to her and to things she has said. But no-one is suggesting that anything she (or anyone) says should be accepted without being tested against the Tipitaka and ancient commentaries. Robert: Would it be better to say that it should be tested not only against the Tipitaka and ancient commentaries, but also against reality? With metta, Robert A #79477 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:10 am Subject: Re: Angulimala truth_aerator Dear Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear Alex > Angulimala had developed the parami to a degree that he could become > one of the eighty leading disciples. I believe that he had accumulated > wisdom to an unimaginably high degree over aeon and aeons, much > higher than I will ever achieve in any life. > You feel your wisdom is higher- perhaps it is - who am I disagree. > robert >>>> 1) Which exactly Parami did Angulimala develop? 2) Was Metta one of them? 3) How could such developed disciple DO 1st degree MURDER of 999 people? I can understand accidental killing. I can understand killing someone in defense of someone else. I can understand killing in self defense. Even though KILLING of people is always unwholesome, some cases are less blameworthy than others. 4) What sort of bad, destruction and obstructive kamma did Angulimala develop? Lots of Metta, Alex #79478 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Khun Sujin's explanations. nilovg Dear Robert A, (and Howard), it is good you insist. Maybe this is an opportunity to clarify some things. Do insist again, if you want to know more! Jon answered with no. I like to add a few more things. Meanwhile I saw your next post which is very good, I do appreciate it. Op 28-nov-2007, om 2:01 heeft Robert het volgende geschreven: > I could rephrase my questions to be - is DSG a group to discuss Khun > Sujin's interpretation of the Pali texts? ------- N: I would like to give examples and then let you see for yourself. Yesterday I quoted a sutta in my Preserving the Buddha's Teachings (which Howard appreciated. Thanks, Howard). The Buddha said the same about hearing, etc, he spoke about experiences through the six doors. We may read this and that is all. But Kh Sujin will always remind us: this is about dhammas appearing just now, like seeing now, attachment now. She always leads us to the present moment. Is this her interpretation? Let us read again: You do not have to believe, do not delight in speculation. There are realities now, and more understanding of their characteristics can be developed. Is anattaa not central in the Buddha's teachings? Kh Sujin explains: is it self that is seeing? We did not create seeing, it is a conditioned dhamma. If there were no eysense and visible object there could not be seeing. We may hear these words and then forget about them. But we can consider them when seeing arises. Now, always now. That is the way to develop 'our own' understanding, not just by mere belief. Kh Sujin reminded us that we should be 'our own' refuge. She said: the Buddha taught us so that people could develop their own understanding. At the same time she also reminded us: it is not I who is considering or being aware. It is a dhamma, arising because of conditions. She said that the four noble Truths should be seen in relation to our daily life all the time. When visible object appears, it means that it has arisen and also that it falls away immediately. The falling away now of realities is dukkha. Lobha, attachment, is the second noble truth. Check whether from early morning on we were getting things for ourselves: breakfast, taking hold of this or that object, etc. There is very little daana in a day. Did we think of giving away things or of metta? We read in a sutta that lobha is our teacher (we follow!) and also our pupil, it is always with us, it always follows us. She reminds us of this when attachment comes in while wanting so much progress in understanding. She reminds us that here the patience comes in. After these examples you may draw your own conclusions as to your question: < is DSG a group to discuss Khun Sujin's interpretation of the Pali texts?> Khun Sujin very often answers a person's question with another question. Why? To make him figure out the answer for himself. Nina. #79479 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:47 am Subject: Re: Regarding Khandas, anatta & Control. truth_aerator Hi Sukinder, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > I got the impression that you do not want to continue this discussion. > But there seems to be some misunderstanding which others may also > share, so I would like to try and clarify. > > ============= > Alex: How are "Ultimate terms" anything other than simply pompous > conventions? > > Sukin: I think you may have in mind a meaning of "ultimate" quite > different from the way I use it. > "Reality" is something I contrast with "concept". Concepts include > ideas about people, things, situations, time, or any object of > consciousness which goes beyond the fundamentals of experience, namely > paramattha dhammas. Say, when I see this "computer screen", not only > is this a concept, but also those parts that define outline, shape, > depth and so on, beyond mere "visible object", are concepts. Visible > object on the other hand, is an example of "reality" and is the only > true object of "seeing". Other examples of realities include hearing, > hardness, feeling and the "thinking" which produces the idea of > "computer screen". These have characteristics, individual and general > and are irreducible. It is in reference to this that I regard them > also as "ultimate". This and the fact that developed wisdom has only > these as object of study / insight, and never of concepts such as > people, things, postures etc. >>>> When you say irreducible, are you refering to duration, amount of rupa particles, or the relative strength of each rupa particle? If the mind is removed, then there is no basis to say "This or that rupa exists/doesn't/both/neither." Thus in one way they aren't ultimate. > ============= > Alex: Since everything is impermanent, there can't be ultimacy found > anywhere. > > Sukin: This seems to be similar to the Mahayana / Nagarjuna arrival at> the idea of Emptiness. This latter imo, is just the result of armchair> philosophy, a misuse of the concept of conditionality / D.O. and > impermanence. Because conditioned, therefore no sabhava, because > impermanent, therefore no ultimacy. But that's just papanca in the > philosopher's mind. >>>> Don't call Buddha that! In fact Buddha's argument of Anatta (no sabhava) starts with ANICCA! >>> > How could Nagarjuna make any distinction about anything if there was > no distinct Sabhava that would differentiate one moment of experience from another? >>> The distinction is itself relative and conditioned (on the mind which makes the distinction). >>>>> The fact that many different dhammas each with distinct > characteristics, function and cause arise together and condition one > another does not mean the individual nature of each is borrowed. In > the same way, the fact that dhammas arise and fall away instantly does not negate their being `ultimately real'. >>>> >>>>>>> > Alex: Have you percieved "certain mental realities" ? > yes/no ? > > Sukin: If you mean by this, "has there been any insight into nama and rupa?", then the answer is a big NO. >>> Thus what sort of Ultimate reality, aside from "armchair philosophy" (your word, not mine) are you talking about? How can it be ultimate reality if it hasn't been percieved? Reality MUST be percieved in order to be reality, otherwise it remains in imagination/speculation! > ============= > Alex: Ultimate reality needs to have an ultimate observer for it to be > Ultimate Reality. Reality can't simply be somewhere without being > felt, perceived, or cognized in any way. > > Sukin: I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at. But the > wisdom of Vipassana which insights and knows reality as reality, > dhammas, ayatanas, khandhas, this itself is just another conditioned > ULTIMATE reality. >>>> What I said above is: In order for something to be other than armchair philosophy it must be percieved. > > Alex: When actual experience comes, I try not to think about it while it is happening. > > Sukin: But isn't "trying not to think", just more thinking? >>> No. > ============== > > Alex: > > Ultimately out of all of this discussion, regardless of the answer, > the only thing that matters is: > > > > WHAT TO DO? Do you sit on the coach watching TV or develop N8P? > > > > Sukin: See, you have taken the N8FP to be associated with certain > > conventional activity, > >>>> > > Alex: A wonderful, smart, educated, well thought excuse not to follow the > N8P. Do you think the Buddha was being figurative when he was > teaching this crucial path? > > Sukin: You are over reacting. My statement does not say what you think > it says. The 4NT is the Truth as DC has pointed out in another thread, > of which the N8FP is one. You do seem to equate or at least to some > extent identify, the N8FP with this idea of meditation. Doesn't it > look like that it is you who is trying to fit one of the Noble Truths with some `conventional idea'?! >>>> Meditation is where you can see Nama-Rupa and all of that. Ordinary activities scatter the mind too much and don't give the opportunity of seeing. In fact when one does meditation such as "anapanasati" with the goal of seeing Anicca-Dukha-Anatta & DO IS FULLFILING ALL 8 factors of N8P. > ============== > Sukin: Isn't seeing, hearing, sound, hardness, feeling, anger etc. > real? Even a schizophrenic will be able to make rightly the > distinction between these and the idea of `green goblins'. >>> 1st) Please define exactly what you mean by "real". 2) one can hallucinate sights, smells & sounds - is that real? For example: is seeing mirage of a water real? What is the difference between seeing mirage of a water vs Seeing real water that looks identical to mirage of a water? 3) In dreams you can see sights. Is that real sight? 4) We aren't Sarvastivadins. Past is no longer existing. Future is not yet existing. Present is when future (one non existant) becomes past (another non-existant). Furthermore in another thread I've said that we DO NOT normally percieve the absolute present. We react 1/4 seconds later (at least. Often for complex actions the reaction time is even slower). Thus what we recognize as "NOW" is in fact past (non-existent). > > In other words we begin to distinguish reality from concept and what > are but mere elements from the idea of "self" that follow. Not so > complicated isn't it? And surely no need for any concentration or > Jhana practice, but just to patiently develop better and better > understanding of?? Besides aren't such concepts as Jhana and `sphere > of neither perception nor non perception' which you so readily talk > about and try to convince others of, aren't these SO far removed from > experience? >>>> Jhana allows one to slow down the concept making activity of the mind and it also (atleast temporary) removes lust (which blinds us). Jhana is a tool that CAN be used for insight purposes. Besides, even in the base of nothingness there IS satipathana practice - so Buddhist Jhana isn't simply being "a bliss bunny" or knocking out oneself unconsious. Meditators would be stupid to waste years trying to enter a state where one doesn't see, hear, sense, cognize. Any non meditator can use a hammer for that. > Alex: There is nothing magical about time, place, posture - except that > some of them are more helpful and some are less. > > Sukin: But there is hardly any difference is there, between believing in a magical place and time, and stating that there is `better' place > and posture? >>>> Where is better to do lets say anapanasati: On the busy bus? or In a secluded place (such as a cave, under the tree, in abandoned building) ? > ============== > > Therefore as far as I'm concerned, the N8FP can arise while > > discussing, watching TV or being in the middle of any conventional > > activity, as long as the understanding is there, that in fact there are only fleeting dhammas arising and falling away. The question of choosing "WHAT TO DO?" therefore has no place and would be a wrong question. >>> When you have said about "any conventional activity", does it include being a Butcher, murderer, rapist or prostitute? Surely "any" needs to be removed. > > =============== > Alex: Ajahn Chah (a GREAT MONK!!!! ) said to study one's heart, not the > books. Considering that he was in Thai forest tradition, it meant > mindfulness & samadhi. > > Sukin: Yes, A. Chah was my favorite until I met A. Sujin. I think he > also said something like; > "If sitting could lead to understanding, then chickens who sit all > day, they would be well on their way to enlightenment". ;-) >>> Yes. Even Venerable TB has said that satipathana isn't bare observation. There are specific things to do and to avoid. Same with mindfulness of breathing. 2nd quote) Chickens do not have required roots, so even if they tried to do the best practice - they wouldn't do it. Lots of Metta, Alex #79480 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings truth_aerator Dear Nina --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: one may consider each of the five khandhas as self, or the self as possessing these, > or containing them, or as contained within them. Thus there are > twenty wrong views. The khandhas are actually nama and rupa, > paramattha dhammas. At this moment there may be an idea of I see, I > hear. One can only find out for oneself whether there is here the > view of an abiding ego or not. > Ven. Bodhi explains wrong views very well in his intro to the > Muulapariyaaya Sutta, the Root of Existence. > The person with sakkaayadi.t.thi next speculates about the future > destination of his ego: I will be, believing in eternalism, or I will > not be, believing in annihilationism. Personality belief can lead to > many other kinds of wrong view. > N: One may cling to a self with only craving (not accompanied by wrong view), or with conceit or with wrong view. > The conceit of I am (asmi maana) is not wrong view. One finds oneself so important and then there may be conceit without wrong view. At a funeral, someone may think: I am alive, I exist, I am not like that dead person. I heard someone saying that. >>> Thank you very much. Question: Maggots for example do not hold 20 self views. Maggots do not speculate about the past or the future. Maggots do not have conceits or big cravings. Thus they are enlightened? Please explain. Lots of Metta, Alex #79481 From: "nidive" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:56 am Subject: Re: Angulimala nidive Hi RobertK, > Angulimala had developed the parami to a degree that he could > become one of the eighty leading disciples. I believe that he had > accumulated wisdom to an unimaginably high degree over aeon and > aeons, much higher than I will ever achieve in any life. How does this (incredible) belief help you to achieve the goal of nibbana? Are you heaping up your hopes on an imaginery "accumulated wisdom"? Perhaps you might have elevated this "accumulated wisdom" to the status of God. Swee Boon #79482 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:21 am Subject: Re: Angulimala - Lack of Faith truth_aerator Dear Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear Alex > Angulimala had developed the parami to a degree that he could become > one of the eighty leading disciples. I believe that he had accumulated > wisdom to an unimaginably high degree over aeon and aeons, >> much higher than I will ever achieve in any life. >>> Wow, what a positive statement! Where is "your" faith faculty? Believe in yourself (vinnana-nama-rupa)! Best wishes to you! May you accumulate as much if not higher wisdom than Angulimala! Positive thinking!! Not negative. Lots of Metta, Alex #79483 From: Ken O Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Khun Sujin's explanations. ashkenn2k Hi Robert > I could rephrase my questions to be - is DSG a group to discuss > Khun Sujin's interpretation of the Pali texts? KO: Good question and thanks for your caution. Our interpretation is based not just on Vinaya and Suttas, we also based our interpretations on Abdhidhamma and commentaries. I think I should say, this is one of the unique list where we based on such interpretations which I believe shun by many practitioners nowadays. We do not based our interpretations on our own self interpretations, when it is self opinion, it would be said this is our personal opinion. My own feeling is that I based on this because we are in the age where there were many people who said many things about their own interpretations and these could be correct or incorrect. I prefer to base it on ancient words. If KS interpretations is not based on these words, I would not have discuss in this list at all. Also, many of us here comes a long way, some of us do not start with Thervada like myself. Sarah would know that I was very argumentative when I first started in DSG and also doubt them many times and countless times hurling many questions. This is only through many dicussions that I am convince they are right about the dhamma. If you observe, many people come to this list and ask us about the dhamma, interpretations of the dhamma and challenge us. Why, because in this list, you will get explanation of the dhamma where you seldom find in another. It may or may not in agreement with them, at least they know when they have doubt in certain matters, we give them an answer basing on the ancient commentaries and not our own, if there is, it would be qualify as our own opinion :-) Enjoy your stay here. You never know what hit you and one day you may say Eureka and become one of the dinosaurs, just like me. Cheers Kind regards Ken O #79484 From: Ken O Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Angulimala ashkenn2k Hi Alex > 3) How could such developed disciple DO 1st degree MURDER of 999 > people? I can understand accidental killing. I can understand > killing someone in defense of someone else. I can understand > killing in self defense. Even though KILLING of people is always > unwholesome, some cases are less blameworthy than others. > > 4) What sort of bad, destruction and obstructive kamma did > Angulimala develop? KO: Angulimala is a very interesting sutta. He was being hit by a stick, postherd and there was blood running from his cut head. Buddha said, "Bear it brahim! Bear it, brahim!. You are experiencing here and now the results of deeds because of which you might have been tortured in hell for many years, for many hundreds of years, for many thousands of years." The statement is clear that if he is not on the path, he would have experience the torture of his misdeeds by suffering in hell. Since because he became Arahant, his kamma is fully eradicated what he is experience now on this stick and postherd is his vipaka on the present life. A person wisdom does not deteriorate on what he did. Take for eg, Devadatta cause Buddha to bleed, he was sallowed by earth and suffer for many years in hell. But Buddha did say, if I did not forget, Devadatta would be a paccekaBuddha. Kamma is not deterministic. If it is, there is no way we go get out of samsara. Killing is bad, we know but it does not negate the wisdom that have developed. This sutta clearly shows that wisdom which is cultivated is not lost, and when the right situation arise, it would ripe. Cheers Kind regards Ken O #79485 From: Ken O Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings ashkenn2k Hi Alex No offense meant, are you a maggot and you know how they think :-))) Question: Maggots for example do not hold 20 self views. Maggots do >> not speculate about the past or the future. Maggots do not have > conceits or big cravings. Thus they are enlightened? KO: Now to serious business. Maggots do have cravings for life, if you notice they eat and eat to quickly gain weight and evolved. Why because of craving of being. Whether they have conceit or not, this I cannot ascertain, but I am certain they crave life, they cling to five aggregates. I believe they cling to the satisfaction of eating and being free of hunger. To evolve and perpetuate their next cycle of their own generations. again, I apologise if I offend you. Kind regards Ken O #79486 From: Dieter Möller Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) moellerdieter Hi James and others interested , quite a time passed that we communicated with eachother..I hope you are well.. ;-) I agree with your objection: there is an inaccessible generalization (sutta out of context )involved ...not fitting to prove the point :' For him (the Buddha) , the doctrine of not-self is a technique or strategy for liberation, and not a metaphysical or ontological position.". But provides this issue (anatta = strategy only ) evidence for a suspicion that the Venerable ' has self-view and wishes to promote self' , which triggered the recent discussion? It is certainly useful to look further into details of the article , i.e. the 3 remaining points , supporting the interpretation. B.T.W. : why did you choose to write to the publisher instead directly to the author, who -I assume (d) - may have been glad to find special interest in his essay and appreciate the opportunity to explain/clarify misunderstandings himself..? with Metta Dieter #79487 From: Ken O Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 10:00 am Subject: Re: Controlling Others Re: [dsg] Re: The Not-self strategy ... Freedom of Will ashkenn2k Hi Elaine Treat words like visible objects. Because of our conditioning of putting feelings into certain words, we react in certain ways. When we understand our reaction, reflect on our feelings, we will realise that because of conditions and causes, this arise, that arise. Or you could see it as suffering and what is suffering is not me, not I and not myself. Equanmity arise when we see things as it is, its characteristics and its reality. Why is there I to be angry about? Cheers This would take time, I took a very long time also, I used to be very emotional about it and now still emotional :-). I believe with reflecting and considering, I sure one day you would not react to emails emotionally but objectively. Emails are just plain visible objects :-) Cheers Ken O #79488 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 10:16 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Angulimala truth_aerator Dear Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > A person wisdom does not deteriorate on what he did. Take for eg, > Devadatta cause Buddha to bleed, he was sallowed by earth and suffer > for many years in hell. But Buddha did say, if I did not forget, > Devadatta would be a paccekaBuddha. >> But what sort of wisdom did he have before he started killing 999 people? Wouldn't someone with "Great Wisdom" abstain from killing at any cost? The point I am trying to make is that Buddha's Dhamma works WELL! It doesn't require extraordinary accumulation for Arahatship. Or lets also say it this way: The fact that you have access to Original Dhamma (found in suttas & Vinaya) and can practice - that is already an incredible accumulation! Oh and in AN there is a sutta which says that views can be lost (I assume it is pre-sotapanna views). "Monks, there are these five kinds of loss. Which five? Loss of relatives, loss of wealth, loss through disease, loss in terms of virtue, loss in terms of views. It's not by reason of loss of relatives, loss of wealth, or loss through disease that beings — with the break-up of the body, after death — reappear in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. It's by reason of loss in terms of virtue and loss in terms of views that beings — with the break-up of the body, after death — reappear in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. These are the five kinds of loss. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.130.than.html#los s5 Lots of Metta, Alex #79489 From: Ken O Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 10:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Khandhas are uncontrollable ... Partial Controllability ... ashkenn2k Hi Alex > The murders he did was simply due to conditions? Or was it a > volitional choice. KO: Another intersting question hence I put off my sleep for another 15 mins. If I am not wrong, he believe that by killing 1000 people he would gain back the trust of his teacher. And by doing it it again and again, this increase the conditioning. Because of his believe, he is condition to act in this way. Just like the sutta on the dog asectics and cow ascetics, they believe and they act in this way. Similiary when we believe in kusala, we also act in this way. We are already condition by it. Thus we always say, listen and considering the dhamma, what we listen, we incline, we ponder and this condition our habitual behaviour. Kind regards Ken O #79490 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 10:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings truth_aerator Dear Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Hi Alex > > No offense meant, are you a maggot and you know how they think :-))) >> No offence taken. You've said a good point, how do I know how maggots think? Since I am not a maggot now, I do not have 1st hand experience. However we can be certain that WE are more intelligent than them. Since we are more intelligent than maggots, we can, through observation determine approximate level of intelligence that maggots have. > Question: Maggots for example do not hold 20 self views. Maggots do > >> not speculate about the past or the future. Maggots do not have > > conceits or big cravings. Thus they are enlightened? > KO: Now to serious business. Maggots do have cravings for life, if > you notice they eat and eat to quickly gain weight and evolved. Why > because of craving of being. Whether they have conceit or not, this I cannot ascertain, but I am certain they crave life, they cling to > five aggregates. I believe they cling to the satisfaction of eating > and being free of hunger. To evolve and perpetuate their next cycle > of their own generations. > > again, I apologise if I offend you. > > > Kind regards > Ken O Their craving to eat is obviously a much smaller craving than human cravings. It is also possible that their "craving to eat" is almost subconscious and thus not a real volition. Many scientists used to believe that animals are merely robots, without real 'consciousness'. While I don't believe that, I am certain that maggots 'desires', etc, if aren't almost completely subconscious are in no way blown up desires like humans and higher animals have. For example Buddha has said (cut outs): To a toddler, who moves about with difficulty, there is not even a self. How could a view arise about a self?... Maalunkhyaputta, to a toddler who moves about with difficulty, there are not even thoughts... ? To a toddler who moves about with difficulty there are not even virtues. How could there be a holding to virtues as high? Malunkhyaputta, to a toddler there is not even sensual desires..How could there be interest for sensual desires?.Malunkhyaputta, to a toddler beings don't matter. How could he have anger towards beings? http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/064-maha-malunkhyaputta-e1.htm Similiar with Maggots. Lots of Metta, Alex #79491 From: "shennieca" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 10:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings shennieca Hi KenO, Imo, maggots don't "think" as much as human beings because their brains are not very developed, but this is only a speculation, who knows, they may be more intellectual than us, and they know the answers for atomic fusions already. (But I don't think so). I think, all worldlings have a sense of self. If a puthujjana says he/she doesn't have a sense of self, it is strange. Only Arahants don't have the sense of self. Humans beings who have not seen the real not-self, cannot escape from sakkaya-ditthi. If anyone says they don't have sakkaya-ditthi, then they must have realized the real not-self and is enlightened already. Realizing 'not-self' is wisdom, it is not a concept. How do we realize this non-conceptual not-self? It is by using this : sila- >samadhi->panna formula. (quote) Sakkaya-ditthi can only be destroyed completely by the noble path and fruit: the three supramundane virtues of morality, concentration and wisdom. It is therefore imperative to work for the development of these virtues. How should one do the work? By means of noting or observing one must go out from the jurisdiction of defilements (kilesa). One should practice by constantly noting or observing every act of seeing, hearing, etc., which are the constituent 'physical and mental' processes, till one is freed from sakkaya-ditthi, the wrong view of self. (unquote) by Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw. I think it would be really nice if we can laugh and play and say that it is samadhi because we know the rising and falling of the dhamma. (Oh, only if enlightenment twere that easy). With metta, Elaine #79492 From: "shennieca" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 10:59 am Subject: Controlling Others Re: [dsg] Re: The Not-self strategy ... Freedom of Will shennieca Hi KenO, Thank you for your e-m. :-)) Sometimes it is difficult to observe feelings when it becomes emotional. I know, emotion is just a 'mental formation', it shouldn't last very long. But I don't understand why some people grieve for years for their loved ones. Shouldn't it last for a split second and it passes away? Why does it arise again and again? :-(( I've heard one of my friends says how much she hates her father. She really hated her father when he was alive, and when he died, she has never visited his grave. Sometimes in the middle of the night she wakes up screaming, she dreamt of strangling his neck ! Why does that type of anger and hatred arises? She says it is uncontrollable, it pops up in her dreams occasionally and she cannot control what she dreams about. She cannot forgive her father at all. I think, if she forgives him, the nightmare won't happen as often. She went for therapy and all but it didn't help her. :-(( I don't have that type of anger, thank goodness. I'm happy and contented. :-)) I'm sorry if my e-m is preachy. But it is uncontrollable, I blame it on the causes and conditions! hmmm.. With metta, Elaine ---------------------- #79493 From: mlnease Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 11:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings m_nease Hi Nina, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > One may cling to a self with only > craving (not accompanied by wrong view), or with conceit or with > wrong view. > The conceit of I am (asmi maana) is not wrong view. Conceit does not > arise together with wrong view. One finds oneself so important and > then there may be conceit without wrong view. At a funeral, someone > may think: I am alive, I exist, I am not like that dead person. I > heard someone saying that. > One cannot tell about someone else whether there is conceit or wrong > view when he speaks about I or self. Moreover, wrong view and conceit > can alternate very quickly. > Nina. Thanks for this--I find these fine points most helpful. The more we know about akusala the less likely we are to be fooled by it, I think. mike #79494 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 11:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (40) nilovg Dear Phil, Op 27-nov-2007, om 17:26 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > One learns to > > see it as an element, but such understanding has to grow. Only an > > anaagaami has eradicated lust. > > Ph: Thanks Nina. It makes me happy to be discussing dhammas in > this way with you again. :) ------ N: I am happy too and I like to discuss Dhamma with you:-)) Nina. #79495 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 11:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Rob M re letter to grieving person nilovg Dear Sarah, Phil, I liked especially this: The Buddha also explained this by saying to a grieving person that he was as it were trying to catch the moon. Yes Phil, do you have a reason to ask for such advice? NIna. Op 28-nov-2007, om 5:00 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Please share more of your reflections on the topic, Phil. Any > recent loss > of a loved one? If so, my heart-felt condolences. #79496 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 12:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings nilovg Dear Alex. Op 28-nov-2007, om 16:52 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Question: Maggots for example do not hold 20 self views. Maggots do > not speculate about the past or the future. Maggots do not have > conceits or big cravings. Thus they are enlightened? ------- When reborn as an animal no wisdom with the rebirth-consciousness and thus no way to attain enlightenment. The rebirth-consciousness is akusala vipaaka, the result of akusala kamma. As you can imagine, lots of delusion in such life. Nina. #79497 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 12:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (39) nilovg Dear Han, I understand you are still not happy with this Jataka. I am just thinking of the point that is made: truthfulness is indispensable for a Bodhisatta. And yes, this has been brought in a very forceful way. Op 27-nov-2007, om 16:23 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Thirdly, despite this sin, when he died he entered the > Brahma plane (of course, after correcting himself!). > > Anyway, if you can condone him for this sin just > because he told the truth, I have nothing more to say. -------- N: It was kusala kamma of a high degree (jhaana) that resulted in rebirth in a brahma plane. But the law of kamma and vipaaka is very just. When akusala kamma has been committed, the result will be produced sooner or later, even when one makes amends. Who knows what terrible deeds we have done in past lives? Akusala kamma cannot be made undone. It is as it is. Even arahats can still experience unhappy results. But they do not commit new kamma that could produce rebirth. Nina. #79498 From: "shennieca" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 12:48 pm Subject: Re: Angulimala shennieca Hi Swee Boon, Alex, all, From what I gathered from this discussion is that, when the causes and conditiosn for killing appears, the person will kill. Why did it happen 999 times? It is because the causes and conditions for killing had appeared 999 times. (?, maybe) I think, he had the will to stop killing, but he thought he was doing his teacher a favor or something like that (I don't remember exactly). So his actions was motivated by his teacher and his ignorance (avijja). So, even though Angulimala had a will, that will is a "conditioned will" because he had wrong-understanding at that time. And why did wisdom suddenly appear? It is because the right causes and conditions for wisdom had appeared. Angulimala met the Buddha and he heard the Dhamma, and the right cause and condition for him to attain Nibbana had appeared. Then he knew that his old teacher had fooled him into doing all these bad things. So, life's like that... dependent on causes and conditions. I think, we are very fortunate that our causes and conditions are right for us to listen to the Dhamma. Some people don't have this opportunity at all. I suppose they have to wait till their conditions are right..(??) Don't know when these right conditions will come though. So, in the end, Nibbana becomes a waiting game. Am I understanding causes and conditions correctly? ... (hmmm, very unsure). With metta, Elaine ------------------------ --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi RobertK, > > > Angulimala had developed the parami to a degree that he could > > become one of the eighty leading disciples. I believe that he had > > accumulated wisdom to an unimaginably high degree over aeon and > > aeons, much higher than I will ever achieve in any life. > > How does this (incredible) belief help you to achieve the goal of > nibbana? > > Are you heaping up your hopes on an imaginery "accumulated wisdom"? > > Perhaps you might have elevated this "accumulated wisdom" to the > status of God. > > Swee Boon > #79499 From: "shennieca" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 1:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (39) shennieca Hello Nina, (Han, all), I have a question. > The Text: > "The recluse who was unable to apply mindfulness, went inside, seized the queen by her hand and then they gave themselves over to misconduct." (unquote). The text says the recluse was unable to apply mindfulness, so he committed the sin. Shouldn't the text just say, because "the causes and conditions for lust has arisen and the causes and conditions for mindfulness has Not arisen", therefore he committed the sin. (Too bad the mindfulness didn't arise for him at that time!) (???). What is the correct explanation for this 'mindfulness' not arising? And for committing the sin? I think, the recluse knows that adultery is a bad, but he did it anyway. So, maybe he had a choice whether to do it or not. Or is it totally, totally "conditioned by lust". ((rolleyes)). Therefore, it is not his fault. (I don't think so). Sometimes "conditions" is an excuse for doing something wrong..no? With metta, Elaine #79500 From: han tun Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 3:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (39) hantun1 Dear Nina, > Nina: I understand you are still not happy with this Jataka. I am just thinking of the point that is made: truthfulness is indispensable for a Bodhisatta. And yes, this has been brought in a very forceful way. Han: I am not happy with this Jataka. I think it is a poor selection of example to show truthfulness is indispensable for a Bodhisatta. There must be many other Jatakas which are better examples than this. I will present one Jataka which was mentioned by U Shwe Aung a few posts later. -------------------- > > Han: Thirdly, despite this sin, when he died he entered the Brahma plane (of course, after correcting himself!). > > Anyway, if you can condone him for this sin just because he told the truth, I have nothing more to say. > Nina: It was kusala kamma of a high degree (jhaana) that resulted in rebirth in a brahma plane. But the law of kamma and vipaaka is very just. When akusala kamma has been committed, the result will be produced sooner or later, even when one makes amends. Who knows what terrible deeds we have done in past lives? Akusala kamma cannot be made undone. It is as it is. Even arahats can still experience unhappy results. But they do not commit new kamma that could produce rebirth. Han: I am satisfied with the above explanation. Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #79501 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 10:33 am Subject: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina et al upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and other admirers of Ajahn Sujin) - I think that the Ajahn's understanding of the Dhamma may be along the following lines: 1) The Buddhadhamma is the true pointing at what is real, and the true map of the way to awakening. 2) Because of the very special nature of the Buddhadhamma, the study and contemplation of the Tipitaka not only provides intellectual knowledge of "the real", but also serves to condition the mind to the point of enabling 'cultivation' by which term is understood the (automatic) resultant development of kusala traits including equanimity, purification, energy, ready concentration and attention, keen mindfulness, wisdom, and relinquishment, and this cultivation in turn leads onwards to the four stages of awakening. 3) There is no need whatsoever to intentionally "do" anything, and, moreover, any attempt to do so not only is fruitless, but is counterproductive in that it solidifies sense of self and grasping, and is the diametric opposite of relinquishment. Even the study and contemplation of the Dhamma is not something usefully "done on purpose", again because of involvement of atta-view, but it occurs, if it occurs, because of interest and opportunity as determined by prior conditions. I would simply like to know whether my take on her approach is correct or not, and if not, to know where it is in error. As for what I wrote, other than the first item I don't share that perspective, and I don't think it correctly captures the Buddha's teachings, but I do find it very interesting - even captivating. With metta, Howard #79502 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 10:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 11/28/2007 10:52:32 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Question: Maggots for example do not hold 20 self views. Maggots do not speculate about the past or the future. Maggots do not have conceits or big cravings. Thus they are enlightened? ============================ Yes, Alex. They *are* enlightened. In fact, I make semi-annual pilgrimages to a garbage dump in Brooklyn for instruction. I always come away just a little wiser, and my practice benefits from the visit to the dump, for I find that upon return home many of my good friends in the Dhamma consistently urge that I immediately seek out viveka. ;-)) With manic metta, Howard P. S. A drop more seriously: Alex, what did you view as mistaken in what Nina wrote, and why? (It seemed pretty much on-target to me.) #79503 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 4:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings truth_aerator Dear Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > > Hi, Alex - > > In a message dated 11/28/2007 10:52:32 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > truth_aerator@... writes: > > Question: Maggots for example do not hold 20 self views. Maggots do > not speculate about the past or the future. Maggots do not have > conceits or big cravings. Thus they are enlightened? > ============================ > P. S. A drop more seriously: Alex, what did you view as mistaken in what Nina wrote, and why? (It seemed pretty much on-target to me.) >>>> I want to hear a deeper reply than simply "not hold 20 self views, craving or conceit" for the sakkaya ditthi to disappear forever and for good. For example Buddha has said (cut outs from mn64): To a toddler, who moves about with difficulty, there is not even a self. How could a view arise about a self?... Maalunkhyaputta, to a toddler who moves about with difficulty, there are not even thoughts... ? To a toddler who moves about with difficulty there are not even virtues. How could there be a holding to virtues as high? Malunkhyaputta, to a toddler there is not even sensual desires..How could there be interest for sensual desires?.Malunkhyaputta, to a toddler beings don't matter. How could he have anger towards beings? http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/064-maha-malunkhyaputta-e1.htm Lots of Metta, Alex #79504 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 5:33 pm Subject: Re: Angulimala philofillet Hi Ken O and all > A person wisdom does not deteriorate on what he did. I think we should be careful in studying extraordinary anecdotes about arahants when considering this. More importantly, for example, as Nina just pointed out, if one if reborn in the animal realm, there is no wisdom. Paying attention to one's morality in the interest of reducing the likelihood of an woeful-realm rebirth (=wisdom deteriorates) is a good idea, I think, and you find it again and again in AN suttas. (And elsewhere, I'm sure.) Metta, Phil #79505 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 5:46 pm Subject: Re: Angulimala rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi Ken O and all > > > A person wisdom does not deteriorate on what he did. > > I think we should be careful in studying extraordinary anecdotes > about arahants when considering this. More importantly, for example, as > Nina just pointed out, if one if reborn in the animal realm, there is > no wisdom. Paying attention to one's morality in the interest of > reducing the likelihood of an woeful-realm rebirth (=wisdom > deteriorates) is a good idea, I think, and you find it again and again > in AN suttas. (And elsewhere, I'm sure.) > > Metta, > > Phil _____ Dear Phil, How can we not pay attention to anecdotes that are in the scriptures? Devadatta will become a pacceka buddha becuase of his accumulations of wisdom- that is what is said. Could you also expalin why knowing this would lead one to not pay attnetion to morality? Robert > #79506 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 6:07 pm Subject: Perfectly instructive whether kusala or akusala (was Re: Angulimala philofillet Hi Robert > How can we not pay attention to anecdotes that are in the scriptures? > Devadatta will become a pacceka buddha becuase of his accumulations > of wisdom- that is what is said. Of course, let's study them, you're right. But I think more mundane considerations of morality should predominate, in my opinion. That's me. I'm more interested in the immorality that conditions woeful-realm rebirth than the rarefied kind of morality that leads to ariyanhood. You know, the "avoid evil, do good, purify the mind." There is a real reason the "avoid evil" is always mentionned first, I think. Though I have heard it misquoted in discussions as "do good, avoid evil, purify the mind." Be careful on that one, Jon - it was you, on a couple of occasions. ;) > Could you also expalin why knowing > this would lead one to not pay attnetion to morality? I think there is a danger of being too keen on understanding moments of akusala as not-self, etc. For example, there is a quote of your I have always liked, about how one gradually becomes less interested in whether there is kusala or akusala and the emphasis shifts to the anattaness of every moment, and thus every moment is "perfectly instructive." Yes, that's true, that's the way the progress would come, but I think it's dangerous if one over- emphasizes the protective aspect of one's baby panna, something like that. Actually, Robert, this is a great opportunity to bring up that quote, which I've wanted to do, and discuss it with you more, if you don't mind. I remember our great discussion at the airport cafe and I haven't had a good talk with you for ages. Do you know the quote I'm referring to? Naomi's going to get pissed if I don't get off the computer tout de suite so I've got to...AARRHH..(thud) Metta, Phil Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Ken O and all > > > > > A person wisdom does not deteriorate on what he did. > > > > I think we should be careful in studying extraordinary anecdotes > > about arahants when considering this. More importantly, for example, > as > > Nina just pointed out, if one if reborn in the animal realm, there is > > no wisdom. Paying attention to one's morality in the interest of > > reducing the likelihood of an woeful-realm rebirth (=wisdom > > deteriorates) is a good idea, I think, and you find it again and again > > in AN suttas. (And elsewhere, I'm sure.) > > > > Metta, > > > > Phil > _____ #79507 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 6:24 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) buddhatrue Hi Dieter, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Dieter Möller wrote: > B.T.W. : why did you choose to write to the publisher instead directly to the author, who -I assume (d) - may have been glad to find special interest in his essay and appreciate the opportunity to explain/clarify misunderstandings himself..? > > with Metta Dieter I have sent an e-mail to Ven. Thanissaro before, and a physical letter through the mail, about another matter, but I never got a response. So, this time, I thought a more effective route would be to write to the website publisher. Metta, James #79508 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 6:35 pm Subject: Re: Angulimala - Lack of Faith rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > > Dear Robert, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > Dear Alex > > Angulimala had developed the parami to a degree that he could > become > > one of the eighty leading disciples. I believe that he had > accumulated > > wisdom to an unimaginably high degree over aeon and aeons, > > >> > much higher than I will ever achieve in any life. > >>> > > Wow, what a positive statement! Where is "your" faith faculty? > Believe in yourself (vinnana-nama-rupa)! >------------- Dear Alex , "Belief in yourself": we need to be careful as that can be wrong view, or clinging or conceit. Saddha is something different, it comes without any attachment , it is not so common. In a Buddha sasana, out of the all arahats, there are only eighty leading disciples . It is a very rare thing, . I think few people have such wisdom and determination, metta , or energy to become such. Even to become a sukka vipassaka arahat already needs an extraordinary degree of wisdom and other parami. Further than that the one who becomes such an arahat must recieve a firm prediction from a Buddha who sees that he has the needed requisites. To claim that one can become one of these, or to think that one has more wisdom than such a one, .. well is it wisdom or saddha or something else? Robert #79509 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 6:48 pm Subject: Re: Angulimala rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi RobertK, > > > Angulimala had developed the parami to a degree that he could > > become one of the eighty leading disciples. I believe that he had > > accumulated wisdom to an unimaginably high degree over aeon and > > aeons, much higher than I will ever achieve in any life. > > How does this (incredible) belief help you to achieve the goal of > nibbana? > > Are you heaping up your hopes on an imaginery "accumulated wisdom"? > > Perhaps you might have elevated this "accumulated wisdom" to the > status of God. > ____________ Dear Swee Boon, Accumulations are very natural, nothing related to God. Every moment there are accumulations- usually of lobha and ignorance. Knowing about accumulations means that very moment becomes very precious. Here are some quotes from the texts about accumlations: From the Therigatha: Talking about Theri Sundarinanda that at the time of the Buddha Padumuttara "she heard the doctrine preached...she ACCUMULATED merit for one hundred thousand aeons journeying on among devas and men." Finally she attained under this Buddha. The Theri Sukkha heard the Buddha Vipassi. She gained faith, went forth, was one of great learning, expert in the doctrine and possessed of intelligence. Similarly at the time of the Blessed one Sikhi and the Blessed one Vessabhu she observed virtuous conduct and was one of great learning and one expert in the Dhamma. Similarly she went forth in the teaching of Kakusandha, Konagama and Kassapa Buddha's, and she was one of pure virtuos conduct, one of great learning, and one who preached the doctrine..In this buddha era she went forth under Dhammadina and finally became arahant." The time between even one buddha is immense but conditions are carried on citta to citta. Or this one Theri Anopama (p178 of translation by Pruitt) "she too performed meritorious deeds under previous Buddhas and accumulated good in various lives as basis for release" . Panna is primary but it needs assistance from other conditions too, so the other parami must also be developed. So long have all of us being imprisoned in samsara- because of wrong of view of self and conceit and tanha that attaches so strongly to wrong view. Even one aeon, it is hard to imagine how long it is, and the number of aeons is more than the grains of sand in the ocean. No other way out than by developing insight into the Dhamma. Tanha, ditthi and mana block the way and they too are accumulated. Robertk #79510 From: "Raymond Hendrickson" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings bitakarma > [Original Message] > From: Alex > To: > Date: 11/28/2007 4:29:10 PM > Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings > > Dear Howard, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > > > > >Alex says.... > I want to hear a deeper reply than simply "not hold 20 self views, > craving or conceit" for the sakkaya ditthi to disappear forever and > for good. > > > For example Buddha has said (cut outs from mn64): > To a toddler, who moves about with difficulty, there is not even a > self. How could a view arise about a self?... Maalunkhyaputta, to a > toddler who moves about with difficulty, there are not even > thoughts... ? To a toddler who moves about with difficulty there are > not even virtues. How could there be a holding to virtues as high? > Malunkhyaputta, to a toddler there is not even sensual desires..How > could there be interest for sensual desires?.Malunkhyaputta, to a > toddler beings don't matter. How could he have anger towards beings? > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/064-maha-malunkhyaputta-e1.htm > > > Lots of Metta, > > Alex > The Buddha says that these questions might be put by "wanderers of other sects" who might "confute you with the simile of the infant?" The Buddha gives the answer to each within the body of the text you quoted...from Middle Lenght Diccourses....."Yet the underlying tendency to personality view lies within him......Yet the Underlying tendency to doubt lies within him" etc for each of the questions.... later in the Sutta he gives the way to the escape from arisen personality view, etc....Ra #79511 From: "Robert" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:25 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Khun Sujin's explanations. avalo1968 Hello Ken O, Thank you for your reply. Ken O: Enjoy your stay here. You never know what hit you and one day you may say Eureka and become one of the dinosaurs, just like me. Cheers Robert A: That could be, but we will see. I have some things to see my way through before I would count myself as "one of the dinosaurs", as you put it. But I do thank all the DSGers for the courtesy and helpfulness offered to the unconvinced such as myself. With metta, Robert A. #79512 From: "Robert" Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:47 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Khun Sujin's explanations. avalo1968 Hello Nina, Thank you very much for your detailed reply: Nina: I would like to give examples and then let you see for yourself. Yesterday I quoted a sutta in my Preserving the Buddha's Teachings (which Howard appreciated. Thanks, Howard). The Buddha said the same about hearing, etc, he spoke about experiences through the six doors. We may read this and that is all. But Kh Sujin will always remind us: this is about dhammas appearing just now, like seeing now, attachment now. She always leads us to the present moment. Is this her interpretation? Robert A: It is an interpretation and a correct one, I believe. Nina: Let us read again: You do not have to believe, do not delight in speculation. There are realities now, and more understanding of their characteristics can be developed. Is anattaa not central in the Buddha's teachings? Kh Sujin explains: is it self that is seeing? We did not create seeing, it is a conditioned dhamma. If there were no eysense and visible object there could not be seeing. We may hear these words and then forget about them. But we can consider them when seeing arises. Now, always now. That is the way to develop 'our own' understanding, not just by mere belief. Kh Sujin reminded us that we should be 'our own' refuge. She said: the Buddha taught us so that people could develop their own understanding. At the same time she also reminded us: it is not I who is considering or being aware. It is a dhamma, arising because of conditions. She said that the four noble Truths should be seen in relation to our daily life all the time. When visible object appears, it means that it has arisen and also that it falls away immediately. The falling away now of realities is dukkha. Lobha, attachment, is the second noble truth. Check whether from early morning on we were getting things for ourselves: breakfast, taking hold of this or that object, etc. There is very little daana in a day. Did we think of giving away things or of metta? We read in a sutta that lobha is our teacher (we follow!) and also our pupil, it is always with us, it always follows us. She reminds us of this when attachment comes in while wanting so much progress in understanding. She reminds us that here the patience comes in. After these examples you may draw your own conclusions as to your question: < is DSG a group to discuss Khun Sujin's interpretation of the Pali texts?