#80200 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 6, no 5. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 16-dec-2007, om 15:49 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > You may like a special kind of fruit, and it will happen again that > you like it. That object becomes your strong dependence-condition for > continuing to like it; you like it not just once. You want to have it > again and again, and this becomes a habit. That is why we like > different things." > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, that is interesting. That fruit is pa~n~natti, right? Also, > what's > this > again and again"? There isn't just "now"? What's going on here, > Nina? Should > Ken get worried? ;-)) ------- N: Lodewijk and I were discussing this. He loves Durian fruit, I hate it, the smell. Yes, this Durian is a concept, but the flavour is ruupa. So is the smell. Want it again: a figurative way of explaining. When he saw in Indonesia, on one of the islands, that there was plenty Durian, he started to eat a lot of it. He and another member of the group who was traveling. Nina. #80201 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma nilovg Dear Alex, you gave an experience-oriented view of dukkha. This is not the whole of the truth. It is getting late, I just refer now to my posts to Howard. Nina. Op 15-dec-2007, om 22:37 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Without ANY feelings, perceptions, consciousness, etc it is > IMPOSSIBLE TO BE AFFLICTED! Rupa CAN and often IS one of the things > that afflict, but only a sentient being THROUGH cognition can > be "afflicted" #80202 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma truth_aerator Dear Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Alex, > you gave an experience-oriented view of dukkha. This is not the whole > of the truth. It is getting late, I just refer now to my posts to > Howard. > Nina. > Op 15-dec-2007, om 22:37 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > > > Without ANY feelings, perceptions, consciousness, etc it is > > IMPOSSIBLE TO BE AFFLICTED! Rupa CAN and often IS one of the things > > that afflict, but only a sentient being THROUGH cognition can > > be "afflicted" DUKHA IS EXPERIENCE. Do you really think that there are boxes called "dukha" ? No way! This is ridiculous to claim that Suffering is an 'object'. Suffering is a FEELING. May the DHAMMA BE WITH YOU! Lots of Metta, Alex #80203 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:37 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: A Reminder for Us Clingers-to-Views kenhowardau Hi Sarah, Thanks for this refresher. I hope I am not speaking too early, but this time the message might actually be getting through. Just a little bit, anyway. :-) I knew the simile of the raft should be applied here and now - as should all of the Dhamma. But I have always had the impression it was originally taught specifically as a description of parinibbana. As the saying goes, first impressions count for a lot. And so, every time over the past few years when you have been patiently explaining the raft simile I have been thinking you were talking mainly about parinibbana - but with an incidental lesson for us non-arahants. Now I am beginning to get the picture. At any moment of panna the Dhamma can be described as a raft. Even a beginner - when he has a tiny bit of right understanding - is momentarily crossing over from ignorance to wisdom. At all subsequent times, however, when there is no panna the beginner is likely to fall back into clinging ways. At these times any idea of Dhamma is just useless talk. It is just like a raft after it has reached the shore it was designed to reach. There is still a lot more crossing over to be done, but the simile was not meant to extend that far, was it? It was just meant to apply to the [little bit of] crossing over that has already been done. Thanks Sarah, it has been an effort getting me this far, but I think (fingers crossed) the message is finally getting through. :-) Ken H > ... > S: :-) As you say, attachment to the Dhamma was never a good thing. You > may care to look at the following I wrote some time ago. It is attachment > which is to be abandoned, not the Dhamma or the 'good states'. > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/24878 > > It included the following from B.Bodhi's translation: > > "Simile of the Raft p.229: > > "Bhikkhus, when you know the Dhamma to be similar to a raft, you should > abandon even good states, how much more so bad states." > #80204 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:38 pm Subject: Do "Dhammas" exist? Yes/No ? truth_aerator Hello all, Quick Qs: 1) Does Citta exist? Yes/No 2) Does Cetasika exist? Yes/No 3) Does Rupa Exist? Yes/NO 4) Does Nibbana Exist? Yes/No Lots of Metta, Alex #80205 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 5:46 am Subject: [dsg] Re: [d-l] Fwd: Standing A Young Woman Up .... In My Dream This Morning abhidhammika Dear Mike N, Scott D, Howard, James, Nina, Sarah, Robert K, and all How are you? Mike asked: "By the way, wouldn't this also include results occurring in 'this existence'?" Suan answers: "Yes, Mike, if our weak mental actions could have results in future rebirths, they would certainly have results in this very life, too." The Buddha's teachings in this regard would be "Dukkha Suttam", Section 3, Sekhabalavaggo, Pancakanipaata Pali, Anguttaranikaayo. The quoted Suttam may have direct bearing on our three types of actions in waking moments, but it does support the idea of our present actions having results in this very life. With regards, Suan www.bodhiology.org #80206 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 9:23 am Subject: [dsg] Re: contemplation, was Perfections Corner (54) glenjohnann Hello Nina, your comment below, "a person cannot impinge on eyesense" is very helpful. > N: > Seeing only sees what appears through > eyesense. A person cannot impinge on the eyesense, impossible, that > would hurt! So, it is by listening and discussing, and attending to > the reality appearing now that the right conditions are formed for > awareness that can suddenly arise without preparing it, unexpectedly. Ann #80207 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 8:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Scott) - In a message dated 12/16/2007 2:56:22 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear Scott, Alex, Howard, That is a good example Scott. I like it. Op 16-dec-2007, om 20:35 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Scott: This is not difficult. The 'molested' is not given to > experience. Are you simply being argumentative? My bike (yes, a > Concept, I know - we've both conceded the point of Conventional > Speech) wears out, rusts, falls apart over the years - is 'molested'. > My bike does not experience this 'molestation' in any way. > > ================================ > That's *right*! YOU experience it, which is what makes the decay > dukkha. > The decay is no problem in and of itself, but only with respect to > your > desires, happiness, and suffering. Dukkha is experience-oriented. ------- N: No you, no experiencer, Howard, we both agree. ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, Nina, we do both agree, but it becomes tiresome to have to do a verbal dance to avoid ordinary speech, especially when such a dance isn't required of everyone. My point, of course, is that dukkha of conditioned dhammas pertains to experiencing. Decay is painful, hurtful, unsatisfying, and all the other negatives because it is a condition for dissatisfaction (ranging from mere lack lasting satisfaction to outright suffering). ------------------------------------------------------------ We do not speak about a problem, that is not the way to understand the truth of dukkha. But I will not repeat too much. Nina. ============================== With metta, Howard #80208 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 9:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 6, no 5. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/16/2007 3:17:50 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 16-dec-2007, om 15:49 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > You may like a special kind of fruit, and it will happen again that > you like it. That object becomes your strong dependence-condition for > continuing to like it; you like it not just once. You want to have it > again and again, and this becomes a habit. That is why we like > different things." > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, that is interesting. That fruit is pa~n~natti, right? Also, > what's > this > again and again"? There isn't just "now"? What's going on here, > Nina? Should > Ken get worried? ;-)) ------- N: Lodewijk and I were discussing this. He loves Durian fruit, I hate it, the smell. Yes, this Durian is a concept, but the flavour is ruupa. So is the smell. Want it again: a figurative way of explaining. When he saw in Indonesia, on one of the islands, that there was plenty Durian, he started to eat a lot of it. He and another member of the group who was traveling. Nina. ================================ Yes, certainly. We crave and grasp after (or dislike and push away) various flavors, odors, and so on. They are the "hooks". But also, when odors, textures, colors, and flavors all repeatedly co-occur, we form the idea (and perceptions) of a particular types of fruit, and we cling to these. And that is not illusory, for the co-occurrence is a reality and not concocted by artifice. In fact, quite generally, we love, hate, and cling to conceptual, mind-door phenomena (including loved ones) most of all. We may regret no longer tasting a favorite vanilla flavor, but we *grieve* over the loss of beloved friends and family. Nina, where you speak of Lodewijk, there is but a rapidly changing aggregate of interrelated phenomena, but notwithstanding that, that aggregate (also known as "he" ;-) is most certainly not nothing at all. Aggregates of similar dhammas regularly arising, ceasing, and rearising in a discernible pattern of co-occurrence and relatedness form a central aspect of the reality of existence and are not mere illusion. Grasping them as units/individuals and attributing singular self-existence to them is an error, but so is dismissing them as fictions. There is a middle way even as regards pa~n~natti. With metta, Howard #80209 From: Sukinder Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 5:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma sukinderpal Hi Howard, (Nina and Scott), I'm behind in my reading, this means that I have not read all the posts in this thread, so I am probably missing something. But when I read your statement about "decay is no problem in and of itself" I had exactly the same reaction as Nina. I thought, "Why must it be a matter of either a problem or not a problem?" If you consider Dukkha only in relation to 'experience' but admit at the same time that this is a universal / constant thing, why can't a conclusion be drawn that this is due to some objective 'fact' regardless of any experience? If you then say that the 'fact' is of Anicca, and that the Dukkha is a result of this, then why did the Buddha put these three together as being "characteristic / mark" of all conditioned realities? And if they are *all* dependent on experience, then you must also view Anicca as being more or less subjective, but I'm sure that you do not have any problem wrapping your mind around this as being objective? So perhaps the difficulty with Dukkha is more to do with our inability to grasp it intellectually? I've found myself sometimes thinking about this, that Anicca and Anatta is easier to understand at the level of Suttamaya and Cintamaya panna, but the fact of Dukkha has never struck me as these have. What do you think? Also earlier when reading your other posts I wondered if your understanding of Dukkha as being related to "experience", was not, of the three definitions of Dukkha, captured by the two namely, Dukkha dukkhata and Viparinama dukkhata and that the meaning that we should be looking into is the other one, namely, Sankhara dukkhata? Moreover, with regard to Rupa being molested etc, forgetting for a moment what 'molested' is understood to be in everyday use, this fact about Rupa exhibiting such a characteristic, could the same be said about Nama? I think this fact about rupa wearing and tearing etc, is reflection of what goes on at the level of kalapas, what do you think? And surely 'rise and fall' is one thing, and *this* is something else, no? Some thoughts that came to mind. Corrections welcome. ;-) Metta, Sukinder > > > Howard: > Yes, Nina, we do both agree, but it becomes tiresome to have to do a > verbal dance to avoid ordinary speech, especially when such a dance isn't > required of everyone. > My point, of course, is that dukkha of conditioned dhammas pertains to > experiencing. Decay is painful, hurtful, unsatisfying, and all the other > negatives because it is a condition for dissatisfaction (ranging from > mere lack > lasting satisfaction to outright suffering). > ---------------------------------------------------------- > We do not speak > about a problem, that is not the way to understand the truth of > dukkha. But I will not repeat too much. > Nina. > ============================== > #80210 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 9:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Do "Dhammas" exist? Yes/No ? dcwijeratna Hi Alex, Answers: (1), (2) and (3), No; (4) No idea Mettaa D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #80211 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Dec 16, 2007 11:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma buddhatrue Hi Scott and Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > Scott: This is not difficult. The 'molested' is not given to > experience. Are you simply being argumentative? My bike (yes, a > Concept, I know - we've both conceded the point of Conventional > Speech) wears out, rusts, falls apart over the years - is 'molested'. > My bike does not experience this 'molestation' in any way. This "molestation" that you speak of is anicca (impermanence). When a rock is molested by cold and splits apart, that is anicca. When a rock is molested by waves and is worn away into sand, that is anicca. This "molestation" that you write about is anicca, not dukkha. When there is no clinging then anicca doesn't become dukkha. If you don't cling to the bike, and realize that its nature is to fall apart, then you don't experience dukkha when it does fall apart. The Buddha taught that he only teaches dukkha and the path leading to the ending of dukkha. So, it must be understood that dukkha is experiential and subjective, not natural to all conditioned things. If dukkha was inherent in all that is anicca, then liberation wouldn't be possible. Metta, James #80212 From: Sukinder Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Do "Dhammas" exist? Yes/No ? sukinderpal 1) Does the Dhamma exist? Yes/No 2) Does the Tipitaka exist? Yes/No 3) Does Alex Exist? Yes/No 4) Does DC Exist? Yes/No 5}Anyone to be taken seriously? Metta!?? Sukinder!?? DC Wijeratna wrote: > > Hi Alex, > Answers: (1), (2) and (3), No; (4) No idea > > Mettaa > > D. G. D. C. Wijeratna > #80213 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sutta vs Abhidhamma sarahprocter... Hi Alex & all, --- Alex wrote: > Another point. Where did the Buddha has said: "Monks, don't be > heeedless. Over there there are roots of the trees, over there an empty > huts. Study Dhammasangani, Vibhanga, Dhatukatha, Puggalapaññatti, > Kathavatthu,Yamaka and Patthana books of Abhidhamma Pitaka. Don't > regret it later" . If this quote was found, it'd be written on the > front doors of every Abhidhammika. As far as I know there is NOT a > single reference to AP in the 4 Nikayas. .... I've indicated several times how Buddhagosa traced the Abhidhamma to the 1st Council with many references from the Vinaya itself. He then traced the history of the dhamma-vinaya to the 3 councils and finally to the Vinaya recital in Sri lanka under Mahinda, showing that the Bhikkhus “again rehearsed the entire Dhamma and the Vinaya...even in the same manner as it was rehearsed by the elder Mahakassapa” (Smp, commentary to Vinaya, 38) I've shown how at the time of the 1st council, the Tipitaka was referred to as Dhamma-Vinaya. I believe in suttas such as the Mahaparinibbana Sutta, the Buddha instructed the bhikkhus to take the ‘dhamma-vinaya’ as their Teacher after he passed away. In the series I wrote on the Vinaya and its commentary, the Bahiranidana, I indicated how the Khudakka Nikaya included in the recital includes the Abhidhamma texts. In the Atthasalini (the commentary to the Dhammasangani), it says: “Which is the Khuddaka Nikaya? the whole of the Vinaya-Pitaka, Abhidhamma-Pitaka, and the fifteen divisions.....beginning with Khuddakapatha, Dhammapada, all the remaining words of the Buddha, excluding the four Nikayas....” In both the Bahiranidana and the Atthasalini, detail is given of the explanation in detail of how the 84,000 units of dhamma-vinaya text is formed and this includes how: “Thus as rehearsed at the council, the Abhidhamma is Pitaka by Pitaka classification, Khuddaka-Nikaya by Nikaya classification, Veyyakarana by part classification and constitutes two or three thousand untis of text by the classification of textual units” and “In the Abhidhamma each trinal or dual classification, as well as each clasification of conscious intervals, forms one unit of text.” Reference is also made to to these 84,000 units of dhamma in the Vinaya itself. and as I also mentioned, there are also references to the Abhidhamma in the 1st council in the abhidhamma texts themselves(Vibhanga)and in texts of Mahayana schools . Furthermore, from the Atthasalini, we read about references to the Abhidhamma in the Vianaya and Suttanta: “For it has been said by the Buddha (Vin, 1V,344): “If without any intention of reviling the Vinaya one were to instigate another, saying, Pray study the Suttas or Gathas or Abhidhamma first and afterwards you will learn the Vinaya - there is no offence in him,” (Again, in the Bhikkhuni Vibhanga Vin,1V,344) “Abhikkhuni is guilty of a minor offence) if she questions on the Abhidhamma or Vinaya after getting permission (to question) on the Suttanta, or on the Suttanta or Vinaya after getting permission (to question) on the Abhidhamma, or on the suttanta or Abhidhamma after getting permission (to question) on the Vinaya.”...... The Atthasalini continues: “The Mahagosinga sutta (MN 1, 218) is even stronger authority (to show that the Abhidhamma is the Buddha’s word). for therein when Sariputta, the Generaliisimo of the law, approached the Teacer to inform him of the reciprocal questions and answers that took place between Mahamoggallana and himself, and told how the former had answered (the master said) ‘Brother Sariputta, in the religion the talk of two bhikkhus on the Abhidhamma, each asking and answering the other without faltering, is in accord with the Dhamma. Now such a bhikkhu, brother Sariputta, might enhance the beauty of the Gosinga Sala Forest. The Teacher, far from saying that bhikkus, who knew Abhidhamma, were outside his religion, lifted his drum-like neck and filling (with breath) his mouth, fraught as the full-moon with blessings, emitted his godlike voice,congratulating Moggallana thus: ‘Well done, well done, Sariputta! One should answer rightly as Moggallana has done; Moggallana is indeed a preacher of the dhamma.’ “ It also says in the Atthasalini that “tradition has it that those bhikkhus only who know Abhidhamma are true preachers of the Dhamma”..”He who prohibits (the teaching of ) abhidhamma gives a blow to the Wheel of the conqueror, denies omniscience, subverts the Teacher’s knowledge full of confidence, deceives the audience, obstructs the path of the Ariyas, manifests himself as advocating one of the eighteen causes of dissension in the Order, is capable of doing acts for which the doer is liable to be excommunicated, or admonished (see Vin11,7) or scorned (by the Order), and should be dismissed after the particular act of excommunication, admonition, or scorn, and reduced to living on scraps of food”. Finally for now, Alex, we read in the Suttas themselves about the nine divisions (angas). For example: Heard with the Ear’ (AN, 4s, 191, PTS) “ ‘Monks, four advantages are to be looked for from the frequent verbal practice of teachings heard with the ear (sotaanugataana”m), from considering them in the mind, from thoroughly penetrating them by view. What are the four? Herein a monk masters Dhamma, to wit: Sutta, Geyya, Veyyaakara.na and the rest (Gaathaa, Udaana, Itivuttaka, Jaataka, Abbhutadhamma and Vedalla)*. Those teachings heard with the ear, often practiced verbally, considered by the mind, are thoroughly penetrated by view.’” Here, as I understand, the Veyyaakara.na (Exposition) includes the Abhidhamma Pi.taka. Finally, it really all comes down to whether the realities taught in the Abhidhamma can be tested and proved now. When they are directly understood to be correct, there'll be no further doubts about the Abhidhamma Tipitaka as being the Buddha's word or being in conformity with what is taught in the other Pitakas. So what are the realities now as we write, Alex? Metta, Sarah p.s Lots more detail in 'Useful Posts' under 'Abhidhamma - origins'. ========= #80214 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (54) sarahprocter... Hi Connie & all interested, --- L G SAGE wrote: > CP: In a technical sense, manasikaara refers to aavajjana or adverting, > the first glimpse or taking to heart of the object at the sense or mind > door and thus could be considered as where view is born or originates. ... S: This gives me an excuse to attempt to review the 3 different meanings of manasikaara as I understand them: a) the cetasika, manasikaara (attention) which arises with every citta. This is referred to as aaramma.na manasikaara b) the pa~ncaadvaaraavajjana citta (five sense-door adverting-consciousness. Here it is the 'controller' of the sense-door process. This is referred to as aaramma.napa.tipaadaka manasikaara c) the manodvaaraavajjana citta (mind-door adverting consciousness) Here it is the 'controller' of following javana cittas. This is referred to as javanapa.tipaadaka manasikaara, no matter which doorway, I've heard. [In the mind-door process,the manodvaaraavajjana citta is followed by the javana cittas which may kusala or akusala (except in the case of an arahant). When they are kusala, yoniso-manasikaara refers to the whole mind-door process as discussed before. In the sense-door process, the manodvaaraavajjana citta performs the function of votthapanna ('determining'), which again is followed by the javana cittas.] **** Now checking in the Atthasaalini1, 330 (Expositor, PTS, 'Moral Consciousness in the Worlds of Sense): " 'Attention' is a mode of work, working in the mind. It makes mind, so to speak, different from the previous mind. It is of three kinds: Attention which regulates the object, attention which regulates process-consciousness, attention which regulates apperception. Of these, a) that which regulates the object is called attention because it makes [the object] in the mind. It has the characteristic of driving associated states towards the object, the function of joining associated states to the object, the manifestation of facing the object. It is included in the aggregate of mental coefficients, and should be regarded as the charioteer of associated states because it regulates the object. b) Attention which regulates process-consciousness is a synonym for the adverting of mind at the five doors; and c) attention which regulates apperception is a synonym for mind-door adverting. These two (b) (c) are not intended here [S: in the section on cetasikas]" **** Paali: 330. Kiriyaakaaro manasmi.m kaaro manasikaaro purimamanato visadisa.m mana.m karotii ti manasikaaro. Svaayam aaramma.napa.tipaadako viithipa.tipaadako javanapa.tipaadako ti tippakaaro. a)Tattha aaramma.napa.tipaadako manasmi.m kaaretii ti manasikaaro. So saara.nalakkha.no sampayuttaanam aaramma.nasa.myojanaraso aaramma.naabhimukhaavapaccupa.t.thaano sa'nkhaarakkhandhapariyaapanno aaramma.napa.tipa.tipaadakattena sampayuttaana.m saarathi viya da.t.thabbo. b)Vithipa.tipaadako ti pana pa~ncadvaaraavajjanass' etam adhivacana.m, c)javanapa.tipaadako ti manodvaaraavajjanassa. Na te idha adhippetaa. ***** Metta, Sarah ======== #80216 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina et sarahprocter... Hi James (& Howard), --- buddhatrue wrote: > >S: I'm very happy to discuss and reflect on the different meanings of > dukkha > > and the dukkha of dhammas arising now as we speak anytime you like. > > Sure, let's keep talking about dukkha. It's such a fun topic! ;-)) > Right now I have a nasty cold (runny nose, sore throat, slight > fever, chills, etc.). This cold I have is dukkha- as the Buddha > taught sickness is dukkha. So, could you explain to me how there > could be suffering without a sufferer? How could I have sickness if > I don't really exist? ... S: Two points: 1) There are 3 meanings of dukkha. Here you are referring to dukkha dukkha, the obvious dukkha that everyone understands when there is unpleasant feeling. The second meaning refers to viparinama dukkha, the changing nature of what is pleasant. The third meaning refers to the characteristic of all conditioned dhammas - dukkha on account of their being impermanent. This is the deepest sense which only the understanding of the 8fold Path can really know. 2) Howard put it rather nicely when he said that 'all the things that are taken for self can arise and cease quite well on their own without there being an owner of them or any agent for them.' You mentioned that you were 'talking about taking anatta to an extreme where the sufferer doesn't exist in any sense, not even as an impermanent process (sankhara).' Well, if by 'sufferer' or 'James' you are just referring to impermanent conditioned dhammas (sankhara) and nothing else, then we're all agreed. I'll add that with or without any idea of 'poor James suffering', there are all sorts of namas and rupas arising and falling away, that we can refer to in anyway we like:-) ... > ps. BTW, the doctor I saw yesterday seemed pretty convinced that I > exist so he gave me some medicine and a flu shot. :-) ... S: Now if the good doctor were to understand about those conditioned dhammas, he could still give you some medicine and a flu shot and wish you a speedy recovery too :-). Metta, Sarah p.s ...being called to help my mother and Jon with a crossword now....no time to check... ======== #80217 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:03 am Subject: Perfections Corner (56) nichiconn Dear All, http://www.zolag.co.uk/ - The Perfections Leading to Enlightenment by Sujin Boriharnwanaket; translated by Nina van Gorkom. Chapter 8: The Perfection of Determination. continued... The second foundation dhamma is steadfastness in relinquishment, caaga, the relinquishment of defilements. Relinquishment is not only the giving away of material things for the benefit and happiness of others, such as acts of generosity, daana. But it is also relinquishment of defilements, and this is to the benefit of oneself. When we give away material things to others, we should also be intent on the relinquishment of our defilements. We should consider whether our action and speech are motivated by kusala cittas, we should not give with the expectation to receive something in return. Clinging, lobha, is the opposite, the enemy, of all the perfections. When we have lobha, when we desire to gain something, or when we expect something in return for our good deed, this is opposed to the development of the perfections. Therefore, we should give in such a way that our steadfastness in relinquishing defilements can grow. When we give, we should not expect anything in return, and moreover, we should not think of giving as being tedious, we should not give without cheerfulness and generosity, we should give whole-heartedly. We need to have a subtle and detailed knowledge of our cittas, otherwise defilements cannot be eliminated. When we see someone else's generosity, we can rejoice in his good deed, we can feel enthusiasm about it. We should remember that also forgiving is a kind of daana, because we wish someone else to be free from any adversity or danger. Thus, generosity is not merely the giving of material gifts. There can be purity of citta when, by our acts of generosity, we are intent on giving support to someone else and make him free from harm. We may be able to rejoice in giving and also abandon our own defilements at such moments. ..to be continued, connie #80218 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:04 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (72) nichiconn Dear Friends, Part 5 15. Cattaaliisanipaato 1. Isidaasiitheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 420. "Napiha.m aparajjha.m ki~nci, napi hi.msemi na bha.naami dubbacana.m; ki.m sakkaa kaatuyye, ya.m ma.m viddessate bhattaa. 421. "Te ma.m pitughara.m pa.tinayi.msu, vimanaa dukhena adhibhuutaa; puttamanurakkhamaanaa, jitaamhase ruupini.m lakkhi.m. 422. "Atha ma.m adaasi taato, a.d.dhassa gharamhi dutiyakulikassa; tato upa.d.dhasu"nkena, yena ma.m vindatha se.t.thi. 423. "Tassapi gharamhi maasa.m, avasi.m atha sopi ma.m pa.ticcharayi; daasiiva upa.t.thahanti.m, aduusika.m siilasampanna.m. 424. "Bhikkhaaya ca vicaranta.m, damaka.m danta.m me pitaa bha.nati; hohisi me jaamaataa, nikkhipa po.t.thi~nca gha.tika~nca. 418. "I have not offended at all. I have not harmed [him]. I have not said any evil utterance. What is it possible to do when my husband hates me?" [I said.] 419. Downcast, overcome by pain, they led me back to my father's house, [saying,] "In taking care of our son, we have given up the incarnation of Lakkhii." 420. Then my father gave me to a rich man belonging to a second family's household for half the dowry for which the [first] merchant had taken me. 421. In this house too I lived a month. Then he also rejected me, [although] I served him like a slave girl, not harming him, possessed of virtuous conduct. 422. And my father spoke to one who was wandering for alms, a tamer [of others] and [self-]tamed, "Be my son-in-law. Throw away your cloth and bowl." RD: 'Naught have I done that could offend, nor harm, Nor nagged at evil words. What can I do, *401 That me my husband should so sore mislike?' (418) To guard and keep their son, they took me back, Unwilling guides, to father's house, distressed, Distraught: 'Alas! we're beaten, pretty Luck!' *402 (419) Then father gave me for the second time as bride, Content with half my husband's sire had paid. (420) From that house too, when I had dwelt a month, I was sent back, though I had worked and served, Blameless and virtuous, as any slave. (421) And yet a third, a friar begging alms - One who had self controlled, and could control Favour in fellow-men - my father met And spake him thus: 'Be thou my son-in-law! Come, throw away that ragged robe and pot!' (422) *401 The Commentator interprets the Vedic infinitive kaatuye, 'do,' as meaning kaatu' yye, 'do, lady.' *402 My reading of this very obscure passage - jinaamhase ruupinin Lacchin or ruupinii Lacchii - is suggested by my husband, and differs from that of Dr. Neumann, who has felt compelled to doctor the text. Commentary: 'Defeated by the goddess Sirii (Srii) clad in human dress' - i.e., Isidaasii, as personating the fickle goddess of chance. Thus they call her 'Luck!' I cannot believe that, had the young divorcee been enceinte, she would have been sent home so ignominiously, or that the tale would have been silent about the child when born. == to be continued, connie #80219 From: "robmoult" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:06 am Subject: Re: Do "Dhammas" exist? Yes/No ? robmoult Hi Alex, In the Brahmajala Sutta (DN1), Sandaka Sutta (MN76), Kathavatthu Sutta (A 10.69) and in many other places, the Buddha warned monks about useless, idle, "beastly" talk (tiracchana-kathaa) which includes discussions of "existence and non-existence" (iti- bhavaabhava-kathaa). In the Culamalunkya Sutta (MN 63) and the Simsapa Sutta (SN 56.31), the Buddha explains the purpose of the teaching, "Why have I left [answers to speculative questions] undeclared? Because it is unbeneficial, it does not belong to the fundamentals of the holy life, it does not lead to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbana. That is why I have left it undeclared. And what have I declared? 'This is suffering' – I have declared. 'This is the origin of suffering' – I have declared. 'This is the cessation of suffering' – I have declared. 'This is the way to the cessation of suffering' – I have declared. Why have I declared that? Because it is beneficial, it belongs to the fundamentals of the holy life, it leads to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbana. That is why I have declared it." While it is true that the speculative questions posed by Malunkyaputta did not cover metaphysical ontological questions such as you are asking, in my opinion, these types of discussion fall into the category of useless, idle, "beastly" talk and are not connected with the purpose of the teaching. Alex, I am playing "devil's advocate" here in the hopes that somebody can provide sutta quotations to convince me that I am wrong. Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > > Hello all, > > Quick Qs: > 1) Does Citta exist? Yes/No > 2) Does Cetasika exist? Yes/No > 3) Does Rupa Exist? Yes/NO > 4) Does Nibbana Exist? Yes/No > #80220 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Thanks for the reply: A: "Since rupa is ultimately not controllable, anicca, dukkha, anatta -IT IS EXPERIENCED AS SUFFERING...But this experience requires consciousness to be present." Scott: It is important to learn the difference between naama and ruupa, Alex. You continue to conflate the two. If I say, 'The meat is frozen', are you going to stoically insist that the meat can't be frozen because meat doesn't feel anything? A: "Only a sentient being can be molested. A bike doesn't feel molestation in ANY since it doesn't feel anything at all. It is YOU who are making this statement about the bike." Scott: I'll carefully point out that the term 'molested' has taken on the denotation of referring to the sexual abuse of a child in the modern era but this is not the sense in which the word is meant in a Dhamma context. Ruppana is a characteristic of insentient ruupa. As I mentioned, I think you have a hard time with this notion of Characteristics. Sincerely, Scott. #80221 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma scottduncan2 Dear James, Thanks for the reply: J: "This "molestation" that you speak of is anicca (impermanence). When a rock is molested by cold and splits apart, that is anicca. When a rock is molested by waves and is worn away into sand, that is anicca. This "molestation" that you write about is anicca, not dukkha. When there is no clinging then anicca doesn't become dukkha. If you don't cling to the bike, and realize that its nature is to fall apart, then you don't experience dukkha when it does fall apart." Scott: Do you see anicca and dukkha as being inter-related? I think it does seem that one is a function of the other and vice-versa, as if, in reality, they are actually inseparable and are constantly co-occurring (if that is a word). I'd include anatta in this inseparable inter-relationship. These three aspects of conditioned realities can be spoken of separately for didactic purposes but where the rubber hits the road (and is molested - ha ha, I'm so funny) they are As One. J: "The Buddha taught that he only teaches dukkha and the path leading to the ending of dukkha. So, it must be understood that dukkha is experiential and subjective, not natural to all conditioned things. If dukkha was inherent in all that is anicca, then liberation wouldn't be possible." Scott: See Sarah's post on the three meanings of dukkha. Sincerely, Scott. #80222 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:23 am Subject: [dsg] Re: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina et buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: Two points: > > 1) There are 3 meanings of dukkha. Here you are referring to dukkha > dukkha, the obvious dukkha that everyone understands when there is > unpleasant feeling. > > The second meaning refers to viparinama dukkha, the changing nature of > what is pleasant. The third meaning refers to the characteristic of all > conditioned dhammas - dukkha on account of their being impermanent. This > is the deepest sense which only the understanding of the 8fold Path can > really know. James: Yes, I am aware of different types of dukkha. I just gave you one example. Is that not sufficient for you? I must give example of all three types or I can expect a pendantic lecture? :-) Additionally, I don't think that your pendantic lecture is quite correct: 1. dukkha as pain (dukkha-dukkhata) 2. dukkha that is inherent in formation (sankhara-dukkhata) 3. dukkha of change (viparinama-dukkhata) This first of these is actual bodily or mental painfulness. The second is the maintenance factor: the oppressive nature of all formations in that there is continuous upkeep required to maintain conditioned manifestations. This is true at the most basic levels: breathe in, breathe out; eat, eliminate; open the eyes, blink; sit in a relaxed position, shift one's weight in the chair. Housework is an excellent example of the dukkha that is inherent in formation, whether the house is a mansion or a human body. The third dukkha points to the anguish of losing what is blissful or most pleasing; the impermanence of pleasurable bodily and mental states. > > 2) Howard put it rather nicely when he said that 'all the things that are > taken for self can arise and cease quite well on their own without there > being an owner of them or any agent for them.' James: I replied to Howard. > > You mentioned that you were 'talking about taking anatta to an extreme > where the sufferer doesn't exist in any sense, not even as an impermanent > process (sankhara).' Well, if by 'sufferer' or 'James' you are just > referring to impermanent conditioned dhammas (sankhara) and nothing else, > then we're all agreed. James: That would be nice, but for some reason Im not convinced. You seem to believe that sankhara don't exist. Are you now saying that sankhara exist? James is a sankhara punja. I'll add that with or without any idea of 'poor > James suffering', there are all sorts of namas and rupas arising and > falling away, that we can refer to in anyway we like:-) James: Not sure what you mean. But your compassion concerning my sickness is very heart-warming. ;-)) > ... > > ps. BTW, the doctor I saw yesterday seemed pretty convinced that I > > exist so he gave me some medicine and a flu shot. :-) > ... > S: Now if the good doctor were to understand about those conditioned > dhammas, he could still give you some medicine and a flu shot and wish you > a speedy recovery too :-). James: Maybe he does. Metta, James #80223 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Scott: It is important to learn the difference between naama and > ruupa, Alex. You continue to conflate the two. > > If I say, 'The meat is frozen', are you going to stoically insist that the meat can't be frozen because meat doesn't feel anything? >>> The frozen meat is your perception of 'frozen meat'. The frozen part is temperature (fire or lack of fire element) which the insentient rock doesn't feel, btw. The solid piece is the Earth element. The four elements are your (and mine, please excuse for ordinary talk) perceptions of form, colour, touch, etc. > A: "Only a sentient being can be molested. A bike doesn't feel > molestation in ANY since it doesn't feel anything at all. It is YOU > who are making this statement about the bike." > > Scott: I'll carefully point out that the term 'molested' has taken on the denotation of referring to the sexual abuse of a child in the > modern era but this is not the sense in which the word is meant in a > Dhamma context. > > Ruppana is a characteristic of insentient ruupa. As I mentioned, I > think you have a hard time with this notion of Characteristics. > A characteristic is a MENTAL idea. Without the mind, you cannot spot the characteristics, delianations, concepts, etc. Lots of Metta, Alex #80224 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Thanks for the reply: A: "The frozen meat is your perception of 'frozen meat'. The frozen part is temperature (fire or lack of fire element) which the insentient rock doesn't feel, btw. The solid piece is the Earth element." Scott: This is, more or less, correct, as regards the elucidation of the elements. You've nicely clarified your own misunderstanding of the difference between naama and ruupa. The meat is really frozen, separate from my perception (or thinking) of it. A: "The four elements are your (and mine, please excuse for ordinary talk) perceptions of form, colour, touch, etc." Scott: No, Characteristics inhere in the ruupa itself. This is where you are mixed up. A: "A characteristic is a MENTAL idea. Without the mind, you cannot spot the characteristics, delianations, concepts, etc." Scott: I don't share this view with you. You do not understand Characteristic. Dhammas have their own characteristics, naama as well, but these Characteristics are independent of each other but real. Sincerely, Scott. #80225 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:18 am Subject: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 6, no 6. nilovg Dear friends, The wholesome and unwholesome tendencies we accumulate today condition future moments of kusala citta and akusala citta. They condition these by way of natural strong dependence-condition, pakatupanissaya-paccaya [1], another condition among the twentyfour classes of conditions. We think of kusala and akusala that we performed as "ours", but they are just dhammas, devoid of self, that arise because of their own conditions. We see that people have different manners, different ways of walking or sitting. This is due to experiences and tendencies accumulated in the past. Thus, there are three kinds of strong dependence-condition: object strong dependence-condition proximity strong dependence-condition natural strong dependence-condition The Buddha realized the conditions for all phenomena of life thoroughly when he attained Buddhahood. All these conditions are realities, not terms, but the terms are needed to explain realities. When we listen to the Dhamma the tendency to listen and to consider what we hear is accumulated from moment to moment. Right understanding can become an object strong dependence-condition: we see the value of understanding based on listening and this conditions us to listen again and again. We accumulate the tendency to listen and to consider what we hear, this becomes a natural strong dependence-condition for right understanding. The different conditions that play their part in our life are very intricate. Understanding that arises with the citta can condition the arising of a succeeding moment of understanding, not only by way of proximity condition, but also by way of proximity strong dependence-condition, anantarupanissaya-paccaya. The accumulation of sobhana cetasikas such as confidence, saddhå and mindfulness, sati, and other wholesome qualities may be ready to condition that very moment of paññå. When the accumulated conditions are sufficient they can condition higher levels of paññå: stages of insight knowledge and even lokuttara (supramundane) paññå, arising at the attainment of enlightenment, but "we" cannot induce this. It is most valuable to understand more about the different kinds of conditions that play their part in our life. This understanding will prevent us from following the wrong Path and it will help us to realize this moment as non-self, no matter it is kusala or akusala. The Buddha exhorted people to eradicate akusala and to develop kusala, but can "we" do this? Acharn Sujin said: "Is it correct to say that a self can eradicate akusala and develop kusala? Kusala is dhamma and akusala is dhamma, they arise because of their appropriate conditions. One does not like to have akusala, and one likes to have kusala, but can kusala arise often? If there is right understanding, it is a condition to have gradually less akusala, because one can be aware of akusala as akusala. But there is no self who wants to have kusala and to eradicate akusala. Kusala and akusala are anattå. We can verify for ourselves whether we can have kusala to the degree we wish or not." If there are no conditions for kusala, we cannot force its arising. There are many degrees of kusala that can eliminate akusala. It depends on the individual to which kind of kusala he is mostly inclined, to dåna, síla, samatha or to the development of right understanding. We read in the "Dhammmapada" (Khuddaka Nikåya), vs. 183: “Not to do any evil, to cultivate wholesomeness, to purify one's mind,- this is the teaching of the Buddhas.” This is a short text but deep in meaning. When we develop right understanding of all realities appearing through the six doors we "purify the mind". Then we can see akusala and kusala as dhammas that arise because of the appropriate conditions and that are non-self. This understanding is the condition to refrain from akusala and to cultivate kusala. ----------- Footnote: 1. Pakati means natural. The natural strong dependence-condition is very wide, it also includes, for example, kusala that can condition the arising of akusala later on, or akusala that can condition the arising of kusala later on . ***** Nina. #80226 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 1:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin - In a message dated 12/16/2007 8:13:15 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, sukinder@... writes: Hi Howard, (Nina and Scott), I'm behind in my reading, this means that I have not read all the posts in this thread, so I am probably missing something. But when I read your statement about "decay is no problem in and of itself" I had exactly the same reaction as Nina. I thought, "Why must it be a matter of either a problem or not a problem?" ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Sukin, that's ordinary, informal English. The point is that decay is a mere fact, except as grasping makes it otherwise. In and of itself, decay is perfectly neutral. It is just as it is. It is merely "such". ---------------------------------------------------------- If you consider Dukkha only in relation to 'experience' but admit at the same time that this is a universal / constant thing, why can't a conclusion be drawn that this is due to some objective 'fact' regardless of any experience? --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Dukkha, as it applies to conditioned dhammas, is the fact of being among the conditions for dissatisfaction. Without tanha, they are insufficient for dissatisfaction to arise. Their serving as conditions for dissatisfaction and not as conditions for lasting satisfaction is a fact, and it is what constitutes their being dukkha (unsatisfactory/"not good"). They all have that characteristic of unsatisfactoriness, and I do not claim otherwise. But their having it is in relation to experience and not independent of it. That is my sole point. ----------------------------------------------------------- If you then say that the 'fact' is of Anicca, and that the Dukkha is a result of this, then why did the Buddha put these three together as being "characteristic / mark" of all conditioned realities? ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: See what I wrote above. Yes, there are three distinct, universal negative features of dhammas, but they are interrelated. Anicca, dukkha, and anatta three, not one, but they are related. Relatedness isn't the same as identity. The links of dependent origination, as an analogy, avijja --> sankhara --> vi~n~na --> etc, are causally related, but they aren't all the same. ---------------------------------------------------- And if they are *all* dependent on experience, then you must also view Anicca as being more or less subjective, but I'm sure that you do not have any problem wrapping your mind around this as being objective? ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: I never said they are all dependent on experience! Please be more careful. The characteristics of anicca and anatta are independent of experience. Also, as regards dukkha, I say it is *related* to experience - that the term 'dukkha' would be meaningless without relation to experience. However, it is not subjective or a matter of opinion or perspective as to whether conditioned dhammas are dukkha. They *are*. They are not sources of lasting satisfaction, and it is their nature not to be. That is their being dukkha. ------------------------------------------------------ So perhaps the difficulty with Dukkha is more to do with our inability to grasp it intellectually? --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not having a "difficulty" with dukkha ... except in the sense, of course, that my personal dukkhata (suffering) is alive and well and will remain so for ages! LOL! ------------------------------------------------- I've found myself sometimes thinking about this, that Anicca and Anatta is easier to understand at the level of Suttamaya and Cintamaya panna, but the fact of Dukkha has never struck me as these have. What do you think? --------------------------------------------------- Howard: LOL! I think that I don't know that Pali. ;-)) What I can say is the following: 1) All three are clearly interrelated in multiple ways. 2) Anatta is the deepest of the three and the hardest to understand. 3) Anicca is the easiest to understand, though delusively so, for we typically miss radical, momentary impermanence, and that aspect of anicca is closely tied in with the other two lakkhana. 4) Dukkha is subtle, and one is easily confused in thinking that things that are pleasant are not dukkha, but, of course, they *are*, because any satisfaction derived from them is misplaced, absurdly superficial, and also radically non-lasting due to the uncontrollability of change, boredom, and desire for "more and better". Most of all, the greatest possible happiness attainable from conditioned dhammas is junk compared to the perfect happiness of the awakened state the Buddha has taught. (Nibbana.m parama.m sukha.m: Dh 203) ----------------------------------------------------- Also earlier when reading your other posts I wondered if your understanding of Dukkha as being related to "experience", was not, of the three definitions of Dukkha, captured by the two namely, Dukkha dukkhata and Viparinama dukkhata and that the meaning that we should be looking into is the other one, namely, Sankhara dukkhata? ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: No, I think dukkha in all senses is related to experience. ---------------------------------------------------- Moreover, with regard to Rupa being molested etc, forgetting for a moment what 'molested' is understood to be in everyday use, this fact about Rupa exhibiting such a characteristic, could the same be said about Nama? I think this fact about rupa wearing and tearing etc, is reflection of what goes on at the level of kalapas, what do you think? And surely 'rise and fall' is one thing, and *this* is something else, no? ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I imagine that the term translated as "molested" probably refers to being physically affected, by way of battering and physical erosion. As far as I'm concerned, however, namas are just as dukkha as rupas. In any case, though, decaying, physically eroding, being physically affected, and change in all its forms are, in principle, and objectively (independent of desire), just as "interesting" as they are "disturbing", and, in and of themselves and independent of mind, they are all quite neutral. ---------------------------------------------------- Some thoughts that came to mind. Corrections welcome. ;-) ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: No corrections - this is all perspective: yours, mine, and that of others. ========================== With metta, Howard #80227 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:21 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 218, 219, and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 218, 219 Intro: In the previous sections naama was taken separately as a condition for the sense-bases and the mind-base (citta), and then ruupa was taken separately as a condition for the sense-bases. After that it was explained that the ruupa of life-faculty and the ruupa which is nutrition are conditions for the sense-bases. The following sections are a short summary of the fact that naama, the cetasikas which are vipaaka arising together with the heart-base at rebirth, condition the mind-base, that is the rebirth- consciousness they arise together with. Text Vis. 218: Which mind-cum-matter combination Is a condition for which kind And how it is so in each case, A wise man should now seek to find. --------- Text Vis.219: For example, firstly, in rebirth-linking in the five- constituent becoming, the mentality-materiality, in other words, the trio of aggregates with the materiality of the [heart-] basis, is a condition, as conascence, mutuality, support, kamma-result, association, dissociation, presence, and non-disappearance conditions, etc., for the sixth, the mind base. -------- N: Conascence-condition and the other conditions that are conascent are mentioned here since the cetasikas, naama, and the ruupa that is heartbase, arise at the moment of rebirth together with the rebirth- consciousness they condition. The text adds:< in the five-constituent becoming>, because only in the planes of existence where there are naama and ruupa the heart-base arises. There is no heart-base in the aruupa-brahma planes where there is only naama, not ruupa. Both association-condition and dissociation-condition are mentioned here. Association condition pertains only to naama that conditions another naama. Dissociation-condition pertains here to ruupa which conditions naama. The Tiika states that the other conditions (conascence etc.) are universal (saadhaara.na), but that association-condition and dissociation-condition are not universal. They cannot be universally applied, they have to be applied as the case demands. Thus, when one considers the three naama-kkhandhas, the cetasikas, which condition the rebirth-consciousness, association-condition is to be applied. When one considers the heart-base that conditions the the rebirth- consciousness (mind-base), dissociation-condition is to be applied. -------- Text Vis. :This is merely the heading; but since it can all be construed in the way already stated, the detail is not given here. This is the detailed explanation of the clause 'With mentality-materiality as condition, the sixfold base'. ********* Conclusion: As is stated in the Tiika (to Vis. 202), < by the words ‘vi~n~naa.na conditions naama/ruupa’, the Buddha taught to the wise who were investigating the truth that in the highest sense (paramatthato) only naama and ruupa occur, not a person, not a living being (na satto, na jiivo). >This can also be applied to the following link, naama/ruupa conditions the six bases. We learnt about the ways naama (cetasikas) condition the mind-base (citta) at the moment of rebirth and during life. It was explained that in the course of life naama, the cetasikas that are vipaaka, condition the sense-bases they are dependent on in different ways. Moreover, also non-resultant naama is a conditioning factor for the sense-bases, in the same ways. The sense-bases condition the sense-cognitions. Without eye-base there could not be seeing. Visible object impinges on the eye-base so that seeing can arise. Seeing is the result of kamma and so is the eyebase. In this section (219) we learnt that naama, the cetasikas which are vipaaka arising together with the heart-base at rebirth, condition the mind-base, that is the rebirth-consciousness they arise together with. All the different ways in which naama and ruupa condition the sense- bases and the mind-base were given in all details and this helps us to understand that there is not a person who experiences objects through the six doorways. The Buddha taught . The Truth of anattaa can be investigated only through awareness of naama and ruupa as they appear at the present moment. ******** Nina. #80228 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: contemplation, was Perfections Corner (54) nilovg Dear Ann, nice to hear from you. Attachment to a person we mistakenly believe we see is so strong. This attachment arises so often. We are more interested in the object we experience than in the citta itself that experiences. And here again we come back to our discussion in India about the distinction between the six doors that was mentioned by Jon. I recently heard you on tape saying slowly and pondering aloud: seeing sees visible object. We read in the 'Book of Analysis' Ch 16, (762, 763) that the sense- cognitions have different bases and different objects. <'Do not experience each other's object' means: Ear consciousness does not experience the object of eye-consciousness; eye consciousness does not experience the object of ear consciousness either. Nose consciousness does not experience the object of eye consciousness; eye consciousness does not experience the object of nose consciousness either... etc.> Thus, they have nothting to do with each other. They do not know each other. Nina. Op 16-dec-2007, om 18:23 heeft glenjohnann het volgende geschreven: > Nina, your comment below, "a person cannot impinge on eyesense" is > very helpful. #80229 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:35 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sutta vs Abhidhamma truth_aerator Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > .... > I've indicated several times how Buddhagosa traced the Abhidhamma to the 1st Council with many references from the Vinaya itself. >>> 1st) I am very cautious of what Buddhaghosa says 2nd) If it was so simple, there wouldn't be this controversy. I am sure that other schools also did trace their own abhidhamma back to Buddha or Sariputta (wow, Ven. Sariputta must have been busy with multiple Abhidhamma projects...) >>> He then traced the history of the dhamma-vinaya to the 3 councils and finally to the Vinaya recital in Sri lanka under Mahinda, showing that the Bhikkhus "again rehearsed the entire Dhamma and the Vinaya...even in the same > manner as it was rehearsed by the elder Mahakassapa" (Smp, commentary to > Vinaya, 38) >>> It seem that you are assuming that Dhamma means Abhidhamma. In AN 4.180 it says that Dhamma = the Discources (Suttas). The thing is Buddha doesn't mention Abhidhamma pitaka ever in the suttas! And he keeps talking about disappearance of discources (suttas) in the course of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will listen when discourses that are literary works — the works of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of disciples — are recited. They will lend ear and set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn20/sn20.007.than.html Also notice the "Words of Disciples" part. This includes Ven. Buddhaghosa and Mogaliputta Tissa Thera. > > I've shown how at the time of the 1st council, the Tipitaka was referred to as Dhamma-Vinaya. I believe in suttas such as the > Mahaparinibbana Sutta, the Buddha instructed the bhikkhus to take the `dhamma-vinaya' as their Teacher after he passed away. >>> > In the series I wrote on the Vinaya and its commentary, the Bahiranidana, I indicated how the Khudakka Nikaya included in the recital includes the > Abhidhamma texts. In the Atthasalini (the commentary to the > Dhammasangani), it says: >>> That is commentary. I am far too conservative to be a radical Theravadin. >> > Reference is also made to to these 84,000 units of dhamma in the Vinaya > itself. >>> It appears that 84,000 is a symbolic number rather than actual. Probably like 1001 is a symbolic number. and as I also mentioned, there are also references to the > Abhidhamma in the 1st council in the abhidhamma texts > themselves(Vibhanga)and in texts of Mahayana schools . >>>> Those are later and sectarian addons. > Furthermore, from the Atthasalini, we read about references to the > Abhidhamma in the Vianaya and Suttanta: > > "For it has been said by the Buddha (Vin, 1V,344): "If without any > intention of reviling the Vinaya one were to instigate another, saying, > Pray study the Suttas or Gathas or Abhidhamma first and afterwards you will learn the Vinaya - there is no offence in him," (Again, in the Bhikkhuni Vibhanga Vin,1V,344) "Abhikkhuni is guilty of a minor offence) > if she questions on the Abhidhamma or Vinaya after getting permission (to > question) on the Suttanta, or on the Suttanta or Vinaya after getting > permission (to question) on the Abhidhamma, or on the suttanta or > Abhidhamma after getting permission (to question) on the Vinaya."...... >>>. Like "Gatha" doesn't refer to Gatha-Pitaka so, Abhidhamma doesn't need to refer just to pitaka of that name. Furthermore what does Abhidhamma mean? It could simply mean Advanced Dhamma. Suttas such as MN148 or so. You are putting too much emphasis on literal study which simply DID NOT EXIST IN PEASANT SOCIETY OF THOSE TIMES. It seems very unlikely that most of the monks knew more than 10-20 AT BEST suttas. Also, Sariputta learned only a single paragraph from Assaji (?) before joining Buddha. Then it seems that he learned a sutta which helped him to achieve Cessation + Arahatship. Of course he probably also heard the meditation instructions (so 3 suttas total, where one "sutta" was very short one) There would simply be NO time for Buddha or his main disciples to recite and teach Abhidhamma VERBALLY. Scholasticism came later, especially at the stage of settled and large monasteries, etc. > The Atthasalini continues: > > "The Mahagosinga sutta (MN 1, 218) is even stronger authority (to show> that the Abhidhamma is the Buddha's word). for therein when Sariputta, the Generaliisimo of the law, approached the Teacer to inform him of the > reciprocal questions and answers that took place between Mahamoggallana and himself, and told how the former had answered (the master said) > `Brother Sariputta, in the religion the talk of two bhikkhus on the> Abhidhamma, each asking and answering the other without faltering, is in accord with the Dhamma. Now such a bhikkhu, brother Sariputta, might > enhance the beauty of the Gosinga Sala Forest. The Teacher, far from > saying that bhikkus, who knew Abhidhamma, were outside his religion, > lifted his drum-like neck and filling (with breath) his mouth, fraught as > the full-moon with blessings, emitted his godlike voice,congratulating 1st) This is discussion between two Arahants, not people aiming at stream or higher. 2nd) Here Abhidhamma as I've said, could easily mean simply Advanced Dhamma talks such as in advanced suttas in MN. > > It also says in the Atthasalini that "tradition has it that those > bhikkhus only who know Abhidhamma are true preachers of the Dhamma".. >>> Not found in the suttas, only commentary. >>> "He who prohibits (the teaching of ) abhidhamma gives a blow to the Wheel of the conqueror, >>> Who says what is Dhamma as Dhamma and Adhamma as Adhamma does great Merit. Forgot which sutta. >>> denies omniscience, subverts the Teacher's knowledge full of confidence, deceives the audience, obstructs the path of the Ariyas, >>>> 1) Buddha did not claim Omniscience like we imagine it. He actually ridiculed the idea. Path of Ariyas: 2nd) In which of the 37 wings to awakening does it say to study AP? :) > > Finally for now, Alex, we read in the Suttas themselves about the nine divisions (angas). For example: > > Heard with the Ear' (AN, 4s, 191, PTS) > > Herein a monk masters Dhamma, to wit: Sutta, Geyya, Veyyaakara.na and the rest (Gaathaa, Udaana, Itivuttaka, Jaataka, Abbhutadhamma and Vedalla)*. Buddha didn't mention "Abhidhamma Pitaka" nor its 7 books since they didn't exist. 