> Khun Sujin very often answers a person's question with another question. Why? To make him figure out the answer for himself. Robert A: Again, as far as you have described to this point, I have no disagreement with Khun Sujin's interpretation. In fact, I don't know of any Theravada teacher who would disagree with what you have said above, so I don't believe what you have said so far captures the distinctive character of DSG discourse. If it did, I would wonder what is the source of all the lively debate? With metta, Robert A. #79513 From: johnny pruitt Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 3:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings mahasacham I dont understand why conceit cannot occure while self view is present. What is it about these two cetasikas that contradict one another. It seems in order to have conceit one has to have a view of themself. mlnease wrote: > One may cling to a self with only > craving (not accompanied by wrong view), or with conceit or with > wrong view. > The conceit of I am (asmi maana) is not wrong view. Conceit does not > arise together with wrong view. One finds oneself so important and > then there may be conceit without wrong view. At a funeral, someone > may think: I am alive, I exist, I am not like that dead person. I > heard someone saying that. > One cannot tell about someone else whether there is conceit or wrong > view when he speaks about I or self. Moreover, wrong view and conceit > can alternate very quickly #79514 From: mlnease Date: Wed Nov 28, 2007 10:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings m_nease Hi Johnny, johnny pruitt wrote: > I dont understand why conceit cannot occure while self view is present. > What is it about these two cetasikas that contradict one another. It > seems in order to have conceit one has to have a view of themself. Excellent questions in my opinion, but addressed to the wrong person. I was quoting Nina below: > mlnease > wrote: > > One may cling to a self with only > > craving (not accompanied by wrong view), or with conceit or with > > wrong view. > > The conceit of I am (asmi maana) is not wrong view. Conceit does not > > arise together with wrong view. One finds oneself so important and > > then there may be conceit without wrong view. At a funeral, someone > > may think: I am alive, I exist, I am not like that dead person. I > > heard someone saying that. > > One cannot tell about someone else whether there is conceit or wrong > > view when he speaks about I or self. Moreover, wrong view and conceit > > can alternate very quickly For what it's worth, it seems to me that, conventionally speaking, conceit and a view of oneself can of course occur together, along with almost anything else conceptual. Ultimately though, these mental factors obey different rules from what is conceptually, conventionally possible. That's the way I see it. Nina can explain it far better, if she has time. I believe she's very busy right now. Nice to hear from you, Johhny. mike #79515 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina et al nilovg Hi Howard (and friends), Thank you for your post. As always you seriously thought over the matter. But now Larry is waiting with the Vis., I have such a lot of work. Many posts unanswered. I have to delay but I will not forget you! Nina. Op 29-nov-2007, om 0:33 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I think that the Ajahn's understanding of the Dhamma may be along the > following lines: #79516 From: Dieter Möller Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) moellerdieter Hi James, you wrote: 'I have sent an e-mail to Ven. Thanissaro before, and a physical letter through the mail, about another matter, but I never got a response. So, this time, I thought a more effective route would be to write to the website publisher.' D: good that I asked... ;-) with Metta Dieter #79517 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Angulimala nilovg Dear Robert and Phil, Robert, you gave clear examples here. Phil: Siila is included among the paramis, and we read that there was not any kind of siila the Bodhisatta had not observed. Perhaps this appeals to you, Phil. Nina. Op 29-nov-2007, om 3:48 heeft rjkjp1 het volgende geschreven: > Or this one Theri Anopama (p178 of translation by Pruitt) > "she too performed meritorious deeds under previous Buddhas and > accumulated good in various lives as basis for release" . Panna is > primary but it needs assistance from other conditions too, so the > other > parami must also be developed. > > So long have all of us being imprisoned in samsara- because of > wrong of > view of self and conceit and tanha that attaches so strongly to > wrong view. > Even one aeon, it is hard to imagine how long it is, and the number of > aeons is more than the grains of sand in the ocean. > No other way out than by developing insight into the Dhamma. Tanha, > ditthi and mana block the way and they too are accumulated. #79518 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 2:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina et al dcwijeratna Dear Howard, Khun Sujin's teaching, from the discussions going on in the DSG, appears to me as 'adiccha-samuppanna vaada.' Things arising without a cause. I could be wrong, of course. There is nothing wrong with holdin such a view. But to give false impressions, that it is the teaching of the Buddha, or use Dhamma to justify her teachings, is not proper. With mettaa, D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #79519 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 2:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Homework Paper to be Graded nilovg Hi Tep, a good idea to rephrase, so that I can see whether I should add more clarifications. Op 23-nov-2007, om 22:20 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > Your feedback on the right meanings of these terms may be given as > follows. The words in quotations are yours. > > 1. There are two different meanings for nimitta. a) It pertains to > the concept about "the outward appearance or details of a person or > thing". b) "Nimitta of a reality" refers to a trailing (left behind) > mental image of a fallen-away reality. ------- N: Instead of mental image I would rather say: the sign of the *reality* that has fallen away. The nimitta is the reflection of a reality, or it represents reality. Thus what I would rather stress is: the nimitta of a reality. Kh Sujin said: If this would not be true, the Path could not be developed. But there can be awareness of what is appearing through the sense-doors and through the mind-door, not only through the mind-door. Hardness appears and then there can be awareness of its characteristic, without having to think about it, without naming it hardness. It seems only a short moment of hardness, but now we know that when it appears, it has already arisen and fallen away. There are impingements of hardness again and again, but we cannot tell which hardness impinges on the bodysense at which moment. Still, the characteristic of hardness can be the object of awareness. Knowing about nimitta can cure us of trying to hold on to realities. Holding on is a condition for not being aware of a next reality. Kh Sujin used the simile of a circle of light: holding a torch and swinging it around: > T: 2. Sammuti sacca means "what is real in conventional sense, e.g. > person, table, etc.". ----- N: Yes. > > T: 3. Pa~n~natti in brief is "a term or word or an idea that is > conveyed > by a term", where "a term can stand for a reality or for what is not > real in the ultimate sense". "Pa~n~natti stands for name or word and > also for that which is made known". Other meanings can be found in > the Co. > > 4. "Pa~n~natti can also explain what is real: the terms citta, > cetasika, rupa. These words are pa~n~nattis. > As to the term sammutti, this is used in the texts in combination: > sammutti sacca, not sammutti pa~n~natti." ------ N: Yes. ------ > > T: 5. The difference between an ultimate reality and concepts may > be "made clearer" by means of examples. "Seeing arises and seeing is > not imagined, it has an unalterable characteristic. Namely, it > experiences what is visible. This is different from sammutti > sacca, such as a table or person. It seems that we see persons but in > reality this is not so. I would not speak of opposites." > > 6. "Paramattha dhammas can be directly known by those who have > reached the first stage of insight and further. Thus, not only by > ariyans. But also now, when we begin, there can be sometimes > attention to a characteristic that appears without naming it." > ..... N: Yes. I could add to the last point: even now there can be a beginning of understanding of paramattha dhammas. These are experienced all the time, but they are not realized as a dhamma that is conditioned. Visible object or hardness are experienced all day long, but not often as only a dhamma. We are usually absorbed in concepts of persons that are formed up after seeing. Let us not forget that there is also seeing of visible object, without seeing there could not be thinking of a concept of a person. If there would not be a beginning of even a coarse awareness of what appears now, thus not a concept, the Path could not be developed. Nina. #79520 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 3:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (39) nilovg Dear Elaine, Op 28-nov-2007, om 22:50 heeft shennieca het volgende geschreven: > The Text: > > "The recluse who was unable to apply mindfulness, went inside, > seized the queen by her hand and then they gave themselves over to > misconduct." (unquote). > > The text says the recluse was unable to apply mindfulness, so he > committed the sin. Shouldn't the text just say, because "the causes > and conditions for lust has arisen and the causes and conditions for > mindfulness has Not arisen", therefore he committed the sin. (Too bad > the mindfulness didn't arise for him at that time!) (???). ------- N: It is understood that nama and rupa are non-self and arise because of their appropriate conditions. The anattaness has been repeated so often, no need to state this every time. ---------- > > E: What is the correct explanation for this 'mindfulness' not arising? > And for committing the sin? -------- N: The latent tendencies, lying dormant in each citta. The latent tendency of sensuous desire, kaamachandha. He may have committed misbehaviour in a former life and this tendency was accumulated. Such tendencies are as dangerous as a snake that lies sleeping in a box, we also read. The snake does not move, but suddenly it can wake up and bite with deadly poison. The right conditions were present so that this tendency could condition the arising of such desire again. There was unwise attention and at such a moment there is no kusala citta with sati. --------- > > E: I think, the recluse knows that adultery is a bad, but he did it > anyway. So, maybe he had a choice whether to do it or not. Or is it > totally, totally "conditioned by lust". ((rolleyes)). Therefore, it > is not his fault. (I don't think so). > Sometimes "conditions" is an excuse for doing something wrong..no? -------- N: Akusala cittas are so fast, and when they have arisen they cannot be pushed back. It is complicated how different conditions work. But, as Howard also said, conditions should not be an excuse for doing wrong. This way of thinking is as dangerous as the thinking of those with wrong view about kamma and vipaaka. They thought that since kamma does not bring any result, they could murder and do all sorts of evil deeds. As to choice, also this is conditioned. Not my choice. Anattaaness is the core of the teachings. If we reason too much, using logic, thinking in conventional terms, speculating, we will be confused. Nina. #79521 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 3:34 am Subject: Aware and Composed! bhikkhu0 Friends: At Savatthi the Blessed Buddha Gotama once said: Monks, a Noble should dwell Aware and Composed… This is our instruction to you. And how does a monk dwell Aware? Herein a friend dwells contemplating any body as a framed form only as transient, miserable and an impersonal neither-me-nor-mine; alert, ballanced and deliberately aware, thereby controlling any mental dejection of the world arised from coveting it… Exactly so does he dwell with regard to any feeling.. with regard to any mentality.. with regard to any reality.. Only exactly so is this Noble One AWARE! And how does a monk dwell Composed? Herein a friend dwells fully aware of all feelings that arise.. fully aware of all feelings that settles.. fully aware of all feelings that ceases.. such Noble One dwells fully aware of all thoughts that arise.. fully aware of all thoughts that settles.. fully aware of all thoughts that ceases.. such clever one dwell fully aware of all perceptions that arise.. fully aware of all perceptions that settles.. fully aware of all perceptions that ends.. So is this Noble One COMPOSED! Any monk should dwell Aware and Composed. This is our instruction to you… Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka * .... #79522 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:59 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (71) nichiconn dear friends, Part 7 14. Ti.msanipaato 1. Subhaajiivakambavanikaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 398. "Uppaa.tiya caarudassanaa, na ca pajjittha asa"ngamaanasaa; handa te cakkhu.m harassu ta.m, tassa narassa adaasi taavade. 399. "Tassa ca viramaasi taavade, raago tattha khamaapayii ca na.m; sotthi siyaa brahmacaarinii, na puno edisaka.m bhavissati. 400. "Aasaadiya edisa.m jana.m, aggi.m pajjalita.mva li"ngiya; ga.nhiya aasiivisa.m viya, api nu sotthi siyaa khamehi no. 401. "Muttaa ca tato saa bhikkhunii, agamii buddhavarassa santika.m; passiya varapu~n~nalakkha.na.m, cakkhu aasi yathaa puraa.nakan"ti.- Imaa gaathaa paccudaahaasi. [Added by the Council:] 396. Tearing out [her eye], the [woman who was] beautiful to behold, with an unattached mind, was not attached to it. [She said,], "Come, take this eye for yourself." Straightway she gave [it] to this man. 397. And straightway his passion ceased there, and he begged her pardon. "Become whole again, you who lead the holy life. Such a thing will not happen again. 398. "In smiting such a person, in embracing a blazing fire, having seized a poisonous snake, as it were. Become whole again. Forgive me." 399. And released by him, that bhikkhunii went to the presence of the excellent Buddha. When she saw the One with the Marks of Excellent Merit, [her] eye was restored to its former condition. RD: Forthwith the maiden so lovely tore out her eye and gave it him: 'Here, then! take thou thine eye!' Nor sinned she, her heart unobstructed. (396) Straightway the lust in him cease'd and he her pardon imploring: 'O that thou mightest recover thy sight, thou maid pure and holy! Never again will I dare to offend thee after this fashion. (397) Sore hast thou smitten my sin; blazing flames have I clasped to my bosom; Poisonous snake have I handled - but O! be thou heal'd and forgive me!' (398) Freed from molesting, the Bhikkhunii went on her way to the Buddha, Chief of th' Awakened. There in his presence, seeing those features Born of uttermost merit, straightway her sight was restored to her. (399) verse: 368. "Jiivakambavana.m ramma.m, gacchanti.m bhikkhuni.m subha.m; dhuttako sannivaaresi, tamena.m abravii subhaa. 366. A rogue stopped Bhikkhunii Subhaa as she was going to the delightful Jiivakamba Grove. Subhaa said this to him: txt: Tattha jiivakambavananti jiivakassa komaarabhaccassa ambavana.m. Rammanti rama.niiya.m. Ta.m kira bhuumibhaagasampattiyaa chaayuudakasampattiyaa ca rukkhaana.m ropitaakaarena ativiya manu~n~na.m manorama.m. Gacchantinti ambavana.m uddissa gata.m, divaavihaaraaya upagacchanti.m. Subhanti eva.mnaamika.m. Dhuttakoti itthidhutto. Raajagahavaasii kireko mahaavibhavassa suva.n.nakaarassa putto yuvaa abhiruupo itthidhutto puriso matto vicarati. So ta.m pa.tipathe disvaa pa.tibaddhacitto magga.m uparundhitvaa a.t.thaasi. Tena vutta.m- "dhuttako sannivaaresii"ti, mama gamana.m nisedhesiiti attho. Tamena.m abravii subhaati tamena.m nivaaretvaa .thita.m dhutta.m subhaa bhikkhunii kathesi. Ettha ca "gacchanti.m bhikkhuni.m subha.m, abravi subhaa"ti ca attaanameva therii a~n~na.m viya katvaa vadati. Theriyaa vuttagaathaana.m sambandhadassanavasena sa"ngiitikaarehi aya.m gaathaa vuttaa. 366. There, Jiivakamba Grove means: the mango grove of Jivaka Komaarabhacca. Delightful (ramma.m) means: pleasing (rama.niiya.m). It is said that it was exceedingly pleasing and delightful because of the excellence of the locality, the excellence of the shade and water, and the manner in which the trees had been planted. As she was going (gacchanti.m) means: as she was going (upagacchanti.m) in the direction of the mango grove as her daytime resting place. Subhaa means: she was named thus. A rogue (dhuttako) means: a rogue with women (itthi-dhutto). They say he lived in Raajagaha and was the son of a very rich goldsmith. He was a handsome young man, and this rogue with women was a man who wandered around, intoxicated. He saw her [coming along] the opposite path and was enamoured with her, so he stood there and blocked the path. Therefore it is said: a rogue stopped [Bhikkhunii Subhaa]. He prevented my passage. Subhaa siad this to him means: Bhikkhunii Subhaa, [...] Subhaa said means: the therii is speaking to herself as if she were someone else. This verse was spoken by those who held the council in order to show the connection with the verses spoken by the therii. ===tbc, connie. #79523 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:59 am Subject: Perfections Corner (41) 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. ------------------------------ The root of sensuous desire is unwise attention, ayoniso manasikaara. Further on we read that the recluse developed samatha and could again attain jhaana. He saw the danger of dwelling in an unsuitable place, that was the royal park. Therefore, he returned to the forest to be free from all taint of womankind. When he had come to the end of his life, he entered the Brahma plane. The Buddha told this story in the Jeta Grove because of a discontented monk. When this monk saw a beautifully attired woman, defilements arose in him and he wanted to leave monkhood. When he was brought against his will to the Buddha by his teacher and preceptor, and the Buddha asked him whether it was true that he was a backslider, this monk said that it was true. Thereupon the Buddha said: "Monk, defilements do not lead to happiness, they destroy good qualities, they cause rebirth in hell. Why should your defilements not cause your destruction? Why should a strong wind that strikes Mount Sineru not carry off a withered leaf? I myself, during the life I was the recluse Haarita, had acquired the five supernatural powers and the eight attainments, and I strived after awakening wisdom. However, inspite of this, I was, because of this kind of defilement, unable to have awareness and I fell away from jhaana." The Buddha taught this story so that we could see the disadvantage of akusala and the power of accumulated defilements. We should reflect on what we read: "Why should a strong wind that strikes Mount Sineru not carry off a withered leaf?" We all have defilements that are not yet eradicated and we are therefore not as steady as Mount Sineru, we are only like withered leaves, which are light and can be blown away by the wind, the wind of lobha, dosa and moha. ===to be continued, connie #79524 From: "Sukinder" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 6:18 am Subject: Re: Regarding Khandas, anatta & Control. sukinderpal Hi Alex, I knew your post would be too tempting not to respond to. ;-) But I'll have to snip off a big portion of it. ============== > hardness, feeling and the "thinking" which produces the idea of > "computer screen". These have characteristics, individual and general > and are irreducible. It is in reference to this that I regard them > also as "ultimate". This and the fact that developed wisdom has only > these as object of study / insight, and never of concepts such as > people, things, postures etc. >>>> Alex: When you say irreducible, are you refering to duration, amount of rupa particles, or the relative strength of each rupa particle? Sukin: When Rupa is the object of satipatthana, the individual characteristics are known. When the panna is developed to the level of the vipassanannanas, Rupa is known better and better until the three characteristics are insighted. By this point, there is no doubt that "this is the nature of Rupa", an *ultimate reality*. Never is there such considerations as `duration', `particles' or `strength'. This is the way we uninstructed worldlings tend to think about things. ============= Alex: If the mind is removed, then there is no basis to say "This or that rupa exists/doesn't/both/neither." Thus in one way they aren't ultimate. Sukin: This gets too philosophical, but I'll try to say something anyway. According to the Abhidhamma, Rupa lasts as long as 17 moments of citta. It arises by its own conditions irrespective of whether there is any knowing of this or not. But yes, it is known only when it is known. However this should not be taken to mean that one can't make a statement about it at the time that it is not the object of experience. And yes, when the appropriate level of panna has arisen to know Rupa, this can be known as being an ultimate object of the particular kind of experience and so with the Nama itself, that this too is an ultimate reality. In the meantime, as we know to distinguish reality from concept, we can know too that certain lines of thought are based on conceiving and proliferations of ideas. I think it takes some minimum level of wisdom to realize where the enquiry should stop, and this is exactly these experiences through the five sense doors and the mind. With this there is confidence about the value Satipatthana and to knowing that this fathom long body is all that we need to understand the world. So "ultimate"? Yes, though at this point the understanding is mostly at the level of `theory' only. ================= > Sukin: This seems to be similar to the Mahayana / Nagarjuna arrival at> the idea of Emptiness. This latter imo, is just the result of armchair> philosophy, a misuse of the concept of conditionality / D.O. and > impermanence. Because conditioned, therefore no sabhava, because > impermanent, therefore no ultimacy. But that's just papanca in the > philosopher's mind. >>>> Alex: Don't call Buddha that! In fact Buddha's argument of Anatta (no sabhava) starts with ANICCA! Sukin. :-) I believe the Buddha said what he did to those who already experienced some insight into the nature of reality. For them such pointing out of the relationship between the three general characteristics was meant to boost their understanding of these. Certainly they weren't expected to reason their way to "understanding" the way you and I might try to do, would they? ============== > How could Nagarjuna make any distinction about anything if there was > no distinct Sabhava that would differentiate one moment of experience from another? Alex: The distinction is itself relative and conditioned (on the mind which makes the distinction). Sukin: To ignorance and wrong view, the distinction might be relative. To panna of the level of Vipassana, the distinction is absolute. At this level sabhava dhammas are known also by way of dhatu, khandhas and ayatanas. ============== > Sukin: If you mean by this, "has there been any insight into nama and rupa?", then the answer is a big NO. Alex: Thus what sort of Ultimate reality, aside from "armchair philosophy" (your word, not mine) are you talking about? How can it be ultimate reality if it hasn't been percieved? Reality MUST be percieved in order to be reality, otherwise it remains in imagination/speculation! Sukin: You left out the part following the above where I tried to explain this. But I'll try again. Reality *is* perceived / experienced all day. That we do not understand them as they are, as reality, dhatu or dhamma, is no reason why we can't talk about and distinguish then from `concepts'. It is the reason the Buddha came to be and taught us, namely that we might come to know what at the `ultimate' level, are the realities in contrast to the illusion which we have instead always taken to be real. So naturally we need first to know the Truth by way of concept. Bahiya did not know about reality until he met the Buddha. And when the Buddha spoke to him, at first he had to grasp it `conceptually', though for him insight arose immediately after. For us we can be expected to continue groping in the dark holding only to an `idea' about these realities for a long time to come, but there can also be little glimpse of reality here and there, re: moments of satipatthana. Though even this is a far cry from vipassanannanas. So should we all wait for this to happen first, or should we indeed need to talk with confidence about them having seen the value of the Buddha's Dhamma? Remember we are encouraged also to make the distinction between, Pariyatti, which is intellectual understanding of the Dhamma; Patipatti, which is reference to moments of satipatthana; and Pativedha, which is realization. =============== > Sukin: Isn't seeing, hearing, sound, hardness, feeling, anger etc. > real? Even a schizophrenic will be able to make rightly the > distinction between these and the idea of `green goblins'. >>> Alex: 1st) Please define exactly what you mean by "real". 2) one can hallucinate sights, smells & sounds - is that real? For example: is seeing mirage of a water real? What is the difference between seeing mirage of a water vs Seeing real water that looks identical to mirage of a water? 3) In dreams you can see sights. Is that real sight? 4) We aren't Sarvastivadins. Sukin: 1. Citta, Cetasika, Rupa and Nibbana. 2. Hallucination is `thinking'. Thinking *can* be known as a `reality'. The sights, sound, smells hallucinated would be `concepts' i.e. they wouldn't exhibit the characteristics that the realities would, after all it would be `thinking' that is taking place and no actual experience of rupas. Mirage is concept, but what meets the eye is visible object, a reality. 3. Thinking with concepts as object. 4. No idea about Sarvastivadins. ================ Alex: Past is no longer existing. Future is not yet existing. Present is when future (one non existant) becomes past (another non-existant). Furthermore in another thread I've said that we DO NOT normally percieve the absolute present. We react 1/4 seconds later (at least. Often for complex actions the reaction time is even slower). Thus what we recognize as "NOW" is in fact past (non-existent). Sukin: Sorry, I'm absolutely not interested in mixing science with Dhamma. ============== > Sukin: But there is hardly any difference is there, between believing in a magical place and time, and stating that there is `better' place > and posture? >>>> Alex: Where is better to do lets say anapanasati: On the busy bus? or In a secluded place (such as a cave, under the tree, in abandoned building) ? Sukin: I was talking about Satipatthana, a conditioned reality and not Anapanasati, a conventional practice. ============== > > Therefore as far as I'm concerned, the N8FP can arise while > > discussing, watching TV or being in the middle of any conventional > > activity, as long as the understanding is there, that in fact there are only fleeting dhammas arising and falling away. The question of choosing "WHAT TO DO?" therefore has no place and would be a wrong question. >>> Alex: When you have said about "any conventional activity", does it include being a Butcher, murderer, rapist or prostitute? Surely "any" needs to be removed. Sukin: Yes, even a butcher can experience satipatthana and so can the others. Only for satipatthana to arise, one must have heard and appreciated the Dhamma to some extent. And this would of course make it quite unlikely that one will go on as before, being a `murderer' and `rapist'. But nobody should be branded any of these titles and be thought of as being incapable of developing understanding. And we do know of a few prostitutes becoming enlightened don't we? =============== > Alex: Ajahn Chah (a GREAT MONK!!!! ) said to study one's heart, not > the books. Considering that he was in Thai forest tradition, it meant > mindfulness & samadhi. > > Sukin: Yes, A. Chah was my favorite until I met A. Sujin. I think he > also said something like; > "If sitting could lead to understanding, then chickens who sit all > day, they would be well on their way to enlightenment". ;-) Alex: Yes. Even Venerable TB has said that satipathana isn't bare observation. There are specific things to do and to avoid. Same with mindfulness of breathing. Sukin: Satipatthana is satipatthana. A moment of consciousness accompanied by sati and panna of a level and which has characteristic of a reality as object. Could anyone ask for more? No need to add any ideas into this. To do or to avoid anything means that at that moment *no satipatthana* arises. With Anapanasati yes, there needs some adjustment, but this is because we are talking about a practice which involves some conventional action to be taken. ================== Alex, in addition to what I stipulated in my last post I would like to say that I find your questions to be put in a philosophical way and quite difficult to understand. I don't want to get into these kinds of discussions, having recognized my own tendency to proliferate. So please allow me to make this my last post. With metta, Sukin #79525 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 6:21 am Subject: Re: Angulimala - Lack of Faith truth_aerator Dear Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > >>> > > > > Wow, what a positive statement! Where is "your" faith faculty? > > Believe in yourself (vinnana-nama-rupa)! > >------------- > > Dear Alex , > > "Belief in yourself": we need to be careful as that can be wrong view, > or clinging or conceit. >>>> I agree with you. One must be careful not to bring in atta belief. However what I was trying to say is that "one must be confident in the power of N8P and Buddha's teaching. If murderer could become Arahant, so can I. IF enough energy, determination & wisdom is put in (causes) the Phala (results) will come." >>> I think few people have such wisdom and determination, metta , or energy to become such. >>> One of the ways to increase determination, wisdom, etc is to be optimistic about N8P and its Akaliko results. >> Even to become a sukka vipassaka arahat already needs an extraordinary degree of wisdom and other parami. >>> In which suttas is this said. I'd like to read it. >>> > Further than that the one who becomes such an arahat must recieve a firm prediction from a Buddha who sees that he has the needed > requisites. >>> Where in the suttas is this? To claim that one can become one of these, or to think that > one has more wisdom than such a one, .. well is it wisdom or saddha or something else? > Robert > COnfidence in N8P and power of Buddha's teaching. Lots of metta, Alex #79526 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 6:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Corner (39) nilovg Dear Elaine and Mike, Here I am again. Op 28-nov-2007, om 22:50 heeft shennieca het volgende geschreven: > The Text: > > "The recluse who was unable to apply mindfulness, went inside, > seized the queen by her hand and then they gave themselves over to > misconduct." (unquote). > --------- I was considering Mike's post, where he said that knowing details about akusala helps us to be fooled less. When knowing more about the latent tendencies, anusayas, (also mentioned in the suttas), it does help. It is a favorable condition to be careful as to the people we associate with, the circumstances we are in. We see more the danger of akusala because this is accumulated as a latent tendency and can condition the arising of akusala citta again and again. We never know what was accumulated in past lives. It is as dangerous as a s;eeping cobra. My late mother used a Dutch proverb: don't put the cat near the bacon. There is something in the Vinaya I admire so much. When the monk has committed a transgression he has to confess this to his fellow monks. This is good for humility, and also, it reminds him to be more careful in the future. Some people find it a problem that everything is conditioned, yes, but this does not mean powerlessness. It is understanding that can know the right conditions. I know also this understanding is conditioned, it is not mine. It comes about by listening to the teachings. We are already listening and studying the teachings and this stems from conditions in the past. We need not go back endlessly to find out all about the past. Let us rather consider the present moment, the moment of having an opportunity to develop understanding. Just now. Nina. #79527 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 7:13 am Subject: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, Acharn Sujin explained about the development of satipatthåna when we were sitting on the ground in the Jeta Grove, near the place where once the Buddha stayed. In the Jeta Grove he taught the Dhamma to the monks and to the layfollowers who visited him daily. Acharn Sujin said: “Dhamma is what is real, it has no owner. There are two kinds of dhammas: nåma and rúpa. Hearing and sound arise and fall away very rapidly, can we slow them down? Sati can arise and be aware of them. In the beginning there cannot be awareness of all realities that can be experienced through the six doors, because understanding has to be developed. Sati can arise and paññå can begin to understand realities, there is no other way. Thinking arises in between moments of awareness and there is bound to be doubt about realities, because doubt has not been eradicated. When sati arises, pañña must arise together with it. We should have understanding of the characteristics of realities and of satipatthåna and this can condition the arising of sati and pañña that directly understands nåma and rúpa. This is not intellectual understanding, but it is paññå of another level that penetrates thoroughly the characteristics of realities, that realizes them as only elements, dhåtus.” How do we experience the body? We think of our whole body but what we take for our body consists of different groups of rúpas. The rúpas that are the four Great Elements arise in each group of rúpas no matter whether they are of the body or rúpas outside, and these are: the Element of Earth or solidity, the Element of Water or cohesion, the Element of Fire or heat and the Element of Wind or motion. In addition to these four there are other rúpas arising together with them in different combinations. Through touch three of these Great Elements can be directly experienced, one at a time, and these are: solidity appearing as hardness or softness, heat appearing as heat or cold, and motion appearing as motion or pressure. Cohesion cannot be experienced through touch, it can only be known through the mind-door. Hardness or heat are characteristics of rúpa, and these cannot be changed, no matter how we name them. We can experience the characteristics that appear without the need to think of them. In this way we can begin to consider in our own life what the Abhidhamma teaches. The Abhidhamma is not a dry subject that concerns theoretical knowledge, it deals with our life. We learn about nåma and rúpa through the study of the Abhidhamma, but this relates to daily life. Do characteristics of rúpa such as hardness, softness, heat or cold not appear all the time whenever we touch things? The purpose of the enumeration of different nåmas and rúpas is not merely to memorize them or to think of them, but to realize their true nature by the development of satipatthåna. ****** Nina. #79528 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 2:27 am Subject: Toddlers and Self (Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings) upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 11/28/2007 7:29:07 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Dear Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > > Hi, Alex - > > In a message dated 11/28/2007 10:52:32 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > truth_aerator@... writes: > > Question: Maggots for example do not hold 20 self views. Maggots do > not speculate about the past or the future. Maggots do not have > conceits or big cravings. Thus they are enlightened? > ============================ > P. S. A drop more seriously: Alex, what did you view as mistaken in what Nina wrote, and why? (It seemed pretty much on-target to me.) >>>> I want to hear a deeper reply than simply "not hold 20 self views, craving or conceit" for the sakkaya ditthi to disappear forever and for good. For example Buddha has said (cut outs from mn64): To a toddler, who moves about with difficulty, there is not even a self. How could a view arise about a self?... Maalunkhyaputta, to a toddler who moves about with difficulty, there are not even thoughts... ? To a toddler who moves about with difficulty there are not even virtues. How could there be a holding to virtues as high? Malunkhyaputta, to a toddler there is not even sensual desires..How could there be interest for sensual desires?.Malunkhyaputta, to a toddler beings don't matter. How could he have anger towards beings? http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/064-maha-malunkhyaputta-e1.htm Lots of Metta, Alex =================================== The relevant portion of this sutta troubles me - even to the point of wondering as to the purity of the sutta as it has come down to us. The material is the following: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Malunkhyaputta, what do you remember of the five lower bonds of the sensual world preached by me? Venerable sir, I remember self view, doubts holding to virtues as the highest aim, sensual interest and anger as lower bonds of the sensual world preached by the Blessed One. I remember these five lower bonds of the sensual world preached by the Blessed One. Malunkhyaputta, to whom do you know me preaching, the lower bonds of the sensual world in this manner. Wouldn’t the ascetics of other sects find fault with this foolish example. To a toddler, who moves about with difficulty, there is not even a self. How could a view arise about a self? The latent tendencies of a self view filter to him. (* 1) Maalunkhyaputta, to a toddler who moves about with difficulty, there are not even thoughts. How could doubts arise to him about thoughts? The latent tendency to doubt, filter to him. To a toddler who moves about with difficulty there are not even virtues. How could there be a holding to virtues as high?.The latent tendency to hold to virtues as high filter to him. Malunkhyaputta, to a toddler there is not even sensual desires..How could there be interest for sensual desires?. The latent tendencies to greed for sensual interest filter to him.Malunkhyaputta, to a toddler beings don’t matter. How could he have anger towards beings? The latent tendencies to get angry filter to him. Malunkhyaputta, wouldn’t the ascetics of other sects find fault with this foolish example. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A toddler, having minimal intellect in effect, though far from none, I would agree likely has no self *view*. But sense of self is clearly hale and hearty in a toddler, and would be cause for concern if missing! In fact, it is typically present in an almost entirely unbridled fashion. The statements that there are no sensual desires, no greed, and no anger in a toddler are wildly inconsonant with reality. A toddler is almost completely "me! me! me!". A typical toddler is all about desiring, grasping and holding onto what is desired, fiercely pushing away any interferences, and angry and crying and even hitting when thwarted. A typical toddler, though I hasten to add "not every toddler", is ALL SELF! Something seems very wrong with this piece of the sutta. With metta, Howard #79529 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 7:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conceit and Self View nilovg Dear Johnny and Mike, Op 29-nov-2007, om 0:27 heeft johnny pruitt het volgende geschreven: > I dont understand why conceit cannot occure while self view is > present. What is it about these two cetasikas that contradict one > another. It seems in order to have conceit one has to have a view > of themself. -------- N: I understand your question, they seem so close. This is clarified in the sutta about Khemaka (Kindred Sayings III, Khandhå-vagga, Middle Fifty, Part 4, § 89) we read that the monk Khemaka, who was staying in Jujube Tree Park, was afflicted by sickness. Some other monks who were staying near Kosambí in Ghosita Park, asked the monk Dåsaka to inquire after his health. After he gave the message that his health was not improving, the other monks told Dåsaka to ask Khemaka whether he still took anything for self. When Khemaka had told Dåsaka that he did not take anything for self, the other monks concluded that Khemaka must be an arahat. Khemaka answered Dåsaka: “Though, friends, I discern in the five khandhas of grasping no self nor anything pertaining to the self, yet am I not arahat, nor one in whom the åsavas (cankers) are destroyed. Though, friend, I see that I have got the idea of ‘I am’ in the five khandhas of grasping, yet do I not discern that I am this ‘I am’.” Then the venerable Dåsaka returned to the monks with that message and reported the words of the venerable Khemaka (and those monks sent this further message): “As to this ‘I am’, friend Khemaka, of which you speak, what do you mean by this ‘I am’? Do you speak of ‘I am’ as body or as distinct from the body? As feeling, or as distinct from feeling? As perception... as the “activities”... as consciousness, or as distinct from consciousness? As to this ‘I am’, what do you mean by it?” (So the venerable Dåsaka went again and took the message in these words.) “Enough, friend Dåsaka. What boots this running to and fro! Fetch my staff. I will go myself to these monks.” So the venerable Khemaka, leaning on his staff, came to those monks. When he got there, he greeted them, and exchanging the courtesies of civil words, sat down at one side. As he thus sat, the elders thus spoke to the venerable Khemaka:— “As to this ‘I am’, friend Khemaka, of which you speak, what do you mean by it? Do you speak of it as body or as distinct from body... as consciousness, or as distinct from consciousness?” “No friends, I do not say, ‘I am body or feeling, or perception, or the ‘activities’ or consciousness, or as distinct from these and from conscious-ness. ’ Though, friends, I see that I have got the idea of ‘I am’ in the five khandhas of grasping, yet I do not discern that I am this ‘I am’. Just as, friends, in the case of the scent of a blue lotus, or a white lotus,— if one should say: ‘The scent belongs to the petals or the colour or the fibres of it’, would he be rightly describing the scent?” “Surely not, friend.” “Then how would he be right in describing it?” “Surely, friend, by speaking of the scent of the flower.” “Even so, friends, I do not speak of the ‘I am’ as a body, or as feeling and so forth. Nevertheless I see that in these five khandhas of grasping I have got the idea of ‘I am’; yet I do not discern that I am this ‘I am’. Though, friends, an ariyan disciple has put away the five lower fetters yet there remains in him a subtle remnant from among the five khandhas of grasping, a subtle remnant of the I am-conceit, of the I am-desire, of the lurking tendency to think ‘I am’, still not removed from him. Later on he lives contemplating the rise and fall of the five khandhas of grasping, seeing thus: ‘Such is body, such is the arising of body, such is the ceasing of it. Such is feeling... perception... the activities... such is consciousness, the arising of it and the ceasing of it’. In this way, as he lives in the contemplation of the five khandhas of grasping, that subtle remnant of the I am-conceit, of the I am-desire, that lurking tendency to think ‘I am’, which was still not removed from him–that is now removed. Suppose, friends, there is a dirty, soiled cloth, and the owners give it to a washerman, and he rubs it smooth with salt-earth, or lye or cowdung, and rinses it in pure clean water. Now, though that cloth be clean, utterly cleansed, yet there hangs about it, still unremoved, the smell of the salt-earth or lye or cowdung. The washerman returns it to the owners, and they lay it up in a sweet-scented coffer. Thus that smell... is now utterly removed...”.. ------ N: One may no longer believe in a self, but because of accumulations one may still find 'this individual here' important. Mike wrote: For what it's worth, it seems to me that, conventionally speaking, conceit and a view of oneself can of course occur together, along with almost anything else conceptual. Ultimately though, these mental factors obey different rules from what is conceptually, conventionally possible. That's the way I see it. ------ N: Perhaps you think of conceit as finding 'oneself' or 'this individual here' important. We use the word oneself to explain it, but we know that in the ultimate sense conceit and wrong view are different cetasikas that cannot arise together. They each have different objects. ------ Nina. #79530 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 2:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Angulimala upasaka_howard Hi, Robert (and Swee Boon) - In a message dated 11/28/2007 9:50:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@... writes: Accumulations are very natural, nothing related to God. Every moment there are accumulations- usually of lobha and ignorance. Knowing about accumulations means that very moment becomes very precious. =============================== Robert, I love your last sentence here, both content and the formulation! I agree that what happens right now is of critical import. The present moment, with its present kamma, is indeed, precious, and is, in a way, everything. With metta, Howard #79531 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 7:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings nilovg Dear Alex, Op 29-nov-2007, om 1:28 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > I want to hear a deeper reply than simply "not hold 20 self views, > craving or conceit" for the sakkaya ditthi to disappear forever and > for good. ------- N: these 20 froms of sakkaayadi.t.thi describe the holding on to the wrong view of self. The insight wisdom, developed stage by stage up to the first stage of enlightenment, the stage of the sotaapanna can eradicate all wrong views. Wrong view is deeply rooted and it takes a long, long time of developing understanding of the realities of our daily life before it is developed to that stage. It really has to be uprooted by understanding. Nina. #79532 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 2:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings upasaka_howard Hi, Ray (and Alex) - In a message dated 11/28/2007 11:05:40 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, rhendrickson1@... writes: The Buddha says that these questions might be put by "wanderers of other sects" who might "confute you with the simile of the infant?" The Buddha gives the answer to each within the body of the text you quoted...from Middle Lenght Diccourses....."Yet the underlying tendency to personality view lies within him......Yet the Underlying tendency to doubt lies within him" etc for each of the questions.... later in the Sutta he gives the way to the escape from arisen personality view, etc....Ra ================================ Ahhh! Thank you, Ray! I now breathe more easily. :-) With metta, Howard #79533 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 2:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina... upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 11/29/2007 3:05:18 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard (and friends), Thank you for your post. As always you seriously thought over the matter. But now Larry is waiting with the Vis., I have such a lot of work. Many posts unanswered. I have to delay but I will not forget you! ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Thanks, Nina. :-) ------------------------------------------------ Nina. ====================== With metta, Howard #79534 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 7:49 am Subject: Re: Toddlers and Self (Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings) nilovg Hi Howard, Op 29-nov-2007, om 16:27 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > A toddler is almost completely > "me! me! me!". A typical toddler is all about desiring, grasping > and holding > onto what is desired, fiercely pushing away any interferences, and > angry and > crying and even hitting when thwarted. A typical toddler, though I > hasten to > add "not every toddler", is ALL SELF! Something seems very wrong > with this > piece of the sutta. ------- N: You speak from personal observance of toddlers ;-)) Meanwhile you read Ray's post with a good explanation. We have to think of the latent tendencies. Nina. #79535 From: "Robert" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 7:55 am Subject: Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 3. avalo1968 Hello Nina, Thank you for another helpful description of Khun Sujin's Dhamma talk. There is one question that came to mind when I read this post. You used the word 'satipatthåna ' twice in this post: Nina: ... We should have understanding of the characteristics of realities and of satipatthåna and this can condition the arising of sati and pañña that directly understands nåma and rúpa. ... The purpose of the enumeration of different nåmas and rúpas is not merely to memorize them or to think of them, but to realize their true nature by the development of satipatthåna. Robert A: My question is this: In the reading I have done elsewhere the word satipatthåna is usually translated as 'The Four Foundations of Mindfulness' or something like that, and reference is made the the Satipatthåna Sutta. Would I be correct to substitue in your two sentences above for the word 'satipatthåna' the phrase 'the four foundations of mindfulness', or are there other shades of meaning in your use of the word that I would lose by this substitution. Thank you, Robert A. #79536 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 2:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina... upasaka_howard Hi, DC - In a message dated 11/29/2007 5:17:41 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, dcwijeratna@... writes: Dear Howard, Khun Sujin's teaching, from the discussions going on in the DSG, appears to me as 'adiccha-samuppanna vaada.' Things arising without a cause. I could be wrong, of course. There is nothing wrong with holdin such a view. But to give false impressions, that it is the teaching of the Buddha, or use Dhamma to justify her teachings, is not proper. With mettaa, D. G. D. C. Wijeratna =============================== I agree that some admirers of her teaching tend in that direction - towards what I have referred to as a "randomness view", but I do not believe that engendering such a view is her intention at all. In some ways, as I as I see it, her teaching is close to the wu-wei teaching of Zen, which, in emphasizing anatta, also downplays volition. With metta, Howard #79537 From: "nidive" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 8:18 am Subject: Re: Angulimala nidive Hi RobertK, > Accumulations are very natural, nothing related to God. Every > moment there are accumulations- usually of lobha and ignorance. > Knowing about accumulations means that very moment becomes very > precious. I do not understand lobha and ignorance to be accumulations. They are latent tendencies of mental defilements. They are simply present if present, not present if not present (ie. in an arahant). There is no accumulation of anything other than bright & dark kamma. If ignorance & wisdom are accumulations, there is simply no chance that wisdom will ever conquer ignorance, even for infinite aeons. Why? Because no "beginning of ignorance" is discernible, as the Buddha himself said. Hence, how will one ever see the "fulfillment of wisdom" even for infinite aeons? Swee Boon #79538 From: "nidive" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 8:26 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Angulimala nidive Hi Howard, > RobertK: Knowing about accumulations means that very moment becomes > very precious. > Howard: The present moment, with its present kamma, is indeed, > precious, and is, in a way, everything. By "present kamma", I suppose you refer to new kamma or intention or bodily, verbal & mental actions. Am I right? If so, I agree with you that the present moment (if there is such a thing as a 'moment') is indeed precious, and is, in a way, everything. Swee Boon #79539 From: Ken O Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 8:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings ashkenn2k > > Their craving to eat is obviously a much smaller craving than human > cravings. It is also possible that their "craving to eat" is almost subconscious and thus not a real volition. Many scientists used to believe that animals are merely robots, without real > 'consciousness'. While I don't believe that, I am certain that maggots 'desires', etc, if aren't almost completely subconscious are in no way blown up desires like humans and higher animals have. > > > For example Buddha has said (cut outs): > > To a toddler, who moves about with difficulty, there is not even a > self. How could a view arise about a self?... Maalunkhyaputta, to a > > toddler who moves about with difficulty, there are not even > thoughts... ? To a toddler who moves about with difficulty there > are not even virtues. How could there be a holding to virtues as high? Malunkhyaputta, to a toddler there is not even sensual desires..How could there be interest for sensual desires?.Malunkhyaputta, to a toddler beings don't matter. How could he have anger towards beings? > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/064-maha-malunkhyaputta-e1.htm > > Similiar with Maggots. KO: Alex, you forget some important words that is in the this sutta. I check the link and also with the book I have translated by B Bodhi. After <>, there should be these words <> These are importnat, latent tendecies. These are also being said in a number of suttas on latency and these lantency are the cause of akusala. Yes a toddler may be innocent but it has latency. Similarly, a maggot has latency. We cannot say their craving is lesser than the human because on what ground are we comparing it with. What is sub-consciousness, are you saying there are two minds in one consciousness? I do not think in the dhamma, we talk about sub-consciousness. This always may be think, if there were sub and main consciousness, which is enlighted first, are there two "me". Cheers Cheers Ken O #79540 From: Ken O Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 8:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Angulimala ashkenn2k Hi Alex > > But what sort of wisdom did he have before he started killing 999 > people? Wouldn't someone with "Great Wisdom" abstain from killing > at any cost? > The point I am trying to make is that Buddha's Dhamma works WELL! > It doesn't require extraordinary accumulation for Arahatship. Or lets also say it this way: The fact that you have access to Original Dhamma (found in suttas & Vinaya) and can practice - that is > already an incredible accumulation! KO: Yes this is difficult to believe. Just like Buddha who immerse himself in sensual delight before enlightment, attain it eventually. He has Great Wisdom, he should have refrain doing it. But it does not happen because the conditions are not right for it to ripen. > > Oh and in AN there is a sutta which says that views can be lost (I > assume it is pre-sotapanna views). > > > "Monks, there are these five kinds of loss. Which five? Loss of > relatives, loss of wealth, loss through disease, loss in terms of > virtue, loss in terms of views. It's not by reason of loss of > relatives, loss of wealth, or loss through disease that beings — > with > the break-up of the body, after death — reappear in the plane of > deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. It's > by > reason of loss in terms of virtue and loss in terms of views that > beings — with the break-up of the body, after death — reappear in > the > plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in > hell. > These are the five kinds of loss. KO: Kamma is not a straight forward thing. You should read Mahakammavibhanga Sutta MN136. Thanks Kind regards Ken O #79541 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 8:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 3. nilovg Dear Robert A, Op 29-nov-2007, om 16:55 heeft Robert het volgende geschreven: > satipatthåna is usually translated as 'The Four Foundations of > Mindfulness' or something like that, and reference is made the the > Satipatthåna Sutta. Would I be correct to substitue in your two > sentences above for the word 'satipatthåna' the phrase 'the four > foundations of mindfulness', or are there other shades of meaning in > your use of the word that I would lose by this substitution. -------- N: Satipatthaana has three meanings: In the “Papañcasúdaní”, Commentary to the Satipaììhånasutta, and in the Commentary to the Book of Analysis, the Dispeller of Delusion (I, Ch 7, A. Suttanta Division) it is said: “...There are three kinds of foundation of mindfulness, satipaììhåna: 1. the domain of mindfulness (sati gocaro) 2. the Master’s threefold surpassing of resentment and gratification (delight) as regards the entry of his disciples [on the way of practice] . 3. mindfulness (sati). As to the domain of mindfulness, sati gocara, this refers to the object of sati, that is: the body, feelings, cittas, dhammas. As to mindfulness, sati, this refers to sati cetasika that is aware of the characteristics of realities. As regards the kind of satipaììhåna that is, the Master’s threefold surpassing of resentment and gratification (delight) as regards the entry of his disciples [on the way of practice], we read further on: “As regards the passage: ‘There are three foundations of mindfulness which the Noble One (ariyan) cultivates, and cultivating which the Noble One is a master who is worthy to instruct his flock, here it is the threefold surpassing by the Master of attachment and aversion as regards the entry of his disciples [on the way]’ that is called the ‘foundation of mindfulness’. The meaning of that is: ‘foundation’ (paììhåna) is because of what should be founded (paììhapetabba); ‘because of what should be made to occur.’ ” Summarizing, satipaììhåna which is the kind of “the Master’s threefold surpassing of resentment and gratification (delight) as regards the entry of his disciples [on the way of practice]”, has the following meaning: it is the way along which the Buddha and his disciples went. ____ The development of satipatthaana, awareness and understanding of nama and rupa, leads to the realization of the stages of insight, to vipassana ~naa.na. But we can also say, the development of satipatthaana, or the development of vipassanaa: meaning: the development of awareness and understanding of nama and rupa that appear at the present moment. Nina. #79542 From: Ken O Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:01 am Subject: RE: [dsg] heresy of instanteneous changing "mind moments" ashkenn2k Hi Charles > It mental state, karma, volition, . are conditioned by complexes > (the 5 > aggregates for example). Also they arise in something, this > something is a > compounded entity that suffers and spreads suffering; therefore .. > it is understandable to be confusing. In modern terms, we tend to equate responsbility of our actions to a self. Kamma does not arise in some entity. There is no entity to be found in any of the aggregates. It is our believe there is one, that is why we crave for being, we crave for existence, hence we conditioned the next birth. Kind regards Ken O #79543 From: Ken O Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:04 am Subject: Re: was Re: [dsg] Alchohol as a medicine for cold throat, & 5th Precept. ashkenn2k Hi Alex I think RobK did explain about taking alcohol in medicine, it is not breaking of precept for such instances. I think it is in UP, pse look it up Kind regards Ken O #79544 From: Ken O Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Khandhas are uncontrollable ashkenn2k Hi Swee Boon KO: There is this confusion over self. Self view exist as ditthi but self does not exist as an entity. > But is "self" the same as volition? Or are they separate things? KO: self does not exist hence the are not comparable or say there are separate things. > Or do they arise together all the time, every time? KO: When self view (ditthi) arise, it arise with volition, everytime. > > Does volition not have the characteristic of anicca, dukkha and > anatta? KO: Yes it has > Does the "self" mental defilement not have the characteristic of > anicca, dukkha and anatta? > > When this volition exhibits the characteristic of anicca, dukkha > and anatta, can I say that this volition is mine, myself, what I am? KO: Self view (ditthi) as a mental defilement have these characteristics. But self as an entiy does not because it does not exist. Ditthi arise with moha hence we tends to equate mine and myself. > When this "self" mental defilement exhibits the characteristic of > anicca, dukkha and anatta, how would it be possible that I could > point out anything that is mine, myself, what I am with regard to > the six sense bases, with regard to the five aggregates? KO: When ditthi arise, there is no way way panna arise. They are exclusive. Hence it would not be possible point out these characteristics. But ditthi does not always arise, if not how do Buddha or Arahant attain enlightment. If ditthi always arise, then it would mean deterministic. No way out of samasara. Only when panna arise, then we are able to see it as not me, not I and not myself Kind regards Ken O #79545 From: Ken O Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:24 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy ashkenn2k Hi Charles Hmm, maybe I am not clear about it. What I am saying is that we tends to hold on to the believe of a self which does not exist while nowadays, people emphasis is as the most important thing cheers Ken O > > > > Based on what you said, ". Self in definition by Buddha is > different from > the dictionary. The dictionary is about > a personality, a totality. In Buddhism, self is an illusion, it is > greed > with ditthi or mano that we conceive that this self is real." > > > > There is a real problem when talking to people in English, the > definitions > of Self are different. And who are we to tell the English speaking > world > that their definition of Self is wrong? > #79546 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 1. nilovg Dear Robert A, Op 28-nov-2007, om 15:32 heeft Robert het volgende geschreven: > Robert A: > I think this is a very important point - to go beyond words and > concepts. ------- N: Not without pa~n~naa, but with pa~n~naa, but this has to be developed on and on, for a long time. ------- > > Nina: > We may know in theory that seeing sees what is visible, visible > object, but it seems that we see people all the time. We usually > think of concepts with ignorance and clinging, we are totally > absorbed in them. > > Robert A: > So what we are doing when we follow the Buddhist Path is developing > the skill of being unabsorbed by them? ------- N: This will happen naturally. It comes with right understanding. It is not a special skill we have to develop. But meanwhile, even being absorbed with attachment is real, it can be object of awareness and understanding. -------- > > Nina: > Acharn Sujin stressed many times that there are three levels of the > understanding of the Dhamma: the level of study, pariyatti, the level > of practice, patipatti and the level of direct realization of the > truth, pativedha. ..... > > Robert A: > Is there a sutta reference you can cite that describes the three > levels of understanding as you have above? ---------- N: Pariyatti is competence in the scriptures and this term is in the commentaries. Pa.tipatti > occurs in the suttas and evenso pa.tivedha. I looked in my PED for > sutta references and there are many with regard to patipatti and > pativedha. > The three together occur in the Co, for example in the Dispeller of > Delusion (Co to the Book of Analysis, second book of the > Abhidhamma). Ch 16 (p. 179) about the decline and disappearance of > the teachings: disappearance of competency (pariyatti), 2. disappearance of > penetration (pa.tivedha) and 3. disappearnace of practice > (pa.tipatti.) Herein, 1, competency is the three Pi.takas; 2. the "penetration" is the penetration of the Truths; 3. the practice is the way...> The principle of these three, though not the three terms together, is explained in the Gradual Sayings For example, II, 246: < Monks, these four dhammas conduce to growth in wisdom. What four? Association with a good man, hearing Saddhamma, wise attention and practice of Dhamma in accordance with Dhamma...> In another sutta these same conditions are mentioned which are leading to enlightenment, which is pa.tivedha. --------- > > R: You said above that pariyatti can be a condition for patipatti. Are > there other conditions for patipatti besides pariyatti, and if so, > is there a sutta that describes all of them? ----- N: see above . Other conditions: all the perfections have to be developed together with satipatthana (the practice), and not one of these should be neglected. We need them as medicine on the long, long journey. Kh Sujin explained: when we hear the word practice we think of doing something specific, but actually it is the development of understanding. --------- > R: In your description above, you said that satipatthana is the > practice. Is there a pali word that you are translating when you > use the word 'practice', and it is true that satipatthana is the > practice or part of the practice? ------- N: pa.tipatti. Developing understanding of the characteristics of dhammas appearing through the six doorways, one at a time. That is included in the meanings of satipatthana. Nina. #79547 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: later in the Sutta he gives the way > to the escape from arisen personality view, etc....Ra > > And guess what that way is? Doing proper Buddhist Jhana! Ananda, what is the path and method, to dispel the lower bonds of the sensual world? Ananda, the bhikkhu secluding the mind thoroughly, by dispelling things of demerit, removes all bodily transgressions that bring remorse. Then secluding the mind, from sensual thoughts and thoughts of demerit, with thoughts and discursive thoughts and with joy and pleasantness born of seclusion abides in the first jhana. Established in it he reflects all things that matter, all feelings, all perceptive things, all intentions, all conscious signs are impermanent, unpleasant, an illness, an abscess, an arrow, a misfortune, an ailment, foreign, destined for destruction, is void, and devoid of a self. Then he turns the mind to the deathless element: This is peaceful, this is exalted, such as the appeasement of all determinations, the giving up of all endearments, the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation and extinction (* 1). With that mind he comes to the destruction of desires. If he does not destroy desires on account of greed and interest for those same things. He arises spontaneously, with the destruction of the five lower bonds, of the sensual world, not to proceed. Ananda, this too is a method for overcoming the five lower bonds of the sensual world.. [alex: same for up to base of nothingness] http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/064-maha-malunkhyaputta-e1.htm Lots of metta, Alex #79548 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Angulimala upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon (and Robert) - In a message dated 11/29/2007 11:19:25 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, nidive@... writes: Hi RobertK, > Accumulations are very natural, nothing related to God. Every > moment there are accumulations- usually of lobha and ignorance. > Knowing about accumulations means that very moment becomes very > precious. I do not understand lobha and ignorance to be accumulations. They are latent tendencies of mental defilements. They are simply present if present, not present if not present (ie. in an arahant). There is no accumulation of anything other than bright & dark kamma. If ignorance & wisdom are accumulations, there is simply no chance that wisdom will ever conquer ignorance, even for infinite aeons. Why? Because no "beginning of ignorance" is discernible, as the Buddha himself said. Hence, how will one ever see the "fulfillment of wisdom" even for infinite aeons? Swee Boon ============================== As I understand the Dhamma, and as I believe, there are degrees to things, including ignorance and greed. These don't occur as just yes/no or 1/0. As for accumulations, I think the term 'accumulation' is to be taken metaphorically. Some instances of kamma condition (right then and there) an increase in number and intensity of future reactions of ignorance and craving, while some condition a decrease. I don't think the notion of accumulation can be separated can be separated from that of kamma and vipaka. With metta, Howard #79549 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:56 am Subject: Toddlers and Self (Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings) truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > A toddler is almost completely > > "me! me! me!". A typical toddler is all about desiring, grasping > > and holding > > onto what is desired, fiercely pushing away any interferences, and > > angry and > > crying and even hitting when thwarted. A typical toddler, though I > > hasten to > > add "not every toddler", is ALL SELF! Something seems very wrong > > with this > > piece of the sutta. It depends on the age of the toddler. What if the child is 1 day or 1mo old, before s/he learns even to talk? Lots of Metta, Alex #79550 From: Dieter Möller Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina... moellerdieter Hi Howard (DC), you wrote: 'In some ways, as I as I see it, her teaching is close to the wu-wei teaching of Zen, which, in emphasizing anatta, also downplays volition.' D: You speak about a very interesting aspect .. it reminds me on a saying ( R.Wilhelm's comment to I-ching 'Grace' ..probably orginated/inspired by Schopenhauer), roughly translated from German: '...When the desire is silent... will comes to rest and then the world appears to be (pure )imagination ... but by observation /awareness alone the will can not be finally brought to rest , but rises again and all the grace was only a moment of temporary equanimity. Therefore it is not yet the real path to enlightenment.' with Metta Dieter #79551 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Angulimala upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 11/29/2007 11:27:14 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, nidive@... writes: Hi Howard, > RobertK: Knowing about accumulations means that very moment becomes > very precious. > Howard: The present moment, with its present kamma, is indeed, > precious, and is, in a way, everything. By "present kamma", I suppose you refer to new kamma or intention or bodily, verbal & mental actions. Am I right? --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, exactly. ---------------------------------------------------- If so, I agree with you that the present moment (if there is such a thing as a 'moment') is indeed precious, and is, in a way, everything. Swee Boon ========================== With metta, Howard #79552 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Ray) - In a message dated 11/29/2007 12:51:53 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, truth_aerator@... writes: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: later in the Sutta he gives the way > to the escape from arisen personality view, etc....Ra > > And guess what that way is? Doing proper Buddhist Jhana! ============================= Just to clarify, it is Ray whom you are quoting and replying to. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #79553 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:07 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Angulimala truth_aerator Hello RobertK and All, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > > Hi, Swee Boon (and Robert) - > > In a message dated 11/29/2007 11:19:25 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > nidive@... writes: > > Hi RobertK, > > > Accumulations are very natural, nothing related to God. Every > > moment there are accumulations- usually of lobha and ignorance. > > Knowing about accumulations means that very moment becomes very > > precious. But since the DO span for eternity (or very close to it) it ALSO means that we have many many latent GOOD qualities that can very quickly give results. I suspect this is one of the reasons for Mahayanist "Buddha nature" theory. Even thoough we may have many defilements, we also have many merits. The RIGHT key, proper practice is needed. Lots of Metta, Alex #79554 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina... upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 11/29/2007 1:05:45 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard (DC), you wrote: 'In some ways, as I as I see it, her teaching is close to the wu-wei teaching of Zen, which, in emphasizing anatta, also downplays volition.' D: You speak about a very interesting aspect .. it reminds me on a saying ( R.Wilhelm's comment to I-ching 'Grace' ..probably orginated/inspired by Schopenhauer), roughly translated from German: '...When the desire is silent... will comes to rest and then the world appears to be (pure )imagination ... but by observation /awareness alone the will can not be finally brought to rest , but rises again and all the grace was only a moment of temporary equanimity. Therefore it is not yet the real path to enlightenment.' with Metta Dieter ============================= Yes, an interesting connection. I can see how this would come to mind. With metta, Howard #79555 From: "Raymond Hendrickson" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self View & Verbal misunderstandings bitakarma Hi again Alex, You said: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: later in the Sutta he gives the way > to the escape from arisen personality view, etc....Ra > > And guess what that way is? Doing proper Buddhist Jhana! One of the interesting things about this Sutta is that it talks about both Jhana and Wisdom as roads to release, the Sutta ends with...... Ananda speaking..... "Venerable sir, if this is the path, the way to the abandoning of the five lower fetters, then how is it that some bhikkhus here [are said to] gain deliverance of mind (ie Jhana, my comment) and some [are said to] gain deliverance by wisdom?" "The difference here, Ananda, is in their faculties, I say." The note on this says.....MA: Among those who proceed by way of serenity, one bhikkhu emphasises unification of mind - he is said to gain deliverance of mind; another emphasises wisdom - he is said to gain deliverance by wisdom. Among those who proceed by way of insight, one emphasises wisdom - he is said to gain deliverance by wisdom; another emphasises unification of mind - he is said to gain deliverance of mind. The two chief disciples attained arahantship by emphasising both serenity and insight, but Ven. Sariputta became one who gained deliverance by wisdom and Ven. Maha Moggallana became one who gained deliverance of mind. thus the reason (for the different designations) is the difference in their faculties, i.e., between the predominance of the concentration faculty and of the wisdom faculty." This is not saying that either concentration or wisdom stands alone, it is a matter of predominance or emphasises of approach. Ra #79556 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 6:13 am Subject: Re: [d-l] Fwd: Standing A Young Woman Up .... In My Dream This Morning abhidhammika Dear Stephen, Joyce, and all How are you? Glad to hear from you. Stephen wondered: "Apparently no one ever (?) came to the Buddha and asked him to interpret a dream. Or had a scary dream problem that needed to be resolved." Suan answers: In `Mahaasupina Jaataka', King Kosala came to the Buddha and asked him to interpret his frightening dreams. Mahaasupina Jaataka is the 77th rebirth story which begins with the episode of King Kosala having 16 frightening dreams and retelling them to the Buddha for answers. Stephen also asked: "Can one generate kamma (so vipaka) in dreams? I'd say yes, as they reflect one's basic states of mind, how we overlay whatever the mind is up to with a story and images. And we are responsible for unconscious dispositions (e.g., asavas). Of course it wouldn't be too weighty!" Suan answers: In Paaraajikaka.n.dapaali, the First Book of Vinaya Pi.taka, it was reported that there were some monks who had erections and ejaculated semen in their dreams. They worried about if they breached a rule of Vinaya, namely, Samghaadiseso rule. Even though the monks had cetanaa (knowingly exerting) that enabled them to ejaculate semen, the Buddha ruled that they did not break the rule because the cetanaa in their dreams does not count. This resolution can be found in Section 235, Paaraajikaka.n.dapaali, Vinaya Pi'taka. So, Stephen, the kamma you do in dreams do not generate vipaaka because the cetanaa that normally generates vipaaka does not count in dreams. Stephen also wrote: "There was a later controversy about whether arahants could have wet dreams that apparently exercised quite a number of people. Without reading a word of the actual debates I'd side, on principle, with those who said no (based on their premise that all sex is bad / raga). However, on my view, as there's no reason at all why an arahant can't get laid (other than Indian / puritan prejudice) I'd say yes." Suan replied: There was an episode of an Arahant being forced to have sex with a woman. If my memory was correct, the Arahant was sleeping in the open area and was exposed to the rather strong wind that caused his male organ to erect. When a woman saw this erection, she could not resist and took advantage of him by sitting on it with her opening for sexual intercourse. Sorry about this x-rated description! :-) Having said that (the story of an Arahant having got laid), the Arahants cannot have wet dreams because they no longer have cetanaa (knowingly exerting) for sexual intercourse. And, wet dreams require cetanaa for sexual intercourse. Therefore, the Arahants cannot have wet dreams. This is nothing to do with a puritan prejudice. Lust for sex has been eradicated by an Anaagaamii, a non-returner, one level below an Arahant. With kind regards, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org --- In dhamma-list@yahoogroups.com, emz4585@ wrote: Hello Suan, Joyce, all An odd thing, perhaps, is that the suttas seem to lack any material on dreams. <....> #79557 From: "nidive" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:41 pm Subject: Re: Angulimala nidive Hi Howard, > As I understand the Dhamma, and as I believe, there are degrees to > things, including ignorance and greed. These don't occur as just > yes/no or 1/0. Yes, there are degrees to ignorance & lobha at various times of the day. Sometimes it's stronger, sometimes it's weaker, and sometimes it may not appear at all for a non-arahant. But the latent tendencies to ignorance & lobha is always there so long as we are not arahants. Whatever degree of ignorance & lobha, they all arise out of this latent tendency. This latent tendency is a "yes/no" or "1/0". It's either present or not present. Swee Boon #79558 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Angulimala upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 11/29/2007 7:41:36 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, nidive@... writes: Hi Howard, > As I understand the Dhamma, and as I believe, there are degrees to > things, including ignorance and greed. These don't occur as just > yes/no or 1/0. Yes, there are degrees to ignorance & lobha at various times of the day. Sometimes it's stronger, sometimes it's weaker, and sometimes it may not appear at all for a non-arahant. But the latent tendencies to ignorance & lobha is always there so long as we are not arahants. Whatever degree of ignorance & lobha, they all arise out of this latent tendency. This latent tendency is a "yes/no" or "1/0". It's either present or not present. -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, 100% correct! (That is - I agree with you! LOLOL!) ----------------------------------------------------- Swee Boon ========================== With metta, Howard #79559 From: "nidive" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:18 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Khandhas are uncontrollable nidive Hi Ken O, > KO: There is this confusion over self. Self view exist as ditthi > but self does not exist as an entity. Of course, self does not exist as an entity. Did I say that? I have been talking about "self-identity views", haven't I? > > But is "self" the same as volition? Or are they separate things? > KO: self does not exist hence the are not comparable or say there > are separate things. "Self" here refers to "self-identity views" or ditthi as you call it. > > Or do they arise together all the time, every time? > KO: When self view (ditthi) arise, it arise with volition, > everytime. So in your opinion, "self-identity views" always condition volition to arise. But can volition arise without the 'conditioning' of "self- identity views"? > > When this "self" mental defilement exhibits the characteristic of > > anicca, dukkha and anatta, how would it be possible that I could > > point out anything that is mine, myself, what I am with regard to > > the six sense bases, with regard to the five aggregates? > > KO: When ditthi arise, there is no way way panna arise. They are > exclusive. Hence it would not be possible point out these > characteristics. Obviously, the Buddha disagrees. ------------------------------------------------------------------ http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.081.than.html "Well then — knowing in what way, seeing in what way, does one without delay put an end to the effluents? There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — assumes form to be the self. That assumption is a fabrication. Now what is the cause, what is the origination, what is the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by that which is felt born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen. That craving... That feeling... That contact... That ignorance is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co- arisen. It is by knowing & seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end to the effluents. ... ------------------------------------------------------------------ As the Buddha said, it is possible to point out the inconstant & dependently co-arisen characteristic of self-identity views. Please let me know if your position is solely yours or that of Khun Sujin as well. Swee Boon #79560 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:54 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) buddhatrue Hi Dieter, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Dieter Möller wrote: > > D: good that I asked... ;-) > > with Metta Dieter > Yeah, I guess so. In case you were wondering, I wrote to Ven. Thanissaro when I was interested in ordaining as a Buddhist monk. The website for his temple, Wat Metta, reads, "At the end of the year, if they receive the abbot's consent, they are eligible for ordination. A new monk is expected to stay at Metta or at affiliated monasteries in Thailand for at least five years, receiving training in all aspects of the monk's life, before he is allowed to go off on his own." I wanted to know why an ordained monk was expected to stay at Wat Metta for five years, when there is nothing in the texts to warrant such a thing. It smacks to me of becoming an indentured servant, or joining a cult. And what does it mean to "go off on his own"? That didn't make any sense to me at all. Well, Ven. Thanissaro never answered my questions. My impression is that he doesn't like to be contradicted. He should change the name of Wat Metta to Wat Netta (as in if you go there, you will be caught in a net!! ;-)). Metta, James #79561 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:57 pm Subject: Perfect and instructive whether kusala or akusala (was Re: Angulimala philofillet Hi again Robert K > Actually, Robert, this is a great opportunity to bring up that > quote, which I've wanted to do, and discuss it with you more, Here's the full quote: "The path of the Bddha is not the stopping of contact, it is insight into the six doors...I think we become less concerned about what the object is and whethere there is kusala or akusala and the focus changes to the anattaness and conditionality of the moment. Ten every moment is so utterly perfect and instructive." BTW, I'm not out to prove a point on this - just want to deepen my understanding of the issues involved. No hurry, when you have time. Metta, Phil #79562 From: "colette" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:59 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The not-self strategy ksheri3 Yea, back in 1980 when I tried to begin lessons in National City, San Diego, in Tai Qkan Do I found that an older individual told that I should observe the similarities between the Martial Arts and Accupuncture. While one is used to destroy another is used to heal YET they both set their foundations upon the many and different points of the human body used as "gateways" or chakras. We could go into Mudras but not right now. Thanx for the reminder. It's good to know others are not so cavelier and careless as is the common characteristic of IGNORANCE and the masses of people that ARE IGNORANT. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles DaCosta" wrote: > > On a quik note : the Buddha's messages are strategies (medicine for the sick > and suffering) (preventive medicine to .) <.....> #79563 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 6:18 pm Subject: Re: A Quick Question on Conditionality philofillet Hi Scott I've been sitting on this thread for awhile, waiting for a way to approach it to pop up. Thing is, I'm totally results-oriented these days re the Dhamma, and you have close to the opposite approach. Which is fine, but just wondering where the twain can meet in a fruitful way. So I'll keep sitting on it for awhile... One thing that is almost surely irrelevant but was fun for me and probably you is something I found on Youtube the other day. (Yes, a pathetic attempt to appeal to a hockey fan.) If I say "Paul Henderson scores for Canada" to you, what is the response. But if you look at this clip, what is the response. http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=2YzHG88B8Qo So much more impact, right? So does ndsc tie in to something that I think about a lot, the impact of media on the mindstream? Do people these days by dint of the huge onslaught of high impact media have a different degree or intensity of ndsc rushing at them compared to people in the Buddha's age, or pre-Industrial ages. Does media onslaught have to do with ndsc do you think? Ejoy the clip, if you haven't seen it for awhile. I assume you're old enough (early 40s at least) to get whacked in the gut by it the way I am! :) Metta, Phil p.s anyone else, if you want to understand Canadians over 40 (and who doesn't?) please study this. #79564 From: "R. K. Wijayaratne" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 2:31 pm Subject: To Vaccha (On Giving) rwijayaratne Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammâ Sambuddhassa! SUMMARY: Here Vacca the wanderer asks the Lord Buddha whether the Lord Buddha had said that giving (of offerings, alms, etc) should only be given to him and his disciples and not to others. The Lord Buddha states that those who report him as saying as such are spreading inaccurate reports and are a misinterpreting his words (comm. in other words all giving is good whether to the Buddha, the Sangha or any others). The Lord Buddha then explains that anyone who prevents and obstructs another from giving (comm. e.g. by saying "Don't give it there / to them") creates three impediments/obstructions i) prevents the merit of the giver, ii) the gain of the recipient and iii) also harms himself thereby. He says that even if someone were to throw the rinsings (food scarps) of a cup or bowl to a village pond wishing for the beings in that pond (e.g. fish, etc) would eat it, that would be a source of merit, not to mention what is given to human beings. The Lord Buddha says that what he DID say was that what is given to a virtuous person bears a greater fruit/result than what is given to an unvirtuous person. A virtuous person is defined here as someone who has abandoned the five hindrances (to the final goal) of i) sensual desire, ii) ill will, iii) sloth and drowsiness, iv) restlessness and anxiety and v) doubt and perplexity (about the Teacher, the Teaching and Path, the disciples, themselves, etc.) and has developed i) higher/noble virtue (sila), ii) higher concentration, iii) higher wisdom, iv) higher release, v) higher knowledge and vision of release. AN 3.57 Vaccha Sutta To Vaccha (on Giving) Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu Then Vacchagotta the wanderer went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One: "Master Gotama, I have heard that 'Gotama the contemplative says this: "Only to me should a gift be given, and not to others. Only to my disciples should a gift be given, and not to others. Only what is given to me bears great fruit, and not what is given to others. Only what is given to my disciples bears great fruit, and not what is given to the disciples of others."' Now those who report this: Are they reporting the Master Gotama's actual words, are they not misrepresenting him with what is unfactual, are they answering in line with the Dhamma, so that no one whose thinking is in line with the Dhamma will have grounds for criticizing them? For we don't want to misrepresent the Master Gotama." "Vaccha, whoever says this: 'Gotama the contemplative says this: "Only to me should a gift be given... Only what is given to my disciples bears great fruit, and not what is given to the disciples of others,"' is not reporting my actual words, is misrepresenting me with what is unfactual & untrue. "Vaccha, whoever prevents another from giving a gift creates three obstructions, three impediments. Which three? He creates an obstruction to the merit of the giver, an obstruction to the recipient's gains, and prior to that he undermines and harms his own self. Whoever prevents another from giving a gift creates these three obstructions, these three impediments. "I tell you, Vaccha, even if a person throws the rinsings of a bowl or a cup into a village pool or pond, thinking, 'May whatever animals live here feed on this,' that would be a source of merit, to say nothing of what is given to human beings. But I do say that what is given to a virtuous person is of great fruit, and not so much what is given to an unvirtuous person. And the virtuous person has abandoned five factors and is endowed with five. "Which five has he abandoned? He has abandoned sensual desire... ill will... sloth & drowsiness... restlessness & anxiety... uncertainty. These are the five factors he has abandoned. And with which five is he endowed? He is endowed with the aggregate of virtue of one beyond training... the aggregate of concentration of one beyond training... the aggregate of discernment of one beyond training... the aggregate of release of one beyond training... the aggregate of knowledge & vision of release of one beyond training. These are the five factors with which he is endowed. "I tell you: What is given to one who has abandoned these five factors and is endowed with these five, bears great fruit. "In a herd of cattle, whether black, white, ruddy, brown, dappled, uniform, or pigeon gray: if a bull is born — tame, enduring, consummate in strength, & swift — people yoke him to burdens, regardless of his color. In the same way, wherever one is born among human beings — noble warriors, priests, merchants, workers, outcastes, or scavengers — if one is tame, with good practices, righteous, consummate in virtue, a speaker of truth, with conscience at heart, one who's abandoned birth & death, completed the holy life put down the burden, done the task fermentation-free, gone beyond all dhammas, through lack of clinging unbound: offerings to this spotless field bear an abundance of fruit. But fools, unknowing, dull, uninformed, give gifts outside and don't come near the good. While those who do come near the good — regarded as enlightened, wise — whose trust in the One Well-gone has taken root, is established & firm: they go to the world of the devas or are reborn here in good family. Step by step they reach Unbinding : they who are wise." <...> #79565 From: "Robert" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 8:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina... avalo1968 Hello Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: ... > In some ways, as I as I see it, her teaching is close to the wu-wei > teaching of Zen, which, in emphasizing anatta, also downplays volition. > > With metta, > Howard > ... Robert A: This is an interesting observation since I have always thought of Theravada Buddhism as strongly emphasizing effort and striving, at least from what I have heard from Thai teachers other than Khun Sujin. I appreciate your help with clarifying this point. Robert A. #79566 From: "Robert" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 8:57 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 3. avalo1968 Hello Nina, Thank you once again for your informative and detailed response to my questions. I am very much in debt to you for your efforts. Your reply did in some ways highlight why I often find DSG perplexing. Nina: N: Satipatthaana has three meanings: In the "Papañcasúdaní", Commentary to the Satipaììhånasutta, and in the Commentary to the Book of Analysis, the Dispeller of Delusion (I, Ch 7, A. Suttanta Division) it is said: "...There are three kinds of foundation of mindfulness, satipaììhåna: 1. the domain of mindfulness (sati gocaro) 2. the Master's threefold surpassing of resentment and gratification (delight) as regards the entry of his disciples [on the way of practice] . 3. mindfulness (sati). Robert A: The Satipatthana Sutta gives rather detailed instructions on how to practice mindfulness of the body, feelings, mind, and mind objects. If one sets out to follow the instructions of this sutta, are the commentaries that you cite really helpful, or would we do better to focus on the sutta itself? Thank you, Robert A. #79567 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 1. sarahprocter... Hi Howard & Robert A, You're both raising good points and topics. More on Methods..... --- upasaka@... wrote: > Nina, thank you for quoting the following sutta. I find it > excellent! :-) <...> > vangorko@... writes: > > We read in the 'Kindred Sayings' (IV, SalÃ¥yatana vagga, Kindred > Sayings on Sense, Third Fifty, Ch 5, §152, Is there a method) .... S: You may also like to see B.Bodhi's translation: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/35054 The sutta is just stressing direct awareness and understanding of realities such as seeing and visible object now, as I read it. [Also, more under 'Method?' in U.P. for those interested) Robert A, do you see anything in the following quote of A.Sujin's (as quoted in this message by Rob K) which doesn't conform with the sutta? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/35003 "Question: Is there a method by which sati can be aware of realities appearing through the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body and mind? How can sati arise fast enough in order to be aware of the present moment? Sujin: There is no method which can be followed, but at this moment realities are appearing already. One can begin to develop more understanding of them. If one first listens to the Dhamma and understands what one hears, sati can arise and be aware of realities. However, we have to listen again and again in order to gain more understanding of realities as non-self. What appears through the eyes, visible object, has contacted the rœpa which is eyesense; it just appears for an extremely short moment and then it falls away." ***** Sarah: I was listening to a tape on which K.Sujin was stressing that if there is any idea at all of 'how I can do it?' or 'what can/should I do?' it indicates there's no understanding, just self-view at such times. When understanding develops, there's no doubt about 'how?' or 'what?' anymore. Even if we have the idea that 'I'd better listen more' or 'I'd better read more texts' or 'I'd better study visible object or hardness more' in order to have awareness indicates attachment, lobha, rather than detachment and understanding of what is conditioned right now. A subtle path to really understand realities as anatta. It's not her path, your path or my path - just the eightfold path as taught by the Buddha. Look forward to hearing more of your reflections. Metta, Sarah ====== #79568 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Kin~ncana sarahprocter... Dear Scott, Larry (& Nina, Han*) --- Scott Duncan wrote: >L: In this sutta (MN43) just these 4 are mentioned and > deliverance through voidness isn't included in the summing up and > seems to be more a matter of insight than tranquility." > > Scott: Yes, thanks. The distinction is reiterated between > concentration mediated deliverance and wisdom mediated deliverance. > I'll see if I can find more on the voidness thing. This is anatta in > a way, right? .... Sarah: Yes. See the lat note BB gives: "MA also points out that the four deliverances are one in meaning because the terms - the immeasurable, nothingness, voidness, and the signless - are all names for Nibbana, which is the object of the fruition attainment of arahantship." I was just listening to the first 3 tracks of the edited mp3 we recently downloaded on dhammastudygroup.org. I have some discussion with K.Sujin on the second track (if I recall) about this same sutta and ceto vimutti, following a discussion here with Matheesha befor on it. *Also, Nina, on the beginning of the third track, K.Sujin talks more about the point we were discussing on jhana as burning and contemplation. She stresses that the 'contemplation' can only be used for up to upacara, such as reflecting on the Buddha's virtues. She also refers to the burning of the sense objects themselves. *Han, if you have time, please listen to the very first 10 minutes of these talks. Here I'm raising all your points on sakkaya ditthi vs Atta-vadupadana. Just to repeat, they are the talks in the audio section, Bangkok, August 2006 (Jon, Sarah & friends). Btw, I keep meaning to add something further on seeing, hearing and other vipaka cittas as insignificant of inconsequential, but have been busy and I know you weren't keen to hear more:-). Ken O also added more good points, I thought. Metta, Sarah ======= #79569 From: "Robert" Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 1. avalo1968 Hello Sarah, I quote from the talk by Khun Sujin you cited: Sujin: ... "The way to begin is knowing when sati arises and when there is forgetfulness. I will give an example. We all touch things which are hard. Even a child knows that something is hard, because hardness impinges on the rœpa which is bodysense and there is citta which experiences the characteristic of hardness. This happens time and again in daily life. When we just experience or notice hardness, it does not mean that there is sati and panna. Someone, however, who has listened to the Dhamma knows that hardness is a reality which appears when it contacts the rœpa which is bodysense. Hardness is non-self, there is nobody who can create the element of hardness. Whenever the bodysense, which is all over the body, from head to toes, is contacted by something hard, the element of hardness appears. The true characteristic of that particular element presents itself at such a moment. However, when there is forgetfulness of realities and there is no right understanding, we take the whole body, from head to toes, for self. From the time we have been getting up in the morning until now we have, time and again, touched what is hard, but if one has not listened to the Dhamma one is forgetful of such moments. A person who has listened to the Dhamma and has grasped what he heard, has right understanding of the characteristic of hardness when it appears. He understands that it is only a reality which appears, not a ÒselfÓ. Just a moment ago we experienced something hard, and now, at this moment, we can begin to understand that hardness is only a reality. Such understanding is due to sati which has arisen and which is aware of the characteristic of hardness. When sati arises it is aware of a reality just for an extremely short moment, and after that there is again forgetfulness of realities." Robert A: I think it will always be impossible for me to reconcile what Khun Sujin says above with the Satipatthana Sutta. Jon was kind enough to share with me your rational as to why this sutta really does not mean what I think it means, but I remain unconvinced and I'm afraid I will eternally remain unconvinced about this point. Best Regards, Robert A. #79570 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) sarahprocter... Dear Han & James,(*Ken O) --- han tun wrote: > > > Han: It is a reminder and a lesson for me, because > I tend to be stubborn and I stick to my gun on many > occasions. > > > James: Really? I haven't seen a lot of evidence of > that, but I will take your word on it. ;-)) > > Han: You won’t see the evidence, because I am stubborn > in a silent way. > In Burma, we say “no back-talk, no do.” > A person who does not argue back, but who won’t do > what he was asked to do either:>). .... S: No comment on particular accumulations:-) However, I think it's a good point in general - we may notice and comment when friends speak unwisely (or stubbornly), but what about all the 'unspoken' cittas, when we keep quiet? *I also laughed when I read Ken O's reminder about all his (super-intense!) questions in the beginning before his 'eureka' experiences (lol!!) - different accumulations, but we all have a keen interest to understand the Buddha's teachings more deeply, otherwise we wouldn't be here. Metta, Sarah ======= #79571 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 1. sarahprocter... Hi Robert A, --- Robert wrote: >KS: Just a moment ago we experienced something hard, and now, at this > moment, we can begin to understand that hardness is only a reality. > Such understanding is due to sati which has arisen and which is aware > of the characteristic of hardness. When sati arises it is aware of a > reality just for an extremely short moment, and after that there is > again forgetfulness of realities." > > Robert A: > I think it will always be impossible for me to reconcile what Khun Sujin > > says above with the Satipatthana Sutta. Jon was kind enough to share > with me your rational as to why this sutta really does not mean what I > think it means, but I remain unconvinced and I'm afraid I will eternally > remain unconvinced about this point. ... S: No need to apologise and as Jon also indicated, all 'interpretations' or understandings of the Teachings are very welcome! I liked your question to Jon too about whether we should consider what is in accordance with the Tipitaka and ancient commentaries, or whether we should consider what is in accordance with reality now. K.Sujin also always reminds us that dhammas are not in the book. What is experienced right now when we touch the keyboard, would you say? Surely, it's only tangible object, only hardness which appears briefly and then is gone. Isn't there just the one world at a time which is ever experienced, which can ever be known? Isn't this also what we read about in the Satipatthana Sutta, i.e different realities appearing no matter what our daily activities are? You've got a few other threads on the go, so no need to pursue this one unless you'd like to, Robert. Also, apologies to many people here - I've got a large bundle of unanswered posts which I hope to catch up on next week. Metta, Sarah ======= #79572 From: han tun Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Kin~ncana hantun1 Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for your note for me. *Han, if you have time, please listen to the very first 10 minutes of these talks. Here I'm raising all your points on sakkaya ditthi vs Atta-vadupadana. Just to repeat, they are the talks in the audio section, Bangkok, August 2006 (Jon, Sarah & friends). Btw, I keep meaning to add something further on seeing, hearing and other vipaka cittas as insignificant of inconsequential, but have been busy and I know you weren't keen to hear more:-). Ken O also added more good points, I thought. Han: There is the pronunciation difficulty. You are better than me in that you can understand Burmese pronunciation of Pali, but I cannot understand easily others’ pronunciation. So if possible, I would like to request you to kindly send me a small portion of the transcript at a time (on whatever subject you want me to study), attached to the direct e-mail to me. Please do not pay much attention to what I say or what I write. I am a born-rebel, and if there is any difference of opinion, my first reaction, on many occasions, is “So what?” which is not a wholesome attitude :>) Respectfully, Han #79573 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina et al sarahprocter... Hi Howard, I think your summary (in your own words) was really very good and very much along the lines of the talk I was listening to in which she was stressing that whenever we have the idea about 'how' or 'what' we should do, it's indicative of self-view. This is regardless of whether we're thinking we should 'do' meditation, 'do' reading of texts or 'do' anything else in order to follow the Path. --- upasaka@... wrote: > 3) There is no need whatsoever to intentionally "do" anything, and, > > moreover, any attempt to do so not only is fruitless, but is > counterproductive in > that it solidifies sense of self and grasping, and is the diametric > opposite > of relinquishment. .... S: At such moments of intentionally "doing" in order to follow the teachings, there is simply no understanding of anatta, of conditioned realities appearing now. I'll now look forward to your further explanations to the 'unconvinced':-). Metta, Sarah ====== #79574 From: han tun Date: Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (1) hantun1 Dear Sarah, > > Han: You won’t see the evidence, because I am > > stubborn in a silent way. > > In Burma, we say “no back-talk, no do.” > > A person who does not argue back, but who won’t > > do what he was asked to do either:>). .... > Sarah: No comment on particular accumulations: -) > However, I think it's a good point in general - we > may notice and comment when friends speak unwisely > {or stubbornly), but what about all the 'unspoken' > cittas, when we keep quiet? Han: You won’t be able to do anything about the 'unspoken' cittas, when one keeps quiet, and you cannot make that person to speak if he chooses to keep quiet. I remember someone told me once: “you can bring the horse to the pond, but you cannot make the horse to drink if it doesn’t want to drink.” So please remember that horse, when I choose to keep quiet :>) Respectfully, Han #79575 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 12:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina et buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Howard, > > I think your summary (in your own words) was really very good and very > much along the lines of the talk I was listening to in which she was > stressing that whenever we have the idea about 'how' or 'what' we should > do, it's indicative of self-view. This is regardless of whether we're > thinking we should 'do' meditation, 'do' reading of texts or 'do' anything > else in order to follow the Path. But you just recently wrote to me and Han: "but we all have a keen interest to understand the Buddha's teachings more deeply, otherwise we wouldn't be here." So, to you, participation in DSG is doing something to more deeply understand the Buddha's teaching. And this is something which all of the members want to "do". Everything we do has intention behind it- that is the law of kamma. So KS is suggesting that we eliminate all intentions in order to follow the Dhamma? That would be impossible. Metta, James #79576 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 1:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina et sarahprocter... Hi James & all, Good to chat to you again:-). > wrote: >>...she was > > stressing that whenever we have the idea about 'how' or 'what' we > should > > do, it's indicative of self-view. This is regardless of whether we're > > thinking we should 'do' meditation, 'do' reading of texts or 'do' > anything > > else in order to follow the Path. .... >J: But you just recently wrote to me and Han: "but we all have a keen > interest to understand the Buddha's teachings more deeply, otherwise > we wouldn't be here." So, to you, participation in DSG is doing > something to more deeply understand the Buddha's teaching. .... S: Good point to raise. It depends whether we really think we can do something or whether we appreciate the understanding of realities right now regardless of the occasion. If we think we can go and do something, there is no understanding now of what is appearing, whether it be visible object, sound or any other dhamma. There are conditions now to listen and consider the teachings carefully, but none of these conditions is a self doing or choosing to do anything. .... >And this > is something which all of the members want to "do". Everything we do > has intention behind it- that is the law of kamma. So KS is > suggesting that we eliminate all intentions in order to follow the > Dhamma? That would be impossible. .... S: Not at all. As you say, it would be impossible to eliminate intentions. There is intention at every moment regardless of the activity or the dhammas being experienced. When there's any idea that we should that we'll do anything or have particular intentions or efforts arise, we forget all about anatta as I suggested. Metta, Sarah ========= #79577 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 1:49 am Subject: Re: was Re: [dsg] Alchohol as a medicine for cold throat, & 5th Precept. sarahprocter... Hi Alex, Thanks for your comments. --- Alex wrote: > Since I took some medicine (cat's claw) I guess I broke the 5th > precept... :( ... S: I've had a cold this week too.....but I've been sipping the ginger and lemon. I see Phil uses this too. As Ken O mentioned, taking medicine with alcohol in isn't necessarily breaking any precept. It always depends on the intention, of course. The Vinaya discusses the point - it depends on whether it is a small enough amount to be tasteless or something like that. I'll check if I have time. .... > > writers..... whereabouts do you live? If it goes down to -40F, I > guess it > must be the Eastern side, right? > >>>> > > Western Canada. Alberta. It is currently 3F. Next week may fall to - > 4F. ... S: Ah-hah! So you may be your nemesis Scott's neighbour!! To give us a clue, do you support the 'Oilers'? ... > > Sarah > > p.s Briefly, Nanavira's article you quoted is full of holes, > starting with the first comment about sotapannas. See 'Suicide' > in 'Useful Posts' for > >>>> more. > I'll have to check. However even Arahants could commit suicide, so I > would not be surprised for sotapannas. ... S: Arahants certainly not. No more lobha, dosa or moha. .... > > There was a person (Channa an Arya) who either achieved Arahatship > before or during suicide (using a knife). SN 35.87 (4) Channa. > pg 1164 > > He was in great pain, in those times there was not good medicine and > he used the knife blamelessly. ... S: Blamelessly because he became an arahant in the interval between using the knife and dying. It has nothing to do with the degree of physical pain or the lack of medicine. As I said, see 'suicide' in U.P. Lots more detail there. ... > I am curious about Anagamiship+ requirment for Nirodha Samapati. > Is there a sutta which says so? I've just checked, it is not in SN. .... S: I don't know about the sutta. It's clearly spelled out in the commentaries and Abhidhamma. As I said, see under 'nirodha samapatti' in U.P. If you always limit your studies to the suttas only, you will come to the same kind of distorted conclusions as those you quoted from Nanavira. ... > I remember frequently Buddha mentioning that achieving Nirodha > Samapatti (CofP&F) if seen with wisdom leads to Arahatship. Ven. > Sariputta in MN111 started out as a sotapanna and reached CofP&F in > 14 days after which he was an Arahant. Same with MahaMogallana, but 7 > days. I suppose that one could become Anagamin on the way towards > CofP&F. In many instances where CofP&f was mentioned, the > practicioner was called a "bhikkhu" and not an arya. .... S: Sorry, none of this is clear to me and I'm probably being dense, but I don't know what CofP&F is. Nirodha samapatti doesn't 'lead to' arahatship. It is an attainment possible on account of full mastery of all jhanas and previous attainment of anagami or arahatship. I know, See Nynatiloka's dictionary: http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/n_r/nirodha_samaapatti.htm Metta, Sarah ======== #79578 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 1:50 am Subject: Perfect and instructive whether kusala or akusala (was Re: Angulimala rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi again Robert K > > > Actually, Robert, this is a great opportunity to bring up that > > quote, which I've wanted to do, and discuss it with you more, > > Here's the full quote: "The path of the Bddha is not the stopping > of contact, it is insight into the six doors...I think we become > less concerned about what the object is and whethere there is kusala > or akusala and the focus changes to the anattaness and > conditionality of the moment. Ten every moment is so utterly perfect > and instructive." > > BTW, I'm not out to prove a point on this - just want to deepen > my understanding of the issues involved. > _________ Dear Phil, yes I like that quote. Every moment is exactly as it must be. If there weren't the conditions for this moment to arise then it couldn't arise. However, because of delusion and tanha, all the time we are looking for some other reality than what is now- and that innate wanting is brought into all Dhamma activities. Thus one starts off on the wrong path and continues on and on, hoping that one has got it right. If one doesn't see that it is wrong then one will remain confused the entire life. But this too is understandable, after all avijja and tanha run deep and the path of the Dhamma is refined and sublime. As I see a thread about Sujin is running I add this quote from a talk: Sujin: If one thinks that one should rather have objects other than the present one, since these appear to be more wholesome, one will never study the object which appears now. And how can one know their true nature when there is no study, no awareness of them? So it must be the present object, only what appears now. This is more difficult because it is not the object of desire. If desire can move one away to another object, that object satisfies one's desire. Desire is there all the time. If there is no understanding of lobha as lobha, how can it be eradicated? One has to understand different degrees of realities, also lobha which is more subtle, otherwise one does not know when there is lobha. Seeing things as they are. Lobha is lobha. Usually one does not see the subtle lobha which moves one away from developing right understanding of the present object."endquote . Robert #79579 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 1:24 am Subject: RE: [dsg] heresy of instanteneous changing "mind moments" dacostacharles Hi KenO, You need to look the Definition of Karma. According to some it is just cause and effect, to others it arises due to volition (intentional acts), and still others make it even more specific – desire is the root cause for it to arise. According to my dictionary: kar·ma (kärÆmÃ), n. 1. Hinduism, Buddhism. action, seen as bringing upon oneself inevitable results, good or bad, either in this life or in a reincarnation: in Hinduism one of the means of reaching Brahman. Cf. bhakti (def. 1), jnana. 2. Theosophy. the cosmic principle according to which each person is rewarded or punished in one incarnation according to that person's deeds in the previous incarnation. 3. fate; destiny. 4. the good or bad emanations felt to be generated by someone or something. [1820–30; < Skt: nom., acc. sing. of karman act, deed] —karÆmic, adj. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma Karma (Sanskrit : kárma (help ·info ), kárman - "act, action, performance"[1] ; Pali : kamma) is the concept of "action" or "deed" in Indian religions understood as that which causes the entire cycle of cause and effect (samsara ) described in Hindu , Jain , Sikh and Buddhist philosophies. I could go on. The issue of a karma points to a doer and a thinker. In other words a being, i.e. a self. Now, if you don’t believe the self exists, how can you believe in suffering and samsara? Charles DaCosta _____ From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken O Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 18:02 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [dsg] heresy of instanteneous changing "mind moments" Hi Charles <...> it is understandable to be confusing. In modern terms, we tend to equate responsbility of our actions to a self. Kamma does not arise in some entity. There is no entity to be found in any of the aggregates. It is our believe there is one, that is why we crave for being, we crave for existence, hence we conditioned the next birth. <...> #79580 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 1:46 am Subject: RE: [dsg] heresy of instanteneous changing "mind moments" dacostacharles Ken0 The entity doesn't exist in the aggregates, it exist because of the aggregates. If I take your position, then who the hell is this WE You keep talking about. You obviously believe in a WE and seem to be trapped into lying to yourself about it. If there is no You or Me, then why are you caught up in presenting there isn't. In a nut shell, if you don't exist, why post to DSG? There would be no need, no reality to be found, no information, no company, no sharing, . Why, because all these things eqos/selves seek! Charles DaCosta _____ From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken O Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 18:02 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [dsg] heresy of instanteneous changing "mind moments" Hi Charles <...> it is understandable to be confusing. In modern terms, we tend to equate responsbility of our actions to a self. Kamma does not arise in some entity. There is no entity to be found in any of the aggregates. It is our believe there is one, that is why we crave for being, we crave for existence, hence we conditioned the next birth. <...> #79581 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 2:23 am Subject: RE: [dsg] heresy of instanteneous changing "mind moments" dacostacharles Hi Alex, I was half a sleep when I made that reply. I think your idea - ". it had to be perceivable ." - was enough. Charles DaCosta _____ From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Alex Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 1:24 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] heresy of instanteneous changing "mind moments" <...> By >0 seconds I meant ALL numbers. Even if it is tiny like 10^(any natural number). 10th or even a millionth part of a second is NOT the smallest, indivisible or "ultimate unit of time" 1 billionth of a second is even quicker. But ANY number > 0 (even if it is 10^-100000000 seconds) is divisible! #79582 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 3:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina et al nilovg Hi Howard, I enjoy it, answering your post. As I said, you seriously thought over what you wrote. As I noticed before, you can very well put yourself in the position of someone else, even when you are of a different opinion. This is very commendable. We can all learn from your example! There is nothing I find wrong here, but I find it difficult to react, because it is quite a task to summarize Khun Sujin's way of explaining in a few points, the 'spirit' may be lost, or something may be missing. I try to add a few things. Op 29-nov-2007, om 0:33 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I think that the Ajahn's understanding of the Dhamma may be along the > following lines: > > 1) The Buddhadhamma is the true pointing at what is real, and the true > map of the way to awakening. -------- N: This could be elaborated on. She stresses the way to develop understanding of realities, understanding of the truth. Right from the beginning it is understanding that is the aim. And it has to be understanding of what occurs now. We have to ask ourselves: is there more understanding while we are listening? She said that some people are listening all day, but may not have understanding of what they hear. Others may not listen for a long time, but they understand and consider what they heard. Moreover, detachment is very much emphasized by her. We cling to self, we cling to all objects that are experienced. The Buddha's Path is a Path of detachment. But attachment should be thoroughly known, otherwise it cannot be eradicated. That is why by her questions she let us be confronted with our defilements, with our attachment, at this very moment. Thus, what Kh Sujin emphasizes: understanding that should be developed and, detachment. ----------- > H: 2) Because of the very special nature of the Buddhadhamma, the > study and > contemplation of the Tipitaka not only provides intellectual > knowledge of > "the real", but also serves to condition the mind to the point of > enabling > 'cultivation' by which term is understood the (automatic) resultant > development > of kusala traits including equanimity, purification, energy, ready > concentration and attention, keen mindfulness, wisdom, and > relinquishment, and this > cultivation in turn leads onwards to the four stages of awakening. ------ N: As to <... but also serves to condition the mind to the point of enabling 'cultivation' by which term is understood the (automatic) resultant development of kusala traits..>, I could add something. It is understanding that develops on and on, beginning at intellectual understanding, that is a condition for the stages of insight, and this eventually for enlightenment. But we should not think with clinging to an idea of enlightenment. As you say, we also need to develop other good qualities, the perfections. She will always stress patience, the highest form of ascetism. This is not a passive kind of patience, but patience with perseverance and detachment. Perseverance: never being disheartened because of lack of progress, not putting off understanding and mindfulness here and now, as far as we are able to. When we have not listened enough, there are no conditions for sati and pa~n~naa. You mention concentration, but this accompanies each citta, it may be akusala, or kusala or neither. When people think of having to focus on a nama and rupa there is bound to be clinging already. Then there is wrong concentration, a factor of the wrong Path. She warns aginst this. I would omit the word automatic, because nothing is automatic, as you also will agree. -------- > H: 3) There is no need whatsoever to intentionally "do" anything, and, > moreover, any attempt to do so not only is fruitless, but is > counterproductive in > that it solidifies sense of self and grasping, and is the diametric > opposite > of relinquishment. Even the study and contemplation of the Dhamma > is not > something usefully "done on purpose", again because of involvement > of atta-view, > but it occurs, if it occurs, because of interest and opportunity as > determined by prior conditions. ------ N: Yes, you understood, though you do not agree. But you also think that effort, will etc. are mental factors, not caused by a self. Only, you believe that it does not matter if the idea of self still occurs in one's practice. Or did I not render your ideas correctly? True, the idea of self comes in all the time, but understanding can realize this as a conditioned dhamma. Everything is dhamma, she stresses all the time. Effort is a dhamma, will is a dhamma. Let us not forget this. Not doing anything, this may be misunderstood by others. We have to take this in the right sense. We need the perfection of truthfulness: when we 'do' something to have more understanding, it can be known whether there is an idea of self luring us here. By her questions she makes us aware of this fact. So often we are fooling ourselves, taking for kusala what is attachment. --------- > > H: I would simply like to know whether my take on her approach is > correct > or not, and if not, to know where it is in error. As for what I > wrote, other > than the first item I don't share that perspective, and I don't > think it > correctly captures the Buddha's teachings, but I do find it very > interesting - > even captivating. ----- N: I am glad you find it captivating :-)) Nina. #79583 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 3:58 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Not-self strategy dacostacharles Dear DM, Good digging. The only problem with it that I can fine is the following statements: “As might be imagined, the first group accused the second group of denying the concept of anatta, or not-self; whereas the second group accused the first of being unable to account for the truths that they said their concept of person explained. Both groups, however, found that their positions entangled them in philosophical difficulties that have never been successfully resolved.” I don’t have any philosophical difficulties. I am quite clear, (yes I): I don’t deny the concept of Anatta and I don’t deny that “I” exist. I do deny a misunderstanding of the concepts of anatta and a self (or being, what ever you want to call it). I based this on the following facts: 1. No clear thinking person can deny the existence of “I, me, mine” (This arises from a self); 2. No clear thinking person can deny the existence of aggregates working together to fulfill desires (this is what is defined as a being and a self); 3. No clear thinking person can deny they are responsible for their “thoughts, actions, and speech” (this is what the Buddha taught in the sutras and vinya, why the Buddha taught morality, and declared morality a part of the path). 4. I could go on this way, but now for the other side (annatta): a) No single person I know has proven beyond a doubt that there is an unchanging, eternal, fully controllable essence in beings (anatta). b) Those that claim they have seen something they think is an essence agree that it is evolving (changing), suffers due to the nature of existence, it may survive many lifetimes but changes some how, and it may or may not exist throughout eternity …. In English, people tend to call this dynamic essence (or thing) a soul, astral body, a spirit, …. However, some prefer to say it is not the essence, rather, it is the whole being or just another aggregate of the being. The Buddha taught that our problem, and the problem of this world, is DESIRE (if you are a Therevandan or old school Buddhist), IGNORANCE (if you are a Mahayanists), and the Vajrayanaists like to add, to the other two points, the lake of POWER/purity in the form of unbreakable COMPASSISON (i.e., pointing to directed concentration). I like to add SELF-CENTEREDNESS (selfishness) to the above three points. So of course, a goal would be to get beyond the self, to a place where it only exist as PURE: compassion (derived from the wisdom of non-suffering), wisdom (of on-suffering), and concentration (energy, power, and drive to not vary from the path of non-suffering). CONCLUSION: If I believe that beings don’t exist then there is on one or thing to suffer, because suffering is a Problem for beings, not concepts and other types of things. Also, then there is no need for the third pillar of the 8FP (i.e., morality), and there is no need to develop the other two (i.e., wisdom, and concentration/purity). The only safe place for this is Nirvana. If I believe that beings do exist then I must exist in samsara and I, no WE, must have a lot of work to do – if We want this to end – because it will not and should not end on its OWN! Relative AND Ultimate truths must be ONE for them both to be TRUE, else one of them is a lie! So, therefore, I MUST do some things and not other things. For example, I must avoid the trappings of a self dominated by: Self-interest, Ignorance of non-suffering, and the lake of power to do what I know is Right. Charles DaCosta _____ From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dieter Möller Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 9:35 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Re: Not-self strategy Hi Alex, Ken H and others, you quoted Ven. Thanissaro' s translation of SN 22.22 : 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.accessto insight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.022.than.html His comment is quite interesting in respect to our discussion .. in particular 'Both groups, however, found that their positions entangled them in philosophical difficulties that have never been successfully resolved.' <...> #79584 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Kin~ncana nilovg Dear Han, I thought of you when hearing this, but I was not sure whether you wanted to pursue this. It seems a technical point, but Kh Sujin brought it to this moment. It is not in the book, it pertains to our life now. A suggestion: the only Pali words are: attavaadupadaana, sakkaayaditthi, attanuditthi. If you double click you need not even download. If there is any trouble, I can transcribe the text. I have my notes ready, but a lot of other work just now. Nina Op 30-nov-2007, om 7:55 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Han: There is the pronunciation difficulty. You are > better than me in that you can understand Burmese > pronunciation of Pali, but I cannot understand easily > others’ pronunciation. So if possible, I would like to > request you to kindly send me a small portion of the > transcript at a time (on whatever subject you want me > to study), attached to the direct e-mail to me. --------- #79585 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Kin~ncana nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 30-nov-2007, om 7:09 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > She > stresses that the 'contemplation' can only be used for up to > upacara, such > as reflecting on the Buddha's virtues. She also refers to the > burning of > the sense objects themselves. ------ N: Thank you. I heard this, but now in India she corrected: attachment to sense objects. Kaama in Pali/Thai: kilesa kaama, and vatthu kaama: the basis for the defilements, the sense objects themselves. It makes more sense that the attachment is burnt away, not the objects which fall away anyway. Nina. #79586 From: han tun Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 5:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Kin~ncana hantun1 Dear Nina and Sarah, But how do I download this to listen? Please instruct me in detail. My computer knowledge is very poor. Can I download it direct to CDR or CD-RW? Or must I download it to "My Documents" first? Download it from where? Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #79587 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 12:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina... upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 11/30/2007 2:23:46 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard, I think your summary (in your own words) was really very good and very much along the lines of the talk I was listening to in which she was stressing that whenever we have the idea about 'how' or 'what' we should do, it's indicative of self-view. This is regardless of whether we're thinking we should 'do' meditation, 'do' reading of texts or 'do' anything else in order to follow the Path. --- upasaka@... wrote: > 3) There is no need whatsoever to intentionally "do" anything, and, > > moreover, any attempt to do so not only is fruitless, but is > counterproductive in > that it solidifies sense of self and grasping, and is the diametric > opposite > of relinquishment. .... S: At such moments of intentionally "doing" in order to follow the teachings, there is simply no understanding of anatta, of conditioned realities appearing now. I'll now look forward to your further explanations to the 'unconvinced':-). ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: You do understand, though, do you not, that this would include talking to myself? ;-) ------------------------------------------------------------- Metta, Sarah =============================== With continuing, unconvinced absence-of-assent, but confirmed, continuing metta, ;-) Howard #79588 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 5:29 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (71) nichiconn dear friends, Part 8 14. Ti.msanipaato 1. Subhaajiivakambavanikaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa verse: 369. "Ki.m te aparaadhita.m me ayaa, ya.m ma.m ovariyaana ti.t.thasi; na hi pabbajitaaya aavuso, puriso samphusanaaya kappati. 367. What wrong have I done you that you should stand obstructing me? For it is not fitting, sir, that a man should touch a woman who has gone forth. txt: "Abravii subhaa"ti vatvaa tassaa vuttaakaaradassanattha.m aaha "ki.m te aparaadhitan"ti-aadi. Tattha ki.m te aparaadhita.m mayaati ki.m tuyha.m, aavuso, mayaa aparaddha.m. Ya.m ma.m ovariyaana ti.t.thasiiti yena aparaadhena ma.m gacchanti.m ovaritvaa gamana.m nisedhetvaa ti.t.thasi, so natthevaati adhippaayo. Atha itthiitisa~n~naaya eva.m pa.tipajjasi, evampi na yuttanti dassentii aaha- "na hi pabbajitaaya, aavuso, puriso samphusanaaya kappatii"ti, aavuso suva.n.nakaaraputta lokiyacaarittenapi purisassa pabbajitaana.m samphusanaaya na kappati, pabbajitaaya pana puriso tiracchaanagatopi samphusanaaya na kappati, ti.t.thatu taava purisaphusanaa, raagavasenassaa nissaggiyena purisassa nissaggiyassaapi phusanaa na kappateva. 367. Having said, Subhaa said in order to show the manner of her speech, What wrong have [I] done you?, etc, is said. There, what wrong (aparaadhita.m) have I done you? means: what offence (apara-ddha.m) have I committed against you, sir? That you should stand obstructing (ovariyaana) me means: for what offence (aparaadhena) is it that you should stand there obstructing (ovaritvaa) my going on, preventing my passage? The implication is: there is none. But he was only intent on the idea, "A woman!" So, showing that it is not proper, she said: For it is not fitting, sir, that a man (puriso) should touch a woman who has gone forth (pabbajitaana.m), [even] according to common usage. Now it is not fitting for a man or even a [male] animal to touch a woman who has gone forth. Put aside now the touch of a man. She should give up being under the influence of desire, and moreover the man should be given up. It is not fitting to touch him. verse: 370. "Garuke mama satthusaasane, yaa sikkhaa suna desitaa; parisuddhapada.m ana"nga.na.m, ki.m ma.m ovariyaana ti.t.thasi. 368. In this weighty teaching of my Teacher, whatever training has been taught by the Sublime One is a purified state without blemish. Why do you stand obstructing me? txt: Tenaaha "garuke mama satthusaasane"ti-aadi. Tassattho- garuke paasaa.nacchatta.m viya garukaatabbe mayha.m satthu saasane yaa sikkhaa bhikkhuniyo uddissa sugatena sammaasambuddhena desitaa pa~n~nattaa. Taahi parisuddhapada.m parisuddhakusalako.t.thaasa.m, raagaadi-a"nga.naana.m sabbaso abhaavena ana"nga.na.m, eva.mbhuuta.m ma.m gacchanti.m kena kaara.nena aavaritvaa ti.t.thasiiti. 368. Therefore she said, etc. The meaning of that is: In the teaching of my Teacher, which is weighty (garuke), worthy of esteem (garu-kaatabbe) like a stone canopy, whatever training regarding the bhikkhuniis has been taught, point out to them by the Sublime One, by the Fully and Perfectly Awakened One, is a purified state (pari-suddha-pada.m), containing the good and the purified (parisuddha-kusala-ko.t.thaasa.m), without blemish (ana"nga.na.m) through the absence of all the blemishes beginning with passion (raagaadi-a"nga.naana.m). Since I have become such a one, what is the reason you stand there obstructing me from going on? to be continued, connie #79589 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 5:30 am Subject: Re: Khandhas are uncontrollable scottduncan2 Dear Swee Boon, Ken O, Regarding: "Well then knowing in what way, seeing in what way, does one without delay put an end to the effluents? There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma assumes form to be the self. That assumption is a fabrication. Now what is the cause, what is the origination, what is the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by that which is felt born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen. That craving... That feeling... That contact... That ignorance is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co- arisen. It is by knowing & seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end to the effluents." Bh. Bodhi translates as: "And how, bhikkhus, should one know, how should one see, for the immediate destruction of the taints to occur? Here, bhikkhus, the uninstructed worldling, who is not a seer of the noble ones and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, who is not a seer of superior persons and is unskilled and undiscipined in their Dhamma, regards form as self. That regarding, bhikkhus, is a formation. That formation - what is its source, what is its origin, from what is it born and produced? When the uninstructed worldling is contacted by a feeling born of ignorance-contact, craving arises: thence that formation is born. Thus, bhikkhus, that formation is impermanent... conditioned, dependentently arisen..." "Note 63. ...Spk identifies...'ignorance-contact' as the contact associated with ignorance (aviijasampayuttaphassa)..." "Note 133. Spk glosses 'that regarding' (saa samanupassanaa) as 'view formation' (di.t.thi-sa"nkhaara)..." The Pali: Paarileyyaka sutta.m Katha.m ca bhikkhave, jaanato katha.m passato anantaraa aasavaana.m khayo hoti: idha bhikkhave, assutavaa puthujjano ariyaana.m adassaavii ariyadhammassa akovido ariyadhamme aviniito sappurisaana.m adassaavii sappurisadhammassa akovido sappurisadhamme aviniito, ruupa.m attato samanupassati yaa kho pana saa bhikkhave, samanupassanaa, sa"nkhaaro so. So pana sa"nkhaaro kinnidaano ki.msamudayo ki~njaatiko kimpabhavoti: avijjaasamphassajena bhikkhave, vedayitena phu.t.thassa assutavato puthujjanassa uppannaa ta.nhaa tatojo so sa"nkhaaro. Iti kho bhikkhave, sopi kho sa"nkhaaro anicco sa"nkhato pa.ticcasamuppanno, saapi ta.nhaa aniccaa sa"nkhataa pa.ticcasamuppannaa, saapi vedanaa aniccaa sa"nkhataa pa.ticcasamuppannaa. Sopi phasso anicco sa"nkhato pa.ticcasamuppanno. Saapi avijjaa aniccaa sa"nkhataa pa.ticcasamuppannaa. evampi kho bhikkhave, jà nato evaü passato anantaraa aasavaana.m khayo hoti. SB: "...As the Buddha said, it is possible to point out the inconstant & dependently co-arisen characteristic of self-identity views." Scott: Is this about micchaa-di.t.thi in general? 'Di.t.thi-sa"nkhaara' seems to refer to the views associated with ignorance, which is a root, a mental factor. So is this sutta referring to root condition? I also notice 'anantaraa', which is translated only as 'condition' by Bh. Bodhi. Might this refer to anantaraa-paccaya (proximity condition) as well? Sincerely, Scott. #79590 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 5:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 3. nilovg Dear Robert A, I am sorry you find dsg perplexing. But by all means, say so if you find this. Op 30-nov-2007, om 5:57 heeft Robert het volgende geschreven: > The Satipatthana Sutta gives rather detailed instructions on how to > practice mindfulness of the body, feelings, mind, and mind objects. If > one sets out to follow the instructions of this sutta, are the > commentaries that you cite really helpful, or would we do better to > focus on the sutta itself? ------- N: I give an example: when he is walking, he knows 'I am walking'. Some people, maybe not you, take awareness to mean: knowing what you are doing. I quote the Co which is helpfull: Subco: Co: -------- I give you the link, the Way of Mindfulness, by Soma Thera. This is the ancient co. You can try whether you find this helpful. < http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wayof.html > The sutta explains what the objects of mindfulness are. Conventional speech is used, and the examples given are meant to bring us back to what appears now: naama and ruupa. It has been taken into account in this sutta that those who had accumulations for jhaana developed both jhaana and vipassanaa. When you look closely under citta, you see that all kinds of citta, jhaanacitta, or akusala citta are objects of mindfuless, so that these are not taken for self. Nothing is excluded. Nina. #79591 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 5:41 am Subject: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, Apart from the three rúpas of solidity, heat and motion that can be directly experienced in daily life, there are in addition four rúpas that appear all the time: visible object or colour, sound, odour and flavour. Also these rúpas arise in a group together with the four Great Elements and other rúpas. Thus, there are seven rúpas that appear time and again in daily life, they have characteristics that can be directly experienced without the need to name them or to think about them. We do not have to think of sound or odour in order to experience them, they appear just for a moment and then they disappear. We cannot cause their arising, they arise when there are the right conditions and then they disappear. We cannot prevent them from disappearing, and they are beyond control, non-self. Development of right understanding leads gradually, from the very beginning, to detachment until the ultimate stage, when arahatship is reached. First there will be detachment from the wrong view of self and later on other defilements will be abandoned, but this is a long way. We have accumulated ignorance for aeons and therefore there cannot be right understanding immediately. We are attached to the idea of my body, but, as Acharn Sujin explained, what is it that appears? When hardness impinges on the bodysense its characteristic can be experienced. Hardness appears and then falls away immediately. We know through remembrance (saññå) that we have arms, legs, and all the other body-parts, but these cannot be experienced, they are concepts that are remembered. When we truly consider that only one characteristic of rúpa is experienced at a time when it impinges on the rúpa that is the body-sense, and that it falls away immediately, we can understand, at least in theory, that our whole body we find so important does not exist in the ultimate sense. We think of “I” who is sitting, we are attached to the idea of a sitting posture. In the ultimate sense rúpa does not sit. A posture is a conglomeration of rúpas we can think of, but it is not real in the ultimate sense. We cling to the idea of my body that is sick or healthy, but the rúpas of which the body consists arise and then fall away immediately, and they do not return. We can begin to consider rúpas such as hardness, sound or visible object as they appear in daily life, but thinking, even in the right way, is not satipaììhåna, the development of direct awareness and understanding. It is a foundation for satipaììhåna. Acharn Sujin explained: “When we touch something, hardness appears. The thinking of a concept follows instantly. Understanding develops if we know that hardness only appears at the point where it touches. The whole body does not appear, we just think of the whole body. What we take for our whole body is not my body, only hardness appears through touch. When one touches hardness one thinks that it is there all the time, but when hardness appears it must have arisen because of conditions. Whatever is real has conditions to arise; the rúpa that has arisen and appears can be the object of understanding. Paññå should be developed so that one will understand that at each moment there is no person there. Realities are not what we think them to be, we think of concepts on account of what is experienced. Understanding should be developed so that the level of pariyatti, intellectual understanding, conditions the level of patipatti, the practice, and that again the level of pativedha, the penetration of the true nature of realities.” ******* Nina. #79592 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 12:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina... upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 11/30/2007 6:00:24 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: I would omit the word automatic, because nothing is automatic, as you also will agree. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I used that word to indicate no intervention by an alleged self/agent, but the lawful arising of dhammas from conditions, an entirely impersonal matter, and automatic in the sense that once the requisite conditions have occurred, there is no alternative possible other than the resultant fruits arising. (BTW, I concur with this.) ------------------------------------------------------- -------- > H: 3) There is no need whatsoever to intentionally "do" anything, and, > moreover, any attempt to do so not only is fruitless, but is > counterproductive in > that it solidifies sense of self and grasping, and is the diametric > opposite > of relinquishment. Even the study and contemplation of the Dhamma > is not > something usefully "done on purpose", again because of involvement > of atta-view, > but it occurs, if it occurs, because of interest and opportunity as > determined by prior conditions. ------ N: Yes, you understood, though you do not agree. But you also think that effort, will etc. are mental factors, not caused by a self. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes - on both counts. ------------------------------------------------------ Only, you believe that it does not matter if the idea of self still occurs in one's practice. Or did I not render your ideas correctly? -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Everything matters. But idea of self is unavoidable in worldlings, and if it were an impassable stumbling block, then awakening would be impossible. -------------------------------------------------------- True, the idea of self comes in all the time, but understanding can realize this as a conditioned dhamma. Everything is dhamma, she stresses all the time. Effort is a dhamma, will is a dhamma. Let us not forget this. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I certainly do not forget it. In fact I emphasize it frequently. ----------------------------------------------------------- Not doing anything, this may be misunderstood by others. We have to take this in the right sense. We need the perfection of truthfulness: when we 'do' something to have more understanding, it can be known whether there is an idea of self luring us here. ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Absolutely. Introspection is very important. Looking into oneself is even more important than looking into a book. (N. B. I was going to put quotes around 'oneself', but I didn't, because I'd have to do the same for 'book' and much more! LOL!) ------------------------------------------------------------- By her questions she makes us aware of this fact. So often we are fooling ourselves, taking for kusala what is attachment. --------- > > H: I would simply like to know whether my take on her approach is > correct > or not, and if not, to know where it is in error. As for what I > wrote, other > than the first item I don't share that perspective, and I don't > think it > correctly captures the Buddha's teachings, but I do find it very > interesting - > even captivating. ----- N: I am glad you find it captivating :-)) Nina. ================================= With metta, Howard #79593 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 5:52 am Subject: Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 4. philofillet Hi Nina (ps to Robert K) > When one > touches hardness one thinks that it is there all the time, but when > hardness appears it must have arisen because of conditions. Whatever In paccayas, what conditions give that impression of a continually present body? Is is proximity/contiguity condition on and on and on...does natural decive support condition have anything to do with that impression of a constantly present body? Metta, Phil p.s hi robert. thanks for the answer. I'll be writing to Matt tomorrow, so back to you in a few days. #79594 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 6:30 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 209-211, and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 209-211 Intro: As we have seen, ignorance conditions rebirth-consciousness, rebirth-consciousness conditions naama/ruupa, and naama/ruupa conditions the sixfold aayatanas. Naama stands here for the cetasikas that accompany the vipaakacitta which is rebirth-consciousness. The six bases are the five sense-bases, the sense organs, and the mindbase that is citta. In the previous sections mentality, naama (cetasikas), was taken separately as conditioning factor for the sixth base, the mind-base, which is the citta it accompanies. In the following sections it is explained that in the five khandha planes, the planes where there are naama and ruupa, naama, the cetasikas, in association with the heartbase, which is ruupa, condition the mind-base at rebirth. The heart-base is a ruupa produced by kamma, which is the base for all cittas other than the sense-cognitions. Only at rebirth the heart-base arises together with the rebirth-consciousness and the accompanying cetasikas. During life, the heart-base citta is dependent on arises just before that citta. Naama in association with the four great Elements conditions the five sense-bases. During life naama conditions ruupa produced by kamma. Among these conditions is postnascence-condition, as will be explained. ----------- Text Vis. 209. Besides the immaterial states, also in the five- constituent becoming that resultant mentality, in association with the heart-basis, is a condition in seven ways at the minimum for the sixth, the mind base, in the same way as was said with respect to the immaterial states. ---------- N: The immaterial states are the aruupa-brahmaplanes where there is only naama, not ruupa, thus no heartbase. In the five-constituent becoming (the planes where there are five khandhas, thus, naama and ruupa) the heart-base arises. The Tiika mentions that here naama is associated with the heart-base, unlike the naama arising in the aruupa-brahmaplanes. Thus, the vipaakacitta and accompanying cetasikas are dependent on the heartbase. The five sense-cognitions of seeing etc. have as their physical base, vatthu, the eyebase and the other sense-bases. All other cittas are dependent on the heart-base. Naama, the cetasikas that are in association with the heartbase, condition the mind-base by way of conascence and the other conditions that are conascent. --------- Text Vis.: But in association with the four primaries, it is a condition in six ways, as conascence, support, kamma-result, dissociation, presence, and non-disappearance conditions, for the other five beginning with the eye base. ------- N: The other five bases are the sense-bases. Naama (cetasikas which are vipaaka) in association with the four Great Elements condition the five sense-bases while they arise together with them, thus, by way of conascence and other conditions that are conascent. The four Great Elements always arise together with the sense-bases, they are the foundation of the sense-bases, they condition them by way of conascence and also by way of support, nissaya. The five sense-bases are produced by kamma, thus, here, in this case, both the sense-bases and naama are result of kamma. That is why kamma-result is mentioned among the conditions. The Tiika states that vatthu, the physical base, not naama, is here dissociation-condition (vippayutta-paccaya) for naama. As will be explained later on, for those who have a spontaneous birth, not human birth, the sense-bases arise at the moment of rebirth-consciousness. --------- Text Vis. : Some, however, is a condition as root-cause condition, and some as nutriment condition. It is by these that the maximum and minimum should be understood. ------ N: The Tiika explains as to root-condition, hetu-paccaya, that naama is hetu-paccaya which is here vipaaka. Rebirth-consciousness may be accompanied by the roots of alobha and adosa, or by pa~n~naa as well. These roots condition the vipaakacitta they accompany by way of root-condition. As to nutrition-condition, this refers to the mental nutriments of cetanaa (volition) and phassa, contact. ********** 210. Result is for result condition During a life in the same ways; While non-result the non-resultant Sixth conditions in six ways. 211. For, as in rebirth-linking, so also in the course of an existence in the five constituent becoming, resultant mentality is a condition in the seven ways at minimum for the resultant sixth base. -------- N: Here again the conditioning factors are the same conascent conditions as mentioned in the case of naama (cetasikas) that condition the mind-base (the citta they accompany), as in the case of rebirth-consciousness. The Tiika mentions that during life naama-dhammas are a condition for ruupa produced by kamma (kammaja ruupa) only when this ruupa has reached the moments of presence, not at its arising moment. Ruupas last longer than citta, they last as long as seventeen moments of citta. The Tiika states that this is to be applied to eyebase, etc. and that naama dhammas condition these ruupas by way of dissociation, presence, non-disappearance and post-nascence. The naama (here the cetasikas) that arises after the ruupa, the sensebase, that has arisen before and has not fallen away yet, condition that ruupa by way of postnascence. It supports that ruupa. It is still present to that ruupa, thus it conditions it also by way of presence and non-disappearance. Also by way of dissociation, since naama is not associated with ruupa. --------- Text Vis.: But non-resultant mentality is a condition in six ways at minimum for the non-resultant sixth base, leaving out kamma-result condition. The maximum and minimum should be understood in the way already stated. --------- N: Kusala citta and akusala citta (which are mind-base in this case) are conditioned by the accompanying cetasikas by way of the conditions which are conascent. Kamma-resultant-condition cannot be applied here, since naama (the cetasikas) and the mind-base are not vipaaka. ********** Conclusion: The Visuddhimagga gives all the details of the different ways naama/ruupa condition the six bases, and this helps us to understand the following text of the ‘Dispeller of Delusion’ (Ch 2, 227, p. 56): When we learn about the different conditions for the bases, ayaatanas, the mindbase and the sense bases, it helps us to understand that they are beyond control, anattaa. ********* Nina. #79595 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 6:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 4. nilovg Hi Phil, Op 30-nov-2007, om 14:52 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > When one > > touches hardness one thinks that it is there all the time, but when > > hardness appears it must have arisen because of conditions. Whatever > > In paccayas, what conditions give that impression of a continually > present body? Is is proximity/contiguity condition on and on and > on...does natural decive support condition have anything to do with > that impression of a constantly present body? ------- No, proximity-condition can only be applied to citta. But ruupas of the body that fall away are replaced all the time by kamma, citta, temperature and nutrition. Only, we do not notice this. BTW, you are too late for a good Dhamma talk with Rob K, he left for Bgk. Unless you can come to Bgk. You can talk by Email (share this with us), but it is not the same as face to face. I would love to meet many more listers, like you and others, in person, it is great and makes all the difference. Nina. #79596 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 6:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Kin~ncana nilovg Dear Han, I do not know your computer. I use my control key: ctrl. I touch at the same time the number that I want to download. Push both and then I see a little shield: save coupling as. I use: desk top. There it appears and downloads itself. But as I said, you can simply click and you hear Jon at once. Nina. Op 30-nov-2007, om 14:24 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > But how do I download this to listen? #79597 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 6:49 am Subject: Fwd: [dsg] Re: Kin~ncana nilovg > Dear Han, do not forget to press save (I have this in blue) when downloading. Nina. > . > > #79598 From: Ken O Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 7:06 am Subject: RE: [dsg] heresy of instanteneous changing "mind moments" ashkenn2k Hi Charles >If I take your position, then who the hell is this WE You keep > talking about. You obviously believe in a WE and seem to be trapped into lying to yourself about it. If there is no You or Me, then why are you caught up in presenting there isn't. KO: Buddha say aggregates are not self. Buddha used I quite often in the suttas. see http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.148.than.html "If anyone were to say, 'The intellect is the self,' that wouldn't be tenable. The arising & falling away of the intellect are discerned. And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would follow that 'My self arises & falls away.' That's why it wouldn't be tenable if anyone were to say, 'The intellect is the self.' So the intellect is not-self. If anyone were to say, 'Ideas are the self,' that wouldn't be tenable... Thus the intellect is not-self and ideas are not-self. If anyone were to say, 'Consciousness at the intellect is the self,' that wouldn't be tenable... Thus the intellect is not-self, ideas are not-self, consciousness at the intellect is not-self. If anyone were to say, 'Contact at the intellect is the self,' that wouldn't be tenable... Thus the intellect is not-self, ideas are not-self, consciousness at the intellect is not-self, contact at the intellect is not-self. If anyone were to say, 'Feeling is the self,' that wouldn't be tenable... Thus the intellect is not-self, ideas are not-self, consciousness at the intellect is not-self, contact at the intellect is not-self, feeling is not self. If anyone were to say, 'Craving is the self,' that wouldn't be tenable. The arising & falling away of craving are discerned. And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would follow that 'My self arises & falls away.' That's why it wouldn't be tenable if anyone were to say, 'Craving is the self.' Thus the intellect is not-self, ideas are not-self, consciousness at the intellect is not-self, contact at the intellect is not-self, feeling is not self, craving is not-self. Cheers Ken O #79599 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Nov 30, 2007 7:30 am Subject: was Re: [dsg] Alchohol & 5th Precept. - Nirodha truth_aerator Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > Thanks for your comments. > > --- Alex wrote: > > > Since I took some medicine (cat's claw) I guess I broke the 5th > > precept... :( > ... > S: I've had a cold this week too.....but I've been sipping the ginger and > lemon. I see Phil uses this too. > > As Ken O mentioned, taking medicine with alcohol in isn't necessarily > breaking any precept. It always depends on the intention, of course. The > Vinaya discusses the point - it depends on whether it is a small enough > amount to be tasteless or something like that. I'll check if I have time. > .... The amount of alchohol is almost non-existent. > > > > writers..... whereabouts do you live? If it goes down to -40F, I > > guess it > must be the Eastern side, right? > > >>>> > > > > Western Canada. Alberta. It is currently 3F. Next week may fall to - > > 4F. > ... > S: Ah-hah! So you may be your nemesis Scott's neighbour!! To give us a clue, do you support the 'Oilers'? > ... I've checked his yahoo profile... :) About hockey. This rivalry is ridiculous. Alberta can afford 2 pro hockey teams. Some provinces can't afford even 1. > > > Sarah > > > p.s Briefly, Nanavira's article you quoted is full of holes, > > starting with the first comment about sotapannas. See 'Suicide' > > in 'Useful Posts' for > > >>>> more. > > I'll have to check. However even Arahants could commit suicide, so I > > would not be surprised for sotapannas. > ... > S: Arahants certainly not. No more lobha, dosa or moha. > .... Arahants obviously don't hate themselves, but they CAN take their own lives (especially if it is motivated by compassion for the would-be killers). > > > > There was a person (Channa an Arya) who either achieved Arahatship > > before or during suicide (using a knife). SN 35.87 (4) Channa. > > pg 1164 > > > > He was in great pain, in those times there was not good medicine and > > he used the knife blamelessly. > ... > S: Blamelessly because he became an arahant in the interval between using the knife and dying. It has nothing to do with the degree of physical pain > or the lack of medicine. As I said, see 'suicide' in U.P. Lots more detail > there. > ... >>>>>>>>>> If Channa cut his throat (Jugular (sp?) vein (sleeping artery)) he would have to become Arahat VERY QUICK (since death may be matter of seconds or minutes) or in the antara-bhava which Theravada (~240 BC and later) denies. But in any case he died (parinibbana'ed) from suicide, as an Arahant. This however does not justify suicide. I think there was also another person in similiar situation. Before the suicided Sariputta and another monk tried to stop him from doing it. Through question & answer (abhidhamma) discussion the venerable in great pain was definately an aria (or even an Arahant). Of course Suicide is something NOT to be done, It bring lots of pain to the relatives and also considering the preciousness of human rebirth are very important things to consider... Regarding Physical Pain. I disagree. Sometimes pain can be soo unbearable and without anasthesia the only choice may be to... Remember unlike today when we can take tranquilizers, people of those times, especially monks, didn't have access to such high quality medicine that we have today... > > I am curious about Anagamiship+ requirment for Nirodha Samapati. > > Is there a sutta which says so? I've just checked, it is not in SN. > .... > S: I don't know about the sutta. It's clearly spelled out in the > commentaries and Abhidhamma. As I said, see under 'nirodha samapatti' in > U.P. If you always limit your studies to the suttas only, you will come to > the same kind of distorted conclusions as those you quoted from Nanavira. > ... Dear Sarah. I hold suttas (and then not all and not all parts) & vinaya to the be the only best source available. Please don't be offended by me saying this. > > I remember frequently Buddha mentioning that achieving Nirodha > > Samapatti (CofP&F) if seen with wisdom leads to Arahatship. Ven. > > Sariputta in MN111 started out as a sotapanna and reached CofP&F in > > 14 days after which he was an Arahant. Same with MahaMogallana, but 7 > > days. I suppose that one could become Anagamin on the way towards > > CofP&F. In many instances where CofP&f was mentioned, the > > practicioner was called a "bhikkhu" and not an arya. > .... > S: Sorry, none of this is clear to me and I'm probably being dense, but I don't know what CofP&F is. CofP&F = (Cessation of Perception & Feeling). >>> Nirodha samapatti doesn't 'lead to' arahatship. >>> By itself might it only lead to asanna brahma loca? But if it is used without clinging and with WISDOM seeing DO, then it leads all the way toward Arahatship which is how Sariputta for example reached Arahatship. He went through ALL 8 Jhanas, then when he was fanning the Buddha he realized that Buddha didn't even cling to his own teaching, so Sariputta was able to achieve CofP&F after which his taints were destroyed. MN111 is one of the many suttas that come to mind. > It is an attainment possible on account of full mastery of all jhanas and > previous attainment of anagami or arahatship. > I know, See Nynatiloka's dictionary: > http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/n_r/nirodha_samaapatti.htm > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== > Considering Sati, Arittha, Devadatta and many others (who would be considered Elders) we need to be VERY careful not to hear info from Buddha's monks who may have been misinformed "Elders". The only "quality control" are the suttas&vinaya. Lots of Metta, Alex