2nd) In MN122 (or 121) Buddha mentioned that he taught Sutta - Geyya- Vayakarana. Again, no mention of AP. > > Here, as I understand, the Veyyaakara.na (Exposition) includes the > Abhidhamma Pi.taka. >>> Why didn't he used AP to remove all the confusion? Probably because that word in its current meaning wasn't invented yet. > Finally, it really all comes down to whether the realities taught in the Abhidhamma can be tested and proved now. When they are directly understood to be correct, there'll be no further doubts about the Abhidhamma Tipitaka as being the Buddha's word or being in conformity with what is taught in > the other Pitakas. >>> The more I understand the suttas, the historical context, the more I question the AP (especially the Commentarial Version). Don't get me wrong. I'll totally change my mind if there are suttas which say that the Buddha taught 6-7 books of AP listed BY NAME. Please excuse me for my Conservatism. Lots of Metta, May the DHAMMA (Buddha's teaching) be with you ALWAYS! Alex #80230 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma nilovg Hi Howard, in your answer to Sukin: here you come closer: However, it is not subjective or a matter of opinion or perspective as to whether conditioned dhammas are dukkha. They *are*. You say: Coming closer. So, if you see that the impermanence of nama and rupa is in itself dukkha, you have got it. I won't say more. I keep silent and let you think further. Nina. Op 17-dec-2007, om 15:20 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I never said they are all dependent on experience! Please be more > careful. The characteristics of anicca and anatta are independent > of experience. > Also, as regards dukkha, I say it is *related* to experience - that > the term > 'dukkha' would be meaningless without relation to experience. > However, it is > not subjective or a matter of opinion or perspective as to whether > conditioned > dhammas are dukkha. They *are*. They are not sources of lasting > satisfaction, > and it is their nature not to be. That is their being dukkha. #80231 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 7:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma nilovg Hi James, Op 17-dec-2007, om 8:09 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > This "molestation" that you speak of is anicca (impermanence). When a > rock is molested by cold and splits apart, that is anicca. When a rock > is molested by waves and is worn away into sand, that is anicca. > This "molestation" that you write about is anicca, not dukkha. ------- N: Anicca and dukkha are very close. As I wrote to Howard: ------- > J:The Buddha taught that he only teaches dukkha and the path > leading to > the ending of dukkha. So, it must be understood that dukkha is > experiential and subjective, not natural to all conditioned things. If > dukkha was inherent in all that is anicca, then liberation wouldn't be > possible. ------ N: I think here it is this context: Being in the cycle of birth and death is dukkha. The Buddha taught the end of it. Nina. #80232 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/17/2007 9:42:43 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, in your answer to Sukin: here you come closer: However, it is not subjective or a matter of opinion or perspective as to whether conditioned dhammas are dukkha. They *are*. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Closer to what, Nina? Your view? The "truth"? ;-) In any case, what I wrote here doesn't reflect a change in position on my part. -------------------------------------------------- You say: Coming closer. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: No closer, because not a change. That has never been other than my understanding. ----------------------------------------------- So, if you see that the impermanence of nama and rupa is in itself dukkha, you have got it. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Impermanence is a cause of dissatisfaction. Certainly. Impermanence is dukkha. But so is persistence a cause of dissatisfaction! Persistence is also dukkha. The continuation/repetition of what is unpleasant is a major cause for suffering, and is thus dukkha. ["Association with the unbeloved is dukkha. ... And what is the dukkha of association with the unbeloved? There is the case where undesirable, unpleasing, unattractive sights, sounds, aromas, flavors, or tactile sensations occur to one; or one has connection, contact, relationship, interaction with those who wish one ill, who wish for one's harm, who wish for one's discomfort, who wish one no security from the yoke. This is called the dukkha of association with the unbeloved."] ----------------------------------------------------- I won't say more. I keep silent and let you think further. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Likewise, Nina! ;-) ----------------------------------------------------- Nina. ========================== With metta, Howard #80233 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 7:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 6, no 5. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 16-dec-2007, om 23:18 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > > Nina, where you speak of Lodewijk, there is but a rapidly changing > aggregate of interrelated phenomena, but notwithstanding that, that > aggregate > (also known as "he" ;-) is most certainly not nothing at all. > Aggregates of > similar dhammas regularly arising, ceasing, and rearising in a > discernible pattern > of co-occurrence and relatedness form a central aspect of the > reality of > existence and are not mere illusion. Grasping them as units/ > individuals and > attributing singular self-existence to them is an error, but so is > dismissing > them as fictions. There is a middle way even as regards pa~n~natti. ------ N: Often discussed, but hard to take, isn't it? I agree that there is not nothing. We can speak of individuals because different people have a different past, different accumulated tendencies. We can use the word character. The Survey of Paramattha Dhammas gives an explanation about 'the variegated nature of the cittas of each of us' which you will appreciate. On p. 53, you can read it in your book and I quote: On p. 51 we read: This morning my eye fell on this (p. 21), the explanation that each citta must experience an object: Especially these words: I think this happens all the time: we seem to be mostly interested in the object that is experienced, this or that person or thing. As soon as seeing has arisen and thinking thinks of this person, it is the person I am interested in and I am forgetful of seeing, of what is seen, and of thinking. Perhaps this infatuation makes it so hard to accept the truth, to really understand it. Yes, we understand in theory: no self, but there is not yet pativedha, the direct realisation. This is a long way of development of understanding. When dosa arises, we notice dosa, and so long as there is no direct awareness of its charactreistic it is still my dosa. Even when we do not expressively think: my dosa. Nina. #80234 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:11 am Subject: Re: Perfections Corner (54) nichiconn Dear Sarah, Nice review of manasikaara! Thank you especially for the quote from Atthasaalinii, 330 (Expositor, PTS, 'Moral Consciousness in the Worlds of Sense): " 'Attention' is a mode of work, working in the mind. *It makes mind, so to speak, different from the previous mind.* It is of three kinds: Attention which regulates the object, attention which regulates process-consciousness, attention which regulates apperception. " I was trying to remember exactly *that*... now if only I could remember just why I was... peace, connie #80235 From: Dieter Möller Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma moellerdieter Hi James and Nina..., you wrote: Nina : Anicca and dukkha are very close. As I wrote to Howard: ------- James:The Buddha taught that he only teaches dukkha and the path > leading to > the ending of dukkha. So, it must be understood that dukkha is experiential and subjective, not natural to all conditioned things. If dukkha was inherent in all that is anicca, then liberation wouldn't be possible. ------ N: I think here it is this context: Being in the cycle of birth and death is dukkha. The Buddha taught the end of it. D: Assumed Nina equates nama - rupa with the 5 khandas, i.e. the living being, it is in line with the canon. As I understand , the individual living being , let aside the Arahant , experiences Dukkha/ 'Suffering' - being in the cycle of birth, old age and death- due to the 5 khanda - attachment. The whole teaching is directed to the suffering individual , please compare e.g. with A.N. III 62 snip 'On account of contact, there are feelings. Bhikkhus, to one who feels, I say this is suffering, this is the arising of sufferings, this the cessation of suffering and this is the path leading to the cessation of suffering. Bhikkhus, what is the noble truth of suffering? Here, bhikkhus, birth, decay, illness, death, grief, lament, displeasure, distress and not to get one desires are suffering. In short the five 5 groups of attachment are suffering.. Bhikkhus, this is the noble truth of suffering... snip ' snip I think that misunderstandings occur when the 5 khandas are not seen in context with D.O., which describes the whole mass of/for individual suffering . with Metta Dieter #80236 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter (and James & Nina) - IMO, very well said, Dieter: To the point, correct, and with well-chosen quotations! With metta, Howard #80237 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:41 am Subject: Re: Sutta vs Abhidhamma nichiconn Dear Alex and All, Not to sound any more beastly than usual in my ranting, but because I like it, I quote an early translator, R. Otto Franke: << It may now be considered as safely established, that the books of the Canon as a whole are not authentic,...>> and << It is given as yet to no mortal man to demonstrate that any one Buddhist sentence was spoken during the lifetime of the Founder. >> Personally, I like believing there actually have been sammasambuddhas and the whole storyline (including the early councils chapters), but as our questionable books indicate, it doesn't matter. Our realization or ignorance of the truth doesn't change the truth in the least but does vitally impact our way of being. To a certain point, I agree with the people who are wont to say "the truth is not to be found in the books". Those little well-marked relics (or Teacher's Assistants if you like,) merely point out the way (which last phrase sounds really familiar somehow, reminding me that the same moon is reflected simultaneously in any number of bodies of water). Rather than "who says so?", it seems to me the questions about authenticity could more properly lie along the lines of "are they pointing the same direction(s)?" The simple answer to that, from my reading, is yes: the suttas with a broader, more sweeping and open-handed gesture while the abhidhammika is more likely to use a single finger or two to prod us along, the others on that same hand pointing back to other portions of the Teachings but mostly, as ever, oneself. It's rather like the amount of detail on a map has no effect on the lay and composition of the land itself but might matter a great deal to the user, especially a stranger in a strange land. Still and all, no, mapreading skills in themselves aren't required and for that matter, one can head off without any idea of what's ahead but yes, one does eventually have to stop surfing the travel channels and actually get off the cushion to really get anywhere else. (Not that there's really any one or any where to go, but) I don't think even a DSG-er would debate that and we seem to be good at picking up darn near anything to argue over... even down to whether the home page might really mean what it says. Getting on a roll here so I'll shut up, connie Alavaka S. - One who being diligent (and) wise believes in the Law of the Saints for attaining Nibbaana, will by listening constantly (to them) acquire knowledge. #80238 From: Dieter Möller Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma moellerdieter Hi Howard, thanks for that kind feedback .. ;-) with Metta Dieter #80239 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:55 am Subject: Re: Sutta vs Abhidhamma truth_aerator Dear Connie, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "L G SAGE" wrote: > Not to sound any more beastly than usual in my ranting, but because I like it, I quote an early translator, R. Otto Franke: << It may now be considered as safely established, that the books of the Canon as a whole are not authentic,...>> and << It is given as yet to no mortal man to demonstrate that any one Buddhist sentence was spoken during the lifetime of the Founder. >> > > Personally, I like believing there actually have been sammasambuddhas and the whole storyline (including the early councils chapters), but as our questionable books indicate, it doesn't matter. Our realization or ignorance of the truth doesn't change the truth in the least but does vitally impact our way of being. > I believe in the 4 Nikayas + first few books of KN. However, later all this sectarianism and philosophical bashing came and started to pollute the wonderful Buddha Dhamma. The Pali Canon WAS compared to independent canon (in sanskrit or Chinease) and found to be very similiar. While we may doubt: a) That Buddha either spoke PALI or Pali was his native language b) The exact wording and sutta arrangement His teaching is so profound, inviting to come and see, that it had to be Spoken by the Buddha. Please read: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/authenticity.htm l Lots of Metta, Alex #80240 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma nilovg Hi Alex, just acknowledging your post. Many posts on this topic, and I cannot add more! Citta, cetasika, rupa and nibbaana are realities, they are paramattha dhammas. I wish you a good Dhamma study. Nina. Op 16-dec-2007, om 21:32 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > This is ridiculous to claim that Suffering is an 'object'. Suffering > is a FEELING. #80241 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma truth_aerator Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Alex, > just acknowledging your post. Many posts on this topic, and I cannot > add more! > Citta, cetasika, rupa and nibbaana are realities, they are > paramattha dhammas. But the Buddha never taught "Paramattha Dhamma" in a later sense of Ultimate ontological realities (other than perhaps Nibbana, but only if it is a "Dhamma". Even here Nibbana is often described in psychological terms.) ! In MN#1, #18 and other suttas, the Buddha tellss that ALL perceptions are conditioned, impermanent, inconstant and should NOT be clung to. Nor should they be built into elaborate systems of relations. A reality is a set of perceptions + mental inferences, which are of course relative and inconstant. This would make them Dukkha and Anatta. >>> > I wish you a good Dhamma study. > Nina. >> I wish you too! :) #80242 From: Undiyaralale Karunarathne Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:58 am Subject: (No subject) karunarathnata Hello. I m Sri Lankan. #80245 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:48 pm Subject: Does Anicca = Dukkha? buddhatrue Hi Nina (Scott, Dieter, Howard, etc.), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > ------- > N: Anicca and dukkha are very close. As I wrote to Howard: see that the impermanence of nama and rupa is in itselfdukkha, you > have got it.> > ------- > ------ > N: I think here it is this context: Being in the cycle of birth and > death is dukkha. The Buddha taught the end of it. > Nina. I'm afraid I must disagree. To you, anicca and dukkha aren't just very close, they are the same thing! However, anicca isn't synonymous with dukkha. Dukkha only occurs with clinging (as the Buddha taught in the Second Noble Truth), if there is no clinging there is no dukkha- even though anicca will continue. The arahant doesn't experience any type of dukkha whatsoever, even though he/she experiences anicca constantly, because the arahant doesn't cling to anything. The arahant doesn't identify with the five aggregates so the three types of dukkha aren't dukkha for the arahant. Some people believe that dukkha only ends for the arahant at paranibbana, but I disagree. The arahant is free from dukkha even while still alive. The arahant doesn't identify with the five aggregates and can't be identified with the five aggregates. Those who believe the arahant still experiences suffering while alive because of the existence of a body must also believe in a self. It is only with clinging that there is dukkha. Anicca isn't automatically dukkha. Metta, James #80246 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:58 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: A Reminder for Us Clingers-to-Views kenhowardau Hi Howard (and Alex), Sorry for the delay, my routines are always disrupted at this time of year. --------------- KH (to Alex): > > I think you have rejected my advice, which was to learn about momentary, paramattha, reality. When you do eventually learn it you will recognise momentary phenomena throughout the suttas and the Abhidhamma-pitaka. I'm sorry to say that, until that time, you will never really know what the Buddha's teaching was all about. > > Howard: > Ken, IMO you're being amazingly arrogant here, probably without realizing it. You haven't even included one "I think" phrase! No-self opinions aren't much of a substitute for humility, which is no-self in action. Ken, please reconsider the business of judging and condemning , and consider that others might have a piece of true understanding. ---------------- I'm not sure if my post was amazingly arrogant, but I am sure it was no more so my usual posts. :-) The point I always try to make is that the Buddha's Dhamma is totally unlike any other teaching. If someone thinks he can see a conventional run-of-the-mill meaning in the Dhamma then that someone, whoever he or she is, should look again. The Dhamma is always about satipatthana. And satipatthana means right understanding of the present, fleeting (momentary), conditioned, absolute reality. --------------------- <. . .> KH: > > In momentary reality every kusala citta is [momentarily] cleansed of defilements. However, there is no possibility of anything being cleansed in advance. There is no thing that lasts for more than a trillionth of a second. > > Howard: > Ken, present conditions influence conditions-to-be. Are you ignoring all that Nina has said about accumulations? --------------------- No, but I think you are. Nina describes the Dhamma as a way of understanding the present reality. You, on the other hand, always insist it is a list of things to be done in order to bring about some kind of future happiness or enlightenment. --------------- A: > > > If something is conditioned, how can it be absolute? > > > KH: > > A conditioned dhamma momentarily arises, performs its functions and falls away. During those three stages it is an absolute, existent, reality. > > Howard: > What does 'absolute' mean, then? The philosophical meaning is "being self-sufficient and free of external references or relationships." It is always contrasted with 'relative'. Whatever is conditioned is relative, not absolute. ---------------- A paramattha dhamma does not owe its characteristics to the opinions of an observer. Its characteristics are not "relative" to those opinions. This is unlike conventional reality, in which 'one man's meat can be another man's poison' etc. ----------- KH: > > By contrast, a chair or a tree or a sentient being etc is never real. It is an illusion created by thinking. > > Howard: > So, certainly your computer and keyboard are illusions created by thinking, and people for sure! So, what are you doing interacting with illusions, Ken? If these are entirely illusion, does that, then, make you insane? ----------- Whenever there is an idea of a self the teaching of anatta must inevitably appear inane. When there is no idea of self, however, there is no apparent conflict with rationality. In the absence of self-view a person can still go about daily life quite happily and sanely. When there is more than a mere *absence* of self view (when there is also right understanding) then it is the idea of lasting "sentient beings" and lasting "computers" that appears as sheer madness. But the concept of typing can still occur - so they tell me. :-) Ken H #80247 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? TGrand458@... In a message dated 12/17/2007 6:47:57 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: Some people believe that dukkha only ends for the arahant at paranibbana, but I disagree. The arahant is free from dukkha even while still alive. The arahant doesn't identify with the five aggregates and can't be identified with the five aggregates. Those who believe the arahant still experiences suffering while alive because of the existence of a body must also believe in a self. It is only with clinging that there is dukkha. Anicca isn't automatically dukkha. Hi James You may have addressed this already, but you're probably aware that an arahant does experience physical dukkha and is clearly described as such in the Suttas. Other than that possible discrepancy, I agree with your points on this issue. Anicca is dukkha only within the purview of a mind subject to attachment. TG #80248 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 7:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? buddhatrue Hi TG, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > > You may have addressed this already, but you're probably aware that an > arahant does experience physical dukkha and is clearly described as such in the > Suttas. An arahant can experience physical pain but there won't be the corresponding mental pain of aversion- so I don't consider that dukkha. Metta, James #80249 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? TGrand458@... In a message dated 12/17/2007 8:09:08 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: An arahant can experience physical pain but there won't be the corresponding mental pain of aversion- so I don't consider that dukkha. .......................... Hi James I agree with the first part of your statement, but to my knowledge physical pain is also dukkha. Buddhist Dictionary (Nyanatiloka) says re: Dukkha: "Pain", painful feeling, which may be bodily and mental." TG #80250 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Reminder for Us Clingers-to-Views upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 12/17/2007 8:58:40 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: A paramattha dhamma does not owe its characteristics to the opinions of an observer. Its characteristics are not "relative" to those opinions. This is unlike conventional reality, in which 'one man's meat can be another man's poison' etc. ============================ A straw man, Ken. I never claimed other than what you say here, and I do not now. With metta, Howard #80251 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? buddhatrue Hi TG, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > I agree with the first part of your statement, but to my knowledge physical > pain is also dukkha. Buddhist Dictionary (Nyanatiloka) says re: Dukkha: > > "Pain", painful feeling, which may be bodily and mental." The dukkha of pain is predominately mental (but there could also be physical pain which causes the mental pain.) The Buddha taught the "pain" of dukkha in terms of mental pain: "...sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, & despair are dukkha;" These five are types of mental pain. Additionally, consider that not everyone considers physical pain "painful". Masochists feel pleasure with physical pain. So, for masochists, physical pain would only be dukkha when it stops, since the mental pleasure would then stop. For the arahant, physical pain isn't dukkha because there is no corresponding mental aversion (or mental craving). Metta, James #80252 From: Undiyaralale Karunarathne Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:02 pm Subject: Anicca=/Dukkha karunarathnata Hi, Dukka is consequence of Anicca. Three Basics of the Dharama is Anicca, Dukkha and Anathma. How can Anicca and dukkha can be equal. They has three different meanings. You can understand them by reading and listening but it will not enough. You have to do meditation upon that three. its Maha Vipassana of 40 ways. Metta, Asanka #80253 From: Undiyaralale Karunarathne Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:08 pm Subject: Abhidamma Vs Sutta. karunarathnata Hi, If Buddha does not taught paramartha and we suppose some body else has generated those things. The think about his brain power. But you have to have a great understanding of paramaratha, Metta, Asanka #80254 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? TGrand458@... In a message dated 12/17/2007 9:16:25 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: The dukkha of pain is predominately mental (but there could also be physical pain which causes the mental pain.) The Buddha taught the "pain" of dukkha in terms of mental pain: "...sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, & despair are dukkha;" These five are types of mental pain. Additionally, consider that not everyone considers physical pain "painful". Masochists feel pleasure with physical pain. So, for masochists, physical pain would only be dukkha when it stops, since the mental pleasure would then stop. For the arahant, physical pain isn't dukkha because there is no corresponding mental aversion (or mental craving). .................................... Hi James You must remember the Sutta where the Buddha (I think) says that normally pain is experienced with "two darts," the mental and the physical...but that the arahant only experiences the pain of a single dart. The Buddha himself is described as suffering physically due to splinters in the foot, poisoned food, backaches, etc. Although no mental suffering accompanied such feeling, without any sense of pain, arahants would probably become virtual lepers...albeit enlightened ones. Did not other arahants "use the knife" because they were in such physical pain? TG #80255 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? buddhatrue Hi TG, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > Hi James > > You must remember the Sutta where the Buddha (I think) says that normally > pain is experienced with "two darts," the mental and the physical...but that the > arahant only experiences the pain of a single dart. James: Right. And because the arahant only experiences physical pain and not mental pain, he doesn't experience dukkha. As the Buddha said in that sutta: "Sensing a feeling of pleasure, he senses it disjoined from it. Sensing a feeling of pain, he senses it disjoined from it. Sensing a feeling of neither-pleasure-nor-pain, he senses it disjoined from it. This is called a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones disjoined from birth, aging, & death; from sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs. He is disjoined, I tell you, from suffering & stress. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn36/sn36.006.than.html > > The Buddha himself is described as suffering physically due to splinters in > the foot, poisoned food, backaches, etc. Although no mental suffering > accompanied such feeling, without any sense of pain, arahants would probably become > virtual lepers...albeit enlightened ones. James: Yes, they do feel physical pain- as the result of past kamma. But, again, this isn't dukkha. As the Buddha explained above, if there is no mental pain there is no dukkha. > > Did not other arahants "use the knife" because they were in such physical > pain? James: I don't think so. Metta, James #80256 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 1:16 am Subject: [dsg] Re: A Reminder for Us Clingers-to-Views kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > In a message dated 12/17/2007 8:58:40 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, > kenhowardau@... writes: > > A paramattha dhamma does not owe its characteristics to the opinions > of an observer. Its characteristics are not "relative" to those > opinions. This is unlike conventional reality, in which 'one man's > meat can be another man's poison' etc. > > > ============================ > A straw man, Ken. I never claimed other than what you say here, and I do > not now. > Hi Howard (and Alex), I'd like to clear up a bit of confusion. On this occasion I was not arguing. I was looking for a way of explaining the meaning of "absolute" in the context of Abhidhamma. Alex seemed to think only nibbana could be absolute. Maybe you can help him with this. Ken H from 80246: > A: > > > If something is conditioned, how can it be absolute? > > > > > > KH: > > A conditioned dhamma momentarily arises, performs its > functions and falls away. During those three stages it is an > absolute, existent, reality. > > > > > Howard: > What does 'absolute' mean, then? The philosophical meaning > is "being self-sufficient and free of external references or > relationships." It is always contrasted with 'relative'. Whatever is > conditioned is relative, not absolute. > ---------------- > #80257 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 2:01 am Subject: [dsg] Re: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina et buddhatrue Hi Sarah, I really must apologize for the tone of this post. It is not polite in some areas and I really regret that. You are a dear and kind friend to me and I don't want to come across as mean- even when I don't agree with your viewpoint. No hard feelings! :-) Metta, James > > James: Yes, I am aware of different types of dukkha. I just gave > you one example. Is that not sufficient for you? I must give > example of all three types or I can expect a pendantic lecture? :-) > > Additionally, I don't think that your pendantic lecture is quite > correct: #80258 From: Dieter Möller Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 2:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? moellerdieter Hi , for consideration from the Maha Pari Nibbana Sutta in respect to pain: 28. But when the Blessed One had entered upon the rainy season, there arose in him a severe illness, and sharp and deadly pains came upon him. And the Blessed One endured them mindfully, clearly comprehending and unperturbed. 29. Then it occurred to the Blessed One: "It would not be fitting if I came to my final passing away without addressing those who attended on me, without taking leave of the community of bhikkhus. Then let me suppress this illness by strength of will, resolve to maintain the life process, and live on." 30. And the Blessed One suppressed the illness by strength of will, resolved to maintain the life process, and lived on. So it came about that the Blessed One's illness was allayed. ...... Now I am frail, Ananda, old, aged, far gone in years. This is my eightieth year, and my life is spent. Even as an old cart, Ananda, is held together with much difficulty, so the body of the Tathagata is kept going only with supports. It is, Ananda, only when the Tathagata, disregarding external objects, with the cessation of certain feelings, attains to and abides in the signless concentration of mind, that his body is more comfortable with Metta Dieter #80259 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 3:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina et sarahprocter... Hi James (& Nina), Of course, no hard feelings at all. Mild compared to the old days:-). Kind of you to write this note all the same. I appreciate it. Just rather busy at the moment, but will get back to you and others. Btw, you and Nina'll be interested to hear that we get on the school bus again today after a swim with my mother at Big Wave Bay. (Yes, Nina, she's like us and prefers swimming to shopping or sight-seeing!). Anyway, Owen promptly invited me to sit next to him again and asked if he could listen again 'to the talking'!! (Yes, James, a request for more 'brain-washing', lol!) Unfortunately, I didn't have my i-pod with me today and he was most disappointed. Anyway, I asked him what he remembered from last week's listening and chat. He said it had been about 'good and bad'. We discussed this a little and later (after playing a 'guess the animal' game), played a 'good and bad' game. We'd take it in turns to ask the other whether certain kinds of behaviour was good or bad. He could appreciate that being kind to the baby was good, getting angry was bad, doing what his mother requested, being polite and so on was good. I'll have to remember my i-pod again next time for some serious 'brain-washing':-). Metta, Sarah --- buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > I really must apologize for the tone of this post. It is not polite in > some areas and I really regret that. You are a dear and kind friend to > me and I don't want to come across as mean- even when I don't agree > with your viewpoint. No hard feelings! :-) #80260 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Reminder for Us Clingers-to-Views upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Alex) - In a message dated 12/18/2007 4:16:44 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard (and Alex), I'd like to clear up a bit of confusion. On this occasion I was not arguing. I was looking for a way of explaining the meaning of "absolute" in the context of Abhidhamma. Alex seemed to think only nibbana could be absolute. Maybe you can help him with this. Ken H ============================ I think this is just a language matter, Ken, not one of any substance. I suspect that Alex agrees that warmth is warmth and sights are sights independent of point of view, and in that sense they are absolute, and not relative. Their nature isn't relative to opinion. On the other hand, they, and all thiongs other than nibbana, are dependent on conditions, and in that sense they are relative, and not absolute. With metta, Howard #80261 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 6:26 am Subject: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 7, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 7 The Understanding of the four noble Truths Attachment, lobha, and aversion, dosa, frequently arise in our daily life. We know in theory that they are dhammas, non-self, but when they arise, do we realize them as only nåma elements? We notice it when we have dosa but we think about "our dosa" or name it dosa, instead of realizing it as a nåma element. Lobha and dosa are cetasikas accompanying akusala citta. In theory we know that citta is different from cetasika. Citta experiences an object, it is the chief in knowing the object, and the accompanying cetasikas that share the same object have each their own characteristic and function. Lobha and dosa are different cetasikas. We can begin to be aware of them when they appear, but only when paññå has been developed to the stage of insight knowledge can it clearly see lobha and dosa as nåma elements devoid of self. At this moment we still confuse the characteristic of nåma such as seeing with rúpa such as visible object, and thus, we are bound to take them for self. It is necessary to listen to the Dhamma and consider it over and over again, otherwise there is no foundation for right awareness of nåma and rúpa. This should not discourage us, we can continue to study with awareness any kind of reality that appears. This kind of study is the beginning of understanding the characteristics of realities. Acharn Sujin said: "Intellectual understanding is not enough, it is only thinking about realities. But knowing this is in itself a condition for right awareness. Awareness can arise very naturally. We touch many things in a day without awareness. When there is a moment of right understanding, there is sati, samådhi (concentration or one- pointedness) and effort, and there is no need to think, "I should try more." There is effort already. The understanding of non-self will grow. Nobody can condition anything, even a reality such as sound. Sound arises when there are conditions for it. Who can do anything? There are conditions for each reality." Effort, viriya, is a cetasika arising with many cittas, it can accompany akusala citta and kusala citta. Thus, when there is mindfulness of a nåma or rúpa, effort, viriya, accompanies the kusala citta. With regard to concentration, samådhi, this is a cetasika that accompanies each citta, thus also the kusala citta with mindfulness. We should not try to focus on one particular dhamma, then there is a concept of self who selects an object of mindfulness and that is a hindrance to the development of paññå. ****** Nina. #80262 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 6:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina et nilovg Dear Sarah, This is again a wonderful report on your starkid. I appreciate it very much. You are swimming and we are shivering (heating is not so good), but in Canada more so, I understand. Nina. Op 18-dec-2007, om 12:27 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Anyway, I asked him what he remembered from last week's > listening and chat. He said it had been about 'good and bad'. We > discussed > this a little and later (after playing a 'guess the animal' game), > played > a 'good and bad' game. We'd take it in turns to ask the other whether > certain kinds of behaviour was good or bad. #80263 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 6:32 am Subject: Perfections Corner (57) nichiconn Dear All, http://www.zolag.co.uk/ - The Perfections Leading to Enlightenment by Sujin Boriharnwanaket; translated by Nina van Gorkom. Chapter 8: The Perfection of Determination. continued... We read in the Commentary to the "Basket of Conduct" that the Bodhisatta needed to have a strong wish, a strong yearning, to become the Sammaasambuddha. We read in the "Miscellaneous Sayings": "Strong desire (chandataa): wholesome desire, the wish for accomplishment. One possessed of the aforesaid qualities must have strong desire, yearning, and longing to practise the qualities issuing in Buddhahood. Only then does his aspiration succeed, not otherwise. The following similes illustrate the magnitude of the desire required. If he were to hear: 'He alone can attain Buddhahood who can cross a whole world-system filled with water and reach the further shore by the bare strength of his arms' --he would not deem that difficult to do, but would be filled with desire for the task and would not shrink away. If he were to hear: 'He alone can attain Buddhahood who can tread across a whole world-system filled with flameless, smokeless redhot coals, cross out, and reach the other side,' he would not deem that difficult to do..." He does not become disheartened, he does not show the slightest dislike when he hears, "He alone can attain Buddhahood who can cross a whole world-system filled with water and reach the further shore by the bare strength of his arms". He is filled with joy and has endeavour to attain Buddhahood. We read: "If he were to hear: 'He alone can attain Buddhahood who can cut through a whole world-system that has become a jungle of thorny creepers covered by a solid thicket of bamboo, cross out, and reach the other side,' etc .... If he were to hear: 'Buddhahood can only be attained after being tortured in hell for four incalculables and a 100,000 aeons' --he would not deem that difficult to do, but would be filled with desire for the task and would not shrink away. Such is the magnitude of the desire required." The Bodhisatta thought that he could achieve this, but his determination was not yet firm enough; he had to continue accumulating keen and refined pa~n~naa so that his noble qualities could reach accomplishment. When he had visited the Sammaa-sambuddha and his noble qualities were accomplished to the degree of being able to make the determination to attain Buddhahood, he could begin to resolve upon the accumulation of the perfections. ..to be continued, connie #80264 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 6:34 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (72) nichiconn Dear Friends, Part 6 15. Cattaaliisanipaato 1. Isidaasiitheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 425. "Sopi vasitvaa pakkha.m, atha taata.m bha.nati 'dehi me po.t.thi.m; gha.tika~nca mallaka~nca, punapi bhikkha.m carissaami'. 426. "Atha na.m bha.natii taato, ammaa sabbo ca me ~naatiga.navaggo; ki.m te na kiirati idha, bha.na khippa.m ta.m te karihiti. 427. "Eva.m bha.nito bha.nati, yadi me attaa sakkoti ala.m mayha.m; isidaasiyaa na saha vaccha.m, ekaghareha.m saha vatthu.m. 428. "Vissajjito gato so, ahampi ekaakinii vicintemi; aapucchituuna gaccha.m, marituye vaa pabbajissa.m vaa. 429. "Atha ayyaa jinadattaa, aagacchii gocaraaya caramaanaa; taata kula.m vinayadharii, bahussutaa siilasampannaa. 423. He too, having lived [with me] for a fortnight, then said to my father, "Give me my cloth and bowl and cup. I will wander for alms again." 424. Then my father, mother, and all the group of my relatives said to him, "What has not been done for you here? Tell [us] quickly. She will do that for you." 425. Spoken to in this way, he said, "If I were able to [support] myself, I would have no use for Isidaasii. I will not live together [with her], living in the same house." 426. Allowed to go, he departed. I for my part, all alone, thought, "I shall ask leave to go to die, or I shall go forth [as a wanderer]." 427. Then the noble lady Jinadattaa, expert in the Discipline, with great learning, possessed of virtuous conduct, came to my father's house when wandering for food. RD: He came, and so we dwelt one half moon more Together. Then to father thus he spake: 'O give me back my frock, my bowl and cup. Let me away to seek once more my scraps.' (423) Then to him father, mother, all the tribe Of kinsfolk clamouring: 'What is it then Here dwelling likes you not? Say quick, what is't That we can do to make you better pleased?' (424) Then he: 'If for myself I can suffice, Enough for me. One thing I know: - beneath One roof with Isidaasii I'll not live!' (425) Dismissed he went. I too, alone I thought. And then I asked my parents' leave to die, Or, that they suffer me to leave the world. (426) Now Lady Jinadattaa on her beat Came by my father's house for daily alms, Mindful of every moral precept, she, Learne'd and expert in the Vinaya. *403 (427) *403 Vinayadharaa, who could repeat the Vinaya-Pitaka. This proficiency was Pa.taacaaraa's to a special degree. See Ps. xlvii.; Ang. Nik., i. 25. to be continued, connie. #80265 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 6:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] paramattha dhamma, wasSutta vs Abhidhamma nilovg Hi Alex, Op 17-dec-2007, om 21:48 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > In MN#1, #18 and other suttas, the Buddha tellss that ALL perceptions > are conditioned, impermanent, inconstant and should NOT be clung to. > Nor should they be built into elaborate systems of relations. > > A reality is a set of perceptions + mental inferences, which are of > course relative and inconstant. This would make them Dukkha and > Anatta. -------- N: The best way to understand what paramattha dhammas are is attending to what appears now. The word paramattha is not so important, but we should find out: what are the realities this term represents. Sarah also reminded you of realities, but I say it again: you are reading now, but there is also seeing, the experience of what appears through eyesense. It is after seeing that you define letters and sentences and the meaning. Seeing of a human or of a dog is the same: just seeing. We may give seeing another name, but the reality does not change. That is what is meant by paramattha dhamma. You can also use the word dhamma. Seeing does not belong to anyone, it is just dhamma, a conditioned reality. Nina #80266 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 8:36 am Subject: [dsg] Re: A Reminder for Us Clingers-to-Views truth_aerator Dear Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > I'm not sure if my post was amazingly arrogant, but I am sure it was no more so my usual posts. :-) The point I always try to make is that the Buddha's Dhamma is totally unlike any other teaching. If someone >>> Exactly! To the point. Most if not all sciences can be studied from the book: math, physics (especially the theoretical kind), statistics. Buddha Dhamma goes much, much deeper. The depth goes beyond ordinary consciousness. > thinks he can see a conventional run-of-the-mill meaning in the > Dhamma then that someone, whoever he or she is, should look again. > The Dhamma is always about satipatthana. And satipatthana means right understanding of the present, fleeting (momentary), conditioned, absolute reality. >>> Right understanding is augmented by the N8P, especially 7th & 8th factors. > > > No, but I think you are. Nina describes the Dhamma as a way of > understanding the present reality. You, on the other hand, always > insist it is a list of things to be done in order to bring about some kind of future happiness or enlightenment. >>>. The truth is to 'be realized' rather than simply speculated on. > --------------- A paramattha dhamma does not owe its characteristics to the opinions > of an observer. Its characteristics are not "relative" to those > opinions. This is unlike conventional reality, in which 'one man's > meat can be another man's poison' etc. >>> If that is so, then WE DO NOT PERCIEVED PARAMATTHA DHAMMAS. If we do not percieve them, then it can't be 'reality', much less 'An ultimate reality'. In order to emperically be percieved, it must go through rise, change & fall. These three remove an sort of absolute reality. IF everything is ANICCA, DUKKHA, ANATTA - then NOTHING can be ULTIMATE. Period. Lots of Metta, Alex #80267 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 8:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] paramattha dhamma, wasSutta vs Abhidhamma truth_aerator Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Alex, Nina. I am not arguing (I totall support) that there is a DO process of seeing, DO process of mentally labeling, etc. What I DO disagree with is giving ANY THING an "absolute" existence. Since every thing is inconstant, it is unsatisfying, and ANATTA. Anatta doesn't just cover the Self, it coves ALL 'external' phenomenon as well. Paramattha is just another word for ATTA which I disagree with. Lots of Metta, Alex #80268 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 4:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? TGrand458@... Hi James I guess we'll just have to disagree about whether physical pain is Dukkha or not. (I notice you did not address Nyanatiloka's Dictionary comments about bodily pain as part of his definition of Dukkha.) I'm also not sure how you have come to a conclusion that physical pain is excluded from Dukkha. I have found no evidence of that in the Suttas or otherwise. My understanding is that any kind of pain whatsoever is included in Dukkha. But I agree with you (I think) in that Anicca is Dukkha only as it pertains to a consciousness subject to attachment. TG #80269 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 10:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 3. dcwijeratna Hello Andrew, Thank you very much for reading my post carefully. You wrote: "I think your approach to the Dhamma may come as somewhat of a shock to many here. Firstly, your contextual interpretation of the suttas seems to produce a result at odds with the likes of Bhikkhu Bodhi's English translations." DC: I agree with your observation above. I can shock you little more: My understanding of the Dhamma, really the teaching of the Buddha is at odds with not only that of Bhikkhu Bodhi, but, in general, with the Western i:nterpretation of the teaching of the Buddha. I want to stress the fact that I am not talking of "Buddhism," the religion practised by the Buddhists, whether they be Theravaadins or Mahaayaanist. I am talking about the teaching of the Buddha. I am a traditional Buddhist; what it means is: my forefathers for over 2300 years were followers of the Buddha, the Dhamma and Sangha. The Pali term for a lay disciple is 'upaasaka'; it is the same in my own language Sinhala. We learn Dhamma not by reading the Pali canon, but we learn it from our elders and the Bhikkhus. We never argue about conepts like anatta or kamma (action) and vipaaka (fruits of kamma, consequenes or results in English). They are facts of life for us; we see them and know them. For us the Buddha is the teacher. The Buddha was not a god or God. We don't believe; we don't have faith. Those are meaningless terms in relation to our behaviour, as far as we are concerned. We behave on the basis of knowledge: not on the basis of the unknown and the unknowable. This "interpretation" business started with the translation of Buddhist texts to Western languages; especially to English. The original translators were philologists, Indologists and so on. Since they could not understand a word of the teaching of the Buddha, they gave their own interpretations to the texts. And it became a fashion for each person to have his own interpretation and keep on arguing about it endlessly. Just look at the number of words wasted here alone. Interpretation is a form of communication: a piece of text--originally spoken, now wriiten, a medium--language for our purposes, and a reader or listener--for verbal communication. Here is an excerpt from a book which explains the process beautifully: "By definition communication via language is a process of relating between persons dependent on a reader/hearer who, upon reading hearing a given word or group of words, grasps the 'same meaning as the writer/speaker had in mind in using those words." Please note the words "SAME MEANING". "The sender and the receiver (author and reader; speaker and listener), as individuals, have differing backgrounds, environments, peer-groups, political affiliations, problems, loyalties, loves etc., all of which profoundly affect his use of words and the mental associations he entertains on hearing certain terms." And when the gap is 2500 years, communication is (almost) impossible. Now I have written quite a lot for the day. I'll send my observations progressively. No hurry, "Khantii parama.m tapo titikkhaa". (Ovaada paatimokkha). Now I am a follower of the Buddha!!! That is from Dhammapada, it is the stanza that follows "sabba paapassa akarana.m, kusalassa upasampadaa, sacitta pariyodapana.m, eta.m Buddhaanasaasana.m" This is all the Dhamma we we will ever need, until we reach nibbaana. For twenty years, this was the daily advice of the BUDDHA to the MONKS unitl the vinaya rules were declared. Now from a different perspective, only dhamma that you need to understand is the Four Noble Truths as given in the Dhammacakkappavattana sutta. Well one question. What is your definition of 'understanding?' With kind regards, DC #80270 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 11:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] paramattha dhamma, wasSutta vs Abhidhamma nilovg Hi Alex, Op 18-dec-2007, om 17:42 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > I am not arguing (I totall support) that there is a DO process > of seeing, DO process of mentally labeling, etc. > > What I DO disagree with is giving ANY THING an "absolute" existence. > Since every thing is inconstant, it is unsatisfying, and ANATTA. > > Anatta doesn't just cover the Self, it coves ALL 'external' > phenomenon as well. Paramattha is just another word for ATTA which > I disagree with. --------- N: On the contrary, right understanding of the paramattha dhammas of our life which are so ephemeral, so insignificant, helps us to break down the idea of persons who exist. One can begin to see the difference between clinging to concepts of people one finds so important, and understanding of mere dhammas, which are like foam, just empty. If you stumble over the word absolute reality, this is not necessary. It only indicates that paramattha dhamma is real in a sense different from the 'worldly sense'. A correct understanding of what paramattha dhamma is brings you to anattaa. Nina. #80271 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 11:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? nilovg Hi James, Op 18-dec-2007, om 2:47 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > However, anicca isn't synonymous > with dukkha. Dukkha only occurs with clinging (as the Buddha taught > in the Second Noble Truth), if there is no clinging there is no > dukkha- even though anicca will continue. ------- N: As to the second noble truth, you are right, that is the cause of dukkha. If there is no more clinging there will not be anymore the dukkha of the arising of nama and rupa at rebirth. This is the way I see it, but I have not understood it in full. The four noble truths are rpofound and difficult to see, as the Co. the Dispeller of Delusion, states. All these posts now prove that dukkha is difficult to understand in all aspects. Nina. #80272 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 11:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Reminder for Us Clingers-to-Views nilovg Hi Howard, As to your post to me the other day (in my answer I quoted from Survey), Lodewijk said that he feels the same as you, about anatta, not preventing to lead daily life. He appreciated your post. Nina. Op 18-dec-2007, om 2:58 heeft kenhowardau het volgende geschreven: > In the absence of > self-view a person can still go about daily life quite happily and > sanely. #80273 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 11:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidamma Vs Sutta. nilovg Dear Asanka, It is good you emphasize here that one should have a great understanding of paramattha dhammas. Just reading is not enough. Some people fall over the English translations of ultimate reality or absolute reality, but when one has a beginning understanding of the paramattha dhamma of this moment, we do not mind any terms. Lobha, dosa, they are real for everybody, no matter what nationality one is. They are paramattha dhammas. Nina. Op 18-dec-2007, om 5:08 heeft Undiyaralale Karunarathne het volgende geschreven: > If Buddha does not taught paramartha and we suppose some body else > has generated those things. The think about his brain power. But > you have to have a great understanding of paramaratha, #80274 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 2:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] paramattha dhamma, wasSutta vs Abhidhamma truth_aerator Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > --------- > N: On the contrary, right understanding of the paramattha dhammas of our life which are so ephemeral, so insignificant, helps us to break down the idea of persons who exist. >>> Are you refering to Paramattha dhammas being "ephemeral, so insignificant" ? 2nd) We aren't arguing anatta. > One can begin to see the difference between clinging to concepts of people one finds so important, and understanding of mere dhammas, > which are like foam, just empty. >>> I agree that we shouldn't cling to concepts and I do agree that we must see the conditionality. > A correct understanding of what paramattha dhamma is brings you to > anattaa. > Nina. > More accurately would be to say: A correct understanding of ANICCA + DUKHA = Anatta. Lots of Metta, Alex #80275 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 4:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? buddhatrue Hi TG, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > > > Hi James > > I guess we'll just have to disagree about whether physical pain is Dukkha or > not. (I notice you did not address Nyanatiloka's Dictionary comments about > bodily pain as part of his definition of Dukkha.) James: Sorry, I thought I did. Physical pain is dukkha for the worldling but not for the arahant. For the worldling, physical pain automatically results in aversion so it can be classified as dukkha. I'm also not sure how you > have come to a conclusion that physical pain is excluded from Dukkha. I have > found no evidence of that in the Suttas or otherwise. James: Now TG, I already gave a sutta quote which explains it beautifully. Okay, I will give it again: "Sensing a feeling of pleasure, he senses it disjoined from it. Sensing a feeling of pain, he senses it disjoined from it. Sensing a feeling of neither-pleasure-nor-pain, he senses it disjoined from it. This is called a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones disjoined from birth, aging, & death; from sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs. He is disjoined, I tell you, from suffering & stress. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn36/sn36.006.than.html And here is another one: "When I dwell with my mind well-established in the four frames of reference, the pains that have arisen in the body do not invade or remain in the mind. Which four? There is the case where I remain focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. I remain focused on feelings in & of themselves... mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. When I dwell with my mind well-established in these four frames of reference, the pains that have arisen in the body do not invade or remain in the mind." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn52/sn52.010.than.html And here is another one: "When an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is touched by a painful bodily feeling, he sorrows, grieves, & laments, beats his breast, becomes distraught. This is called an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person who has not risen up out of the bottomless chasm, who has not gained a foothold. "When a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones is touched by a painful bodily feeling, he does not sorrow, grieve, or lament, does not beat his breast or become distraught. This is called a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones who has risen up out of the bottomless chasm, whose foothold is gained." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn36/sn36.004.than.html And here is another one: I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Rajagaha at the Maddakucchi Deer Reserve. Now at that time his foot had been pierced by a stone sliver. Excruciating were the bodily feelings that developed within him — painful, fierce, sharp, wracking, repellent, disagreeable — but he endured them mindful, alert, & unperturbed. Having had his outer robe folded in four and laid out, he lay down on his right side in the lion's posture, with one foot placed on top of the other, mindful & alert http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn01/sn01.038.than.html > > My understanding is that any kind of pain whatsoever is included in Dukkha. James: Okay, I don't think I can say anymore. I am simply repeating myself. > > But I agree with you (I think) in that Anicca is Dukkha only as it pertains > to a consciousness subject to attachment. James: Good we agree on this. :-) Metta, James #80276 From: "mattroke" Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 6:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?þ mattroke Dear All, I hope you don't mind me giving my thoughts on this matter and my apologies if I am repeating what someone else has already said – I tried to read all the posts, but may have missed some. Prior to enlightenment, I do not think we have any understanding of Annica, Dukkha or Anatta. If we know one we know the three and we would already be enlightened. Anicca and Dukkha are different. Annica is the impermanent nature of dhammas, which can only be known when there is wisdom that has insight into the true nature of a dhamma. Dukkha, when there is insight, is not the unpleasant experiences we have in our daily life, but the understanding that dhammas that do not last can never be satisfactory. It does not have to be an unpleasant experience, it can be a pleasant experience too. All dhammas are dukkha because they are impermanent and do not last. That is why when we have insight into the true nature of what we call life, it is seen as being dukkha. Matt #80277 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 1:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? TGrand458@... Hi James All of you quotes merely stress that there is no mental suffering as a result of physical suffering. Therefore, IMO, they don't prove your point at all. Why would an arahant feel a "single dart" as opposed to "two darts" when physical pain arises? A "dart" is one of the ways the Buddha defines Dukkha. This type of quote you reference proves my point and argues against yours IMO... And here is another one: I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Rajagaha at the Maddakucchi Deer Reserve. Now at that time his foot had been pierced by a stone sliver. Excruciating were the bodily feelings that developed within him — painful, fierce, sharp, wracking, repellent, disagreeable — but he endured them mindful, alert, & unperturbed. Having had his outer robe folded in four and laid out, he lay down on his right side in the lion's posture, with one foot placed on top of the other, mindful & alert The Buddha was able to endure excruciating painful feelings mindful and alert. So he had the "one dart" of the painful feelings. But he did not have the "second dart" of mental disturbance due to the pain. The pain is experinced due to past Kamma. But, it is experienced and it is pain. The only way there is no Dukkha in that case would be if the experience of pain did not arise. Anyway, that's my take on your Sutta references and I think it is well backed up by other Suttas and incidences within the Suttas. Arahants still feel pain due to past kamma, until they pass away ... and pain is one type of Dukkha. At any rate, this issue is not worth being bogged down over. TG #80278 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 8:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? buddhatrue Hi TG, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > > Hi James > > All of you quotes merely stress that there is no mental suffering as a > result of physical suffering. Therefore, IMO, they don't prove your point at all. > > Why would an arahant feel a "single dart" as opposed to "two darts" when > physical pain arises? A "dart" is one of the ways the Buddha defines Dukkha. James: The Buddha never defines physical pain alone (without accompanied mental pain) as dukkha. > > This type of quote you reference proves my point and argues against yours > IMO... > > And here is another one: > I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near > Rajagaha at the Maddakucchi Deer Reserve. Now at that time his foot > had been pierced by a stone sliver. Excruciating were the bodily > feelings that developed within him â€" painful, fierce, sharp, wracking, > repellent, disagreeable â€" but he endured them mindful, alert, & > unperturbed. Having had his outer robe folded in four and laid out, he > lay down on his right side in the lion's posture, with one foot placed > on top of the other, mindful & alert > > The Buddha was able to endure excruciating painful feelings mindful and > alert. So he had the "one dart" of the painful feelings. But he did not have > the "second dart" of mental disturbance due to the pain. The pain is > experinced due to past Kamma. But, it is experienced and it is pain. The only way > there is no Dukkha in that case would be if the experience of pain did not > arise. James: Oh heck, I don't mind if we keep hammering away at this thing. It is a worthwhile subject. It seems to me that you take the body as being self. In other words, if the body of an arahant feels pain then the "arahant" feels pain and that is dukkha. However, the arahant doesn't take the body as being self, he doesn't take feelings, or mental fabrications, or consciousness as being self either. Therefore, if the body of an arahant feels physical pain, it doesn't become mental pain. And TG, you yourself wrote: "But I agree with you (I think) in that Anicca is Dukkha only as it pertains to a consciousness subject to attachment." So, if you agree that dukkha is only registered by a consciousness subject to attachement, and the arahant feels no mental pain at anytime whatsoever, then the arahant doesn't experience dukkha. The Buddha spelled it out very clearly: "This is called a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones disjoined from birth, aging, & death; from sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs. He is disjoined, I tell you, from suffering & stress." So, the arahant is "disjoined" from dukkha- dukkha of any sort. And the arahant is still alive but still doesn't experience any type of dukkha. Again, physical pain, without mental pain, isn't dukkha- it is just another sensation. (BTW, the arahant doesn't feel mental pleasure from physical pleasure either- so sex for an arahant would be out of the question.) Metta, James #80279 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina et sarahprocter... Hi James, --- buddhatrue wrote: > >S: 1) There are 3 meanings of dukkha. Here you are referring to dukkha > > dukkha, the obvious dukkha that everyone understands when there is > > unpleasant feeling. > > > > The second meaning refers to viparinama dukkha, the changing > nature of > > what is pleasant. The third meaning refers to the characteristic > of all > > conditioned dhammas - dukkha on account of their being > impermanent. This > > is the deepest sense which only the understanding of the 8fold > Path can > > really know. .... > James: Yes, I am aware of different types of dukkha. I just gave > you one example. Is that not sufficient for you? .... S: Not sufficient if we wish to understand the deeper meaning of dukkha as a characteristic of all conditioned dhammas. This is the suffering/unsatisfactoriness of formations (sa.nkhaaradukkhataa), on account of continuously rising and falling. As we read in the suttas, all 3 kinds of dukkha have to be understood: "Bhikkhus, there are these three kinds of suffering. What three? Suffering due to pain, suffering due to formations, suffering due to change. These are the three kinds of suffering. The Noble Eightfold Path is to be developed for direct knowledge of these three kinds of suffering, for the full understanding of them, for their utter destruction, for their abandoning." SN:45:165(5)'Suffering' (Bodhi transl) [S: Note, the last two kinds of dukkha were reversed in my comments above] .... > 1. dukkha as pain (dukkha-dukkhata) > > 2. dukkha that is inherent in formation (sankhara-dukkhata) > > 3. dukkha of change (viparinama-dukkhata) .... S: Yes. Here is a note Jon gave before of the explanatory note BB gives in CMA, summarising the detail given in the Visuddhimagga: "- suffering due to pain (dukkhadukkhataa) is painful bodily and mental suffering; - suffering due to formations (sa.nkhaaradukkhataa) is all conditioned phenomena of the three planes, because they are oppressed by rise and fall; - suffering due to change (viparinaamadukkhataa) is pleasant feeling, which brings suffering when it comes to an end." ..... >>S: Well, if by 'sufferer' or 'James' you are just > > referring to impermanent conditioned dhammas (sankhara) and > nothing else, > > then we're all agreed. > > James: That would be nice, but for some reason Im not convinced. > You seem to believe that sankhara don't exist. Are you now saying > that sankhara exist? ... S: I've never suggested or hinted that sankhara (dhammas) don't exist, James! Seeing now is a sankhara dhamma. Visible object appearing is a sankhara dhamma. So is hearing, sound, feeling, perception, like, dislike.... All conditioned dhammas are sankhara dhammas. Of course they exist! I'll be glad to see any comment I've ever given which has led you to your conclusion above. .... >James is a sankhara punja. .... S: What does this mean? Metta, Sarah ========== #80280 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dukkha: From the PTS Pali-English Dictionary sarahprocter... Hi Howard & all, --- upasaka@... wrote: > The following is the lead-in to the Pali Text Society's dictionary > entry, a reasonably reliable source, I'd say. It sure sounds > experiential to me! ... S: Somehow the entry seemed to stress the meaning of 'suffering due to pain'. Again, pls note the other meanings below followed by the quote Jon gave before: "Bhikkhus, there are these three kinds of suffering. What three? Suffering due to pain, suffering due to formations, suffering due to change. These are the three kinds of suffering. The Noble Eightfold Path is to be developed for direct knowledge of these three kinds of suffering, for the full understanding of them, for their utter destruction, for their abandoning." SN: 45:165(5)'Suffering' (Bodhi transl). Jon: "In a footnote, Bhikkhu Bodhi summarises the Visuddhi-Magga elaboration on these 3 kinds of suffering as follows: - suffering due to pain (dukkhadukkhataa) is painful bodily and mental suffering; - suffering due to formations (sa.nkhaaradukkhataa) is all conditioned phenomena of the three planes, because they are oppressed by rise and fall; - suffering due to change (viparinaamadukkhataa) is pleasant feeling, which brings suffering when it comes to an end." ***** S: With regard to "all conditioned phenomena of the three planes, because they are oppressed by rise and fall", this is regardless of whether they are experienced or not. All sankhara dhammas are dukkha. However, of course when it comes to the 4 Noble Truths, that which is not experienced is not an object of attachment, so the Truths refer to what can be known, to what is experienced, the 'All'. Metta, Sarah ======== #80281 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (5) sarahprocter... Dear Han, I know you are about to go on your trip, so briefly here: --- han tun wrote: > Han: No, I don’t think that the practice would be any > better in different circumstances. So, if I feel like > following what the pre-war elders did, I follow that. > If I feel like following the present day practice I > follow that. The main purpose for me is to get my > inner satisfaction. I would not mind if my inner > satisfaction is accompanied by right understanding or > not. .... S: Sometime I'd be interested to hear what you consider to be your 'inner satisfaction' then. .... > Han: I have no specific preference to live in any > particular environment. It won’t make any difference, > because, as I have said before, I am not > result-oriented. I am action-oriented. I will try to > do meritorious deeds to the best of my ability and > will leave the result to my kamma. .... S: This is a good approach which I appreciate. Can the development of understanding also be considered as 'action-oriented' and a 'meritorious deed'? Perhaps the greatest meritorious deed!:-) I'm sure you'll have many opportunities for meritorious deeds of all kinds on your trip. Anumodana in advance for this to you and your wife. Metta, Sarah ======= #80282 From: "Sukinder" Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma sukinderpal Hi Howard, (*James and others), =========== Sukin: But when I read your statement about "decay is no problem in and of itself" I had exactly the same reaction as Nina. I thought, "Why must it be a matter of either a problem or not a problem?" ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Sukin, that's ordinary, informal English. The point is that decay is a mere fact, except as grasping makes it otherwise. In and of itself, decay is perfectly neutral. It is just as it is. It is merely "such". Suk: Yes, that is what I understood you to be saying. However there seemed also to be some unnecessary idea projected. From my perspective being "merely such" applies equally and in the same way to all three characteristics. In other words they are all what they are without having to relate to experience. To you apparently, this applies to Anicca and Anatta, but not to Dukkha. For Dukkha to be "merely such" you see the need to factor tanha /experience otherwise you think that it is meaningless. ========================= Sukin: If you consider Dukkha only in relation to 'experience' but admit at the same time that this is a universal / constant thing, why can't a conclusion be drawn that this is due to some objective 'fact' regardless of any experience? --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Dukkha, as it applies to conditioned dhammas, is the fact of being among the conditions for dissatisfaction. Without tanha, they are insufficient for dissatisfaction to arise. Their serving as conditions for dissatisfaction and not as conditions for lasting satisfaction is a fact, and it is what constitutes their being dukkha (unsatisfactory/"not good"). They all have that characteristic of unsatisfactoriness, and I do not claim otherwise. But their having it is in relation to experience and not independent of it. That is my sole point. Suk: Here you explain your reason to factor tanha / experience in. I saw also that you cited the PTS dictionary meaning, and there among other explanations Dukkha is contrasted with sukkha. I think we can get some idea of what Dukkha means from this kind of comparison; however I think there is also some danger of misunderstanding. Consider someone whose understanding of sukkha is limited by the experience of "my" pleasant feelings and happiness. Would not his understanding of Dukkha be limited by this? He has no idea about the sukkha accompanying the experience of Nibbana, hence no mind to consider that while this is related to the "unconditioned", his own experience is `conditioned' and bound by this fact. An Ariyan's understanding of Dukkha as you know is closely tied to his overall understanding of conditionality. You said, "Their serving as conditions for dissatisfaction and not as conditions for lasting satisfaction is a fact, and it is what constitutes their being dukkha (unsatisfactory/"not good")". Here it seems that your focus is on how one experiences it, but why not instead consider that what is being experienced, *that* might be the characteristic of Dukkha? What according to you is the object of the citta at the time from whence you conclude that it is "unsatisfactory"? Also the question arises; does an Arahat insight only two of the three general characteristics, after all he no more has Tanha? ======================== Sukin: And if they are *all* dependent on experience, then you must also view Anicca as being more or less subjective, but I'm sure that you do not have any problem wrapping your mind around this as being objective? ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: I never said they are all dependent on experience! Please be more careful. Suk: Yes, and I did say that you had no problem seeing Anicca as being objective. But of course I was questioning your reason to factor experience in the case of Dukkha while not doing so for the other two characteristics. ===================== Sukin: So perhaps the difficulty with Dukkha is more to do with our inability to grasp it intellectually? --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not having a "difficulty" with dukkha ... except in the sense, of course, that my personal dukkhata (suffering) is alive and well and will remain so for ages! LOL! Suk: Yes, that I have difficulty does not mean that you would too. ===================== Sukin: I've found myself sometimes thinking about this, that Anicca and Anatta is easier to understand at the level of Suttamaya and Cintamaya panna, but the fact of Dukkha has never struck me as these have. What do you think? --------------------------------------------------- Howard: LOL! I think that I don't know that Pali. ;-)) What I can say is the following: 1) All three are clearly interrelated in multiple ways. 2) Anatta is the deepest of the three and the hardest to understand. 3) Anicca is the easiest to understand, though delusively so, for we typically miss radical, momentary impermanence, and that aspect of anicca is closely tied in with the other two lakkhana. 4) Dukkha is subtle, and one is easily confused in thinking that things that are pleasant are not dukkha, but, of course, they *are*, because any satisfaction derived from them is misplaced, absurdly superficial, and also radically non-lasting due to the uncontrollability of change, boredom, and desire for "more and better". Most of all, the greatest possible happiness attainable from conditioned dhammas is junk compared to the perfect happiness of the awakened state the Buddha has taught. (Nibbana.m parama.m sukha.m: Dh 203) Suk: Allow me to say something from experience, though this involves no more than suttamaya panna (understanding of the level of hearing) and cintamaya panna (understanding of the level of contemplation at the experience of signs). Sometimes there is noticing of `thinking' / thought being formed, immediately following some sense door experience. There is understanding of the relationship between the two processes and with this also of the "uncontrollability" of citta arisen to perform its function. Here Anatta is understood to some extent. On one particular occasion there was what seemed like `pain' falling away before another citta with another object arose. No insight for sure, but that was the best impression I got of the fact of "impermanence". On another occasion' during discussions when A. Sujin pointed out as she often does, the fact of `seeing' arising now, I experienced the momentariness of `seeing' and saw the difference between this and the `thinking' immediately following. This time the impression was not only the fact of impermanence, but also that the `Path' is about `present moment realities' which always appear regardless of activity and situation. I am telling you this because it seems that for me, Anatta is more common, Anicca not so, but Dukkha I can only consider at the level of suttamaya panna and in terms of conventional reality. But then again, there have been a few times while contemplating the other two characteristics, I am lead to conclude that the practice (satipatthana) is about coming to better and better know Dukkha and I'm reminded of the Buddha's statement about his Dhamma being all about "Dukkha and the end of Dukkha". ;-) *At one level I agree with James and others when they point out that too much Anatta is being stressed here and too little of Anicca and Dukkha. Of course it can never be enough to stress Anatta since `self view' is our biggest problem and the only real hindrance with regard to our attempt at understanding all aspects the Dhamma, including Anicca and Dukkha. But yes, I think I would appreciate more reminders about these two facts of reality. ;-) Metta, Sukin #80283 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (5) To Sarah sarahprocter... Dear Han, --- han tun wrote: > Once again, I thank you very much for your kind posts. .... S: Likewise! ... > Han: You may be right to say that much of what is > taken for daana, siila and bhaavanaa may be different > kinds of 'practice' rather than true kusala cittas. > But who will know that? Who will be the judge? ... S: As you know, only pa~n~naa will know and be the judge:-) Of course, the kusala and akusala are changing all the time, regardless of the activity. .... >You > rightly said that without the development of > understanding of present dhammas, we'll never know. > But, again, how can one know that the right > understanding has been developed? Have you developed > the right understanding? .... S: :-) Again, it is only right understanding (pa~n~naa) which can know when there is right understanding and when there is wrong understanding. Again, it doesn't belong to me, you or anyone else. Just another fleeting dhamma, not worth clinging to. .... > Han: You have expressed yourself well. If I cannot > understand, it will be my fault. I have already > expressed my opinion as regards the preference between > pre-war practice and present-day practice in my last > post. .... S: Your comments have all been interesting and I like the stress about not minding about the situation we find ourselves in. I think the important thing is to appreciate that there are always sankhara dhammas, arising and falling away, not belonging to anyone at all. Gradually, they can be understood for what they are and very slowly there can be a relinquishing of taking them for belonging to anyone. At a moment of awareness, just a nama or a rupa appears, such as seeing or visible object. Nothing else at all. Very best wishes and please have a safe trip and a wonderful and wise family holiday time. Metta, Sarah ====== #80284 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 5:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? TGrand458@... Hi James In a message dated 12/18/2007 9:32:34 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: the arahant doesn't take the body as being self, he doesn't take feelings, or mental fabrications, or consciousness as being self either. Therefore, if the body of an arahant feels physical pain, it doesn't become mental pain. And TG, you yourself wrote: "But I agree with you (I think) in that Anicca is Dukkha only as it pertains to a consciousness subject to attachment." So, if you agree that dukkha is only registered by a consciousness subject to attachement, and the arahant feels no mental pain at anytime whatsoever, .................................................... TG: Up to here I agree with one disclaimer... the mental pain the Arahant has eliminated is only that which pertains to attachment. But the Arahant does experience physical pain...in the mind...and that is Dukkha. So I can't abide by your conclusion that follows later below. From your quote from the Parinibbana Sutta in a previous post... "Excruciating were the bodily feelings that developed within him — painful, fierce, sharp, wracking, repellent, disagreeable — but he endured them mindful, alert, & unperturbed." TG Again: Just what is it the Buddha would have had to "endure" if there was no pain/dukkha experienced? From your assertion, there would be nothing to endure. The Kammic residue produced prior to Arahantship is still capable of generating physical pain/dukkha until the death of the Arahant. The living Arahant has eliminated the vast majority of dukkha, but is still capable of experiencing pain, yet is unperturbed by such pain because the Arahant does not view the pain subjectively. I.E., it is just pain due to conditions...it is not "my pain." (Of course an Arahant would not have to go through that mental exercise as an Arahant has already mastered awareness of such.) A living Arahant is completely freed from Dukkha in the sense that the cycle of samsara is destroyed. But while alive, it is only the pain generated by attachment that is completely destroyed...which is most of it. I'm sorry, but none of your quotes are convincing to me; nor do they account for the Sutta that clearly discusses the "two darts." One physical, one mental....and that Sutta says that the Arahant has only eliminated the mental dart. I.E., the arahant does not "distress" over physical pain, yet the arahant feels it just the same. ............................................... then the arahant doesn't experience dukkha. The Buddha spelled it out very clearly: "This is called a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones disjoined from birth, aging, & death; from sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs. He is disjoined, I tell you, from suffering & stress." So, the arahant is "disjoined" from dukkha- dukkha of any sort. And the arahant is still alive but still doesn't experience any type of dukkha. ................................................................ TG: I think your conclusion overreaches the contents in the Sutta. Therefore, your preamble is also overreaching IMO. I can just as well say that -- the Buddha spelled it out clearly -- regarding "the two darts." ................................................................ Again, physical pain, without mental pain, isn't dukkha- it is just another sensation. . .................................................... TG: I just don't know what evidence you have to support this conclusion. (Of course, any sensation is experienced in the mind as well as the body.) The living arahant has only eliminated the dukkha associated with attachment. Residual dukkha of physical discomfort continues until death. BTW, this minor issue aside, I feel that your understanding and my understanding of Dhamma are very very close. It wouldn't bother me much if I were wrong on this particular issue, I just don't think so at this point because the gist of the Suttas don't lead me to think otherwise. I just hope I can find out from direct experience one of these days. TG OUT #80285 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 5:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dukkha: From the PTS Pali-English Dictionary TGrand458@... In a message dated 12/18/2007 10:44:26 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: "In a footnote, Bhikkhu Bodhi summarises the Visuddhi-Magga elaboration on these 3 kinds of suffering as follows: - suffering due to pain (dukkhadukkhataa) is painful bodily and mental suffering; - suffering due to formations (sa.nkhaaradukkhata- sufferi conditioned phenomena of the three planes, because they are oppressed by rise and fall; - suffering due to change (viparinaamadukkhat- suffering due feeling, which brings suffering when it comes to an end." Hi Sarah, All If I have a pleasant mental or physical feeling and it goes away, I don't really feel oppressed by suffering. Also, essentially the second and third "sufferings" are the same thing or highly related. Seems to me that especially #2 and #3 can be looked at a lot deeper than these definitions. Any comments? TG #80286 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 10:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: contemplation, was Perfections Corner (54) sarahprocter... Hi Robert A, --- Robert wrote: > Robert A: > My conclusion to all of this discussion is that to contemplate the > Dhamma is not to think about the Dhamma, but to observe, to see the > Dhamma as it appears now. ... S: I think you have made good points. I think that the word 'contemplate' in translations can and is misunderstood and it's good to ask for clarifications. Usually, as you suggest, it refers not to just thinking about the Dhamma, but to directly understanding or knowing what appears now. For example, sampaja~n~na is often translated as 'clear comprehension' as in Soma's translation of the Satipatthana Sutta and commentaries, you referred to. This is referring to the pa~n~naa wisdom in the development of satipatthana. "Sampajaano = "Clearly comprehending." Endowed with knowledge called circumspection [sampaja~n~na]. "Clearly comprehending - Discerning rightly, entirely and equally [sammaa samantato sama~nca pajaananto] "Rightly = Correctly [avipariitam] "Entirely = By knowing in all ways [sabbaakaarapajaanamena]. "Equally = By reason of proceeding through the conveying of higher and higher spiritual attainments [uparuupari visesaavaahabhaavena pavattiyaa]." ... S: Usually sampaja~n~na is used together with sati (awareness) as you know. There can be sati sampaja~n~na "in all circumstances". "Here, contemplation takes place by means of wisdom that is assisted by mindfulness." The 'comprehending' directly knows any naama or ruupa appearing. Glad to see all your questioning. Metta, Sarah ======= #80287 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 10:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dukkha: From the PTS Pali-English Dictionary sarahprocter... Hi TG, Always good to see you around. --- TGrand458@... wrote: > > In a message dated 12/18/2007 10:44:26 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, > sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > > "In a footnote, Bhikkhu Bodhi summarises the Visuddhi-Magga > elaboration on these 3 kinds of suffering as follows: > - suffering due to pain (dukkhadukkhataa) is painful bodily and > mental suffering; > - suffering due to formations (sa.nkhaaradukkhata- sufferi > conditioned phenomena of the three planes, because they are oppressed > by rise and fall; > - suffering due to change (viparinaamadukkhat- suffering due > feeling, which brings suffering when it comes to an end." > > If I have a pleasant mental or physical feeling and it goes away, I > don't > really feel oppressed by suffering. .... S: Is there not attachment all the time to transient pleasant feelings? Is it not this attachment which brings grief? .... > > Also, essentially the second and third "sufferings" are the same thing > or > highly related. .... S: Viparinaama dukkha, or the dukkha of change, when classified by way of feeling, refers just to pleasant feeling. (The first 'suffering' refers to unpleasant feeling]. Sa.nkhaara dukkha, when classified by way of feeling refers to neutral feeling (and all other kinds as well). They are related, but this is the deeper understanding of the nature of all conditioned dhammas. Without a Buddha, people know that when the pleasant experiences don't last, there is unhappiness. What people don't know, without the Buddha's explanation, is that all conditioned dhammas are dukkha, even good qualities. They are all fleeting and there can never be any self-mastery over them. ... > Seems to me that especially #2 and #3 can be looked at a lot deeper than > these definitions. Any comments? ... S: I think in the deeper sense we can appreciate that any conditioned dhammas at all must be dukkha. Even the unexperienced rupas are 'oppressed', constantly changing and subject to the elements. I'll look forward to your further comments. I'm also behind with my reading, so I may also just be repeating other comments. Metta, Sarah ======= #80288 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 10:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Reminder for Us Clingers-to-Views sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, Back to the raft. Thx for your feedback. --- kenhowardau wrote: > There is still a lot more crossing over to be done, but the simile > was not meant to extend that far, was it? It was just meant to apply > to the [little bit of] crossing over that has already been done. ... S: Or the little bit of crossing over now. Even clinging to panna and other good states (let alone to bad states) has to be seen for what it is when it arises now and abandoned. Otherwise, such clinging hinders progress. Metta, Sarah >>S: It is attachment > > which is to be abandoned, not the Dhamma or the 'good states'. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/24878 > > > > It included the following from B.Bodhi's translation: > > > > "Simile of the Raft p.229: > > > > "Bhikkhus, when you know the Dhamma to be similar to a raft, you > should > > abandon even good states, how much more so bad states." #80289 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 11:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] - Nirodha sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- Alex wrote: > > S: See a message I wrote on this before: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/67402 > > > > We have to keep in mind the 2 meanings of jhana and consider the > verse > > carefully. > >>>> > Thank you for the link, I've briefly looked at it. > I don't remember any sutta which divides Jhana into "mundane" and > supramandane. This seems to be later concept. ... S: When we read suttas, we have to consider the context carefully to understand whether mundane or supramundane jhana is being referred to. As Scott and I have been suggesting, as you prefer to limit your studies to Suttas only (and probably 4 Nikayas only), it's easy to miss a lot of the wealth of detail without further explanation. The teachings are very subtle. ... >To be precise there IS > a separation of Miccha-Samadhi (wrong Samadhi, ie with sensuality or > for example when a sniper concentrates on a target.) and Samma- > Samadhi. But this isn't that sort of separation you are implying > above in that link. ... S: No, but it's good that you appreciate that there's a wrong path and wrong samadhi as well as a right path. Many people prefer to ignore that concentration as we know it is invariable miccha. ... >Furthere according to suttas such as AN 9.36 & > mn111 there isn't a separation between proper Jhana practice > and "insight". ... S: I haven't checked your references, but even for those skilled in jhana and developing insight, the different kinds of consciousness arise at different moments. In this sense, there is always a separation. .... <...> > But how does one get the direct experience that ALL dhammas > (including Citta) arise and fall away by conditions? ... S: By developing satipatthana. First of all, the clear distinction between namas and rupas has to be known. When these dhammas are known more and more precisely, it is clear that they are conditioned and that they arise and fall away. ... >Cessation shows > this blatanly clear that even Vinnana is impermanent and can cease. ... S: I'm totally confused by your use of 'cessation'. Sometimes (in this thread), you are referring to nirodha samapatti (to be attined only by anagamis and arahants, skilled in all jhanas as discussed), and sometimes you are referring to the falling away and cessation of all conditioned dhammas. Of course vinnana (consciousness) is impermanent and ceases. ... > Depending on wisdom, mindfulness and observational sharpness, etc, > the result can be higher or lower stages of Ariahood. > > Without seeing cessation of consciousness how can you have direct > experience that even (mind)consciousness isn't the ultimate ground of > being? Inference and logic may not be powerful enough to do this! ... S: Sorry, I don't know what you're talking about. Please clarify 'cessation' first above. Metta, Sarah ======== #80290 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 11:25 pm Subject: Re: Taking Anatta to an Extreme Re: [dsg] Re: My Understanding of Ajahn .../Sarah sarahprocter... Hi Howard, This may seem like a bit of a quibble. My original post was really taking up the baton of 'taking anatta to extremes' as I'd heard many comments about this:-) --- upasaka@... wrote: > "He is called a worldling for such reasons > As that he generates a multitude of things, > Because he is immersed in the herd, > And because he is a man who is distinct. > > "They generated a multitude of defilements, hence they are worldlings. > They have not destroyed the multiple forms of personality view, <..>> "....the wordling is like a madman. He seizes upon anything he can in > whatever way he can." > > (Mulapariyaya Sutta commentaries, transl by B.Bodhi in "The Discourse > on > The Root of Existence") > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Sarah, this proves my point, not yours! Who is this "worldling" the > > Buddha refers to? ... S: The worldling is the one who has 'not destroyed the multiple forms of personality view'. He 'seizes upon anything he can...' to find a person existing here:-) ... >Who is this "person distinct or remote from the > ariyans," and > who are the "ariyans"? I don't notice the Buddha saying that there are > no > worldlings and no ariyans! ... S: As you know, Howard, this is just 'common usage'. The Buddha used the terms 'worldlings and ariyans' without any misapprehension that there is anything other than 'streams' of namas and rupas arising and falling away. ... > And, Sarah, who is it you are writing to? ... S: Again, what is seen now is just visible object. What is thought about and recognised is an idea of Howard, based on previous recognitions and thoughts. ... <...> >S: It is sanna which remembers so well that it can condition such stories > again and again of permanent beings and things, she stressed. > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I think that precious few of us here believe in any permanent > beings and > things. I know I do not. I think that for most of us that is a red > herring. > -------------------------------------------------------------- ... S: We think we have no idea of 'permanent beings and things', but only the sotapanna has eradicated the idea of nicca (permanence/lastingness). Does the sound seem to last? Does the computer seem real? Is there an idea of Howard remaining? The perversion of permanence can only be eradicated when the perversion of atta is eradicated, through the direct understanding of the rising and falling away of conditioned dhammas which are not subject to any mastery. ... > S: If there's no thinking about people to write > to or people around us, where are the people? > When it is right view about dhammas as anatta, no people at all, > however 'extreme' this may sound, I see it as the sanity as taught by >the wise, rather than the insanity of the herd. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > No people as individuals is correct. No people at all is utterly > false. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- ... S: Individuals, people.....just ideas. If there's no idea now about them, there are no people. I'll leave any last words on this thread to you, Howard. Metta, Sarah ====== #80291 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 11:32 pm Subject: Re: Loooong Post Re: [dsg] Re: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's .../James sarahprocter... Hi Howard (& TG), --- upasaka@... wrote: > As for 'sankhara', I think that 'formation' falls short as > translation, > because it tends to not explicitly include the meaning of a > "fabricational > mental operation", which is one of its central meanings. ... S: Could you give an example of this sankhara,'fabricational mental operation'? .... > Simply put, but not as simply as I'd like, the sankhara are > "fabricational > activities and their products". The only thing excluded from the range > of the > term 'sankhara', then, is nibbana. ... S: Again, pls would you elaborate on what you mean by these "fabricational activities and their products". I'm particular interested to know if these are included in any khandha and if so, which? I'm asking because I think there are many different ideas about 'sankhara' floating around and it's important for us to clarify whether we're on the same page or not with this one. TIA! Metta, Sarah ======= #80292 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 12:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? buddhatrue Hi TG, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > From your quote from the Parinibbana Sutta in a previous post... > > "Excruciating were the bodily > feelings that developed within him â€" painful, fierce, sharp, wracking, > repellent, disagreeable â€" but he endured them mindful, alert, & > unperturbed." > > TG Again: Just what is it the Buddha would have had to "endure" if there > was no pain/dukkha experienced? From your assertion, there would be nothing > to endure. Okay, I really don't think I am going to be able to convince you, but I will give it one more shot anyway. ;-)) During that incident, the Buddha was not "enduring" physical pain. That gives the impression that the Buddha felt extreme pain in his foot, causing mental pain, and he was suppressing the mental pain so that it didn't hurt as bad. That isn't what happened. There are two suttas about that incident. Actually, while the Buddha was lying there, he wasn't enduring physical pain, he was radiating compassion for all living beings. Don't take the beginning of that sutta so literally- it is just a stock phrase. Two more quotes for you and then I am over and out also ;-): "And this, monks, is the noble truth of the cessation of dukkha: the remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving." "Now, ignorance is bound up in these things. From the remainderless fading & cessation of that very ignorance, there no longer exists [the sense of] the body on account of which that pleasure & pain internally arise. There no longer exists the speech... the intellect on account of which that pleasure & pain internally arise. There no longer exists the field, the site, the dimension, or the issue on account of which that pleasure & pain internally arise." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.025.than.html James: Craving is dukkha. When that craving is gone there is no more dukkha. There is no such thing as "residual dukkha". Metta, James #80293 From: han tun Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (5) hantun1 Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for your kind remarks. Sarah: Sometime I'd be interested to hear what you consider to be your 'inner satisfaction' then. Han; It is a very simple statement. I am inwardly, within my mind, satisfied with what I am doing, whether it is right or wrong in the opinion of others. It may be like ‘job-satisfaction’ in day-to-day work. -------------------- Sarah: This is a good approach which I appreciate. Can the development of understanding also be considered as 'action-oriented' and a 'meritorious deed'? Perhaps the greatest meritorious deed!:-) Han: To be honest, I heard the expression ‘development of understanding’ only when I joined DSG. Previously, I knew only daana, siila, bhaavanaa, and siila, samaadhi, pa~n~naa. If the ‘development of understanding’ means ‘bhaavanaa’ then it is action-oriented. Both samatha bhaavanaa and vipassanaa bhaavanaa are action-oriented. If it means ‘development of pa~n~naa’ then one has to walk the path of Noble Eightfold Path. NEP is pa~n~naa, siila, samaadhi. If you consider NEP as action-oriented, then it is action-oriented!:>) -------------------- Sarah: I'm sure you'll have many opportunities for meritorious deeds of all kinds on your trip. Anumodana in advance for this to you and your wife. Han: Thank you very much. -------------------- Respectfully, Han #80294 From: han tun Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (5) To Sarah hantun1 Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for your kind remarks. Sarah: As you know, only pa~n~naa will know and be the judge:-) Of course, the kusala and akusala are changing all the time, regardless of the activity. Han: That will be fine, Sarah. I will let the pa~n~naa judge my activities:>) I do not agree with your second statement. If the kusala and akusala are changing all the time, *regardless of the activity*, then the best thing will be not to do anything!:>). -------------------- Sarah: :-) Again, it is only right understanding (pa~n~naa) which can know when there is right understanding and when there is wrong understanding. Again, it doesn't belong to me, you or anyone else. Just another fleeting dhamma, not worth clinging to. Han: :>) Again, that will be fine, Sarah. I will then do not have to do anything.:>) When you said “it doesn't belong to me, you or anyone else”, does the “it” here mean pa~n~naa? Is pa~n~naa also just another fleeting dhamma, not worth clinging to? -------------------- Sarah: Your comments have all been interesting and I like the stress about not minding about the situation we find ourselves in. I think the important thing is to appreciate that there are always sankhara dhammas, arising and falling away, not belonging to anyone at all. Gradually, they can be understood for what they are and very slowly there can be a relinquishing of taking them for belonging to anyone. At a moment of awareness, just a nama or a rupa appears, such as seeing or visible object. Nothing else at all. Han: I like your above comments, except the last one: “Nothing else at all.” Is that it? Nothing else at all? -------------------- Sarah: Very best wishes and please have a safe trip and a wonderful and wise family holiday time. Han: Thank you very much. When I am worshipping at Shwedagon, I will remember you and your family and pray for your health and happiness. -------------------- Respectfully, Han #80295 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:49 am Subject: Fwd: just a 'hello' and my best wishes sarahprocter... Dear Friends of Ven Pannabahulo. Some of you will remember that Ven P wrote before on DSG before he went to Myanmar for the Rains. He's now back in Chengmai, but unfortunately has health problems. He sent us a note yesterday in response to a suggestion I'd made some time ago about sharing his reflections with us from his time with his teacher in Myanmar vs study with A.Sujin (which he'd referred to and written about on DSG before). S. --- "Ven Pannabahulo (Phra Alan)" wrote: > Dear Sarah, > I hope this finds you and Jonathan happy and well. > I just want to say that I am very sorry to say that I still have not > been able to write the article you asked for. > This must be the 5th week of this raging leg infection and the same > amount of time on anti-biotics. The hospital can't do much until the > infection has gone; and there are some conflicting opinions amonst > doctors as regards treatment for this venal/circulation problem. Suffice > to say that I cannot sit at the computer for very long; and am lacking > energy and strength. For this reason I cannot even look at the DSG > website > Please tell all at DSG that my metta is with them. My thoughts are > with you all. I will be in contact again as soon as my health improves. > With metta and every blessing. > Pannabahhulo Bhikkhu > > > May you be well,happy and peaceful. > > (Phra Alan Cooper) > Pannabahulo Bhikkhu #80296 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Report on the Meeting at the Foundation (5) To Sarah sarahprocter... Dear Han, Thank you for your prompt responses when you must be busy. --- han tun wrote: > Sarah: As you know, only pa~n~naa will know and be the > judge:-) Of course, the kusala and akusala are > changing all the time, regardless of the activity. > > Han: That will be fine, Sarah. I will let the pa~n~naa > judge my activities:>) ... S: :>) ... > I do not agree with your second statement. If the > kusala and akusala are changing all the time, > *regardless of the activity*, then the best thing will > be not to do anything!:>). ... S: Whether we do or don't do anything will depend on conditions anyway. No need to think about whether it would be better to stop the activity. There will be kusala and akusala regardless:>) .... > Sarah: :-) Again, it is only right understanding > (pa~n~naa) which can know when there is right > understanding and when there is wrong understanding. > Again, it doesn't belong to me, you or anyone else. > Just another fleeting dhamma, not worth clinging to. > > Han: :>) Again, that will be fine, Sarah. I will then > do not have to do anything.:>) .... S: Right, no need for 'Han' to do anything....the various dhammas will be performing their functions anyway :>) ... > When you said “it doesn't belong to me, you or anyone > else”, does the “it” here mean pa~n~naa? ... S: Yes! ... > Is pa~n~naa also just another fleeting dhamma, not > worth clinging to? ... S: Yes! Clinging hinders further kusala. .... > Sarah: ..... At a moment of awareness, just a > nama or a rupa appears, such as seeing or visible > object. Nothing else at all. > > Han: I like your above comments, except the last one: > “Nothing else at all.” Is that it? Nothing else at > all? ... S: What else appears, what else can be directly known other than a nama or a rupa? Nothing else at all:>) .... > Han: Thank you very much. When I am worshipping at > Shwedagon, I will remember you and your family and > pray for your health and happiness. .... S: Thank you for this. We wish your family health, happiness and peace in the New Year too. Metta, Sarah ====== #80297 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 3. sarahprocter... Hi DC, --- DC Wijeratna wrote: > Hi Sarah, > Thank you for your e-m re. above. You asked: " > S: What about ruupa? Do you mean that ruupas are not real? I look > forward to any elaborations." ... > DC: I wrote my e-m in a different context. That was trying to explain my > understanding of attaa. We can put together the four 'mental khandhas' > and call it naama; or what we normally call the mind. It is the mind > that we imagine survives death. Everybody knows that we leave the body > here and depart. Of course, ruupa is 'real' as much as the other four > khandhas are. .... S: I think that ruupa is taken for atta too. Don't we take the ruupas of the body for atta very often? I think that external ruupas are also taken for atta. ... > > But I think I must say what I mean by real. Anything I can > experience through my senses is real. Anything which is a "concept", a > mere name, is not real. ... S: So far so good. What about the realities which experiences those objects through the senses, such as seeing consciousness and hearing consciousness? Are they real too? ... >Whatever I get to know except by direct > experience is not 'real' to me. Because, it may be true or not but I > have no way of concluding that it is true. But we end up in a great > difficulty here, because all these things are impermanent-they arise and > fall (uppaada-vaya) sometimes in a fraction of a second; or may be a > nano-second or even faster; the Buddha said that He couldn't even find a > simile to explain that. So what could we mean by real? So there is > nothing!!! ... S: I agree with most your comments, but just because dhammas are very fleeting doesn't mean they are not real or nothing! When they arise, they have characteristics and are not nothing. .... >Really this is what is the law of causality is about. > According to Dhamma, we human beings can't understand that: (1) we have > delusion (moha); in fact that is why we travel throug samsaara (avjjaa .... S: thanks for your food for thought, DC! Metta, Sarah ====== #80298 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:51 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (72) nichiconn Dear Friends, Part 7 15. Cattaaliisanipaato 1. Isidaasiitheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 430. "Ta.m disvaana amhaaka.m, u.t.thaayaasana.m tassaa pa~n~naapayi.m; nisinnaaya ca paade, vanditvaa bhojanamadaasi.m. 431. "Annena ca paanena ca, khajjena ca ya~nca tattha sannihita.m; santappayitvaa avaca.m, ayye icchaami pabbajitu.m. 432. "Atha ma.m bha.natii taato, idheva puttaka caraahi tva.m dhamma.m; annena ca paanena ca, tappaya sama.ne dvijaatii ca. 433. "Athaha.m bha.naami taata.m, rodantii a~njali.m pa.naametvaa; paapa~nhi mayaa pakata.m, kamma.m ta.m nijjaressaami. 434. "Atha ma.m bha.natii taato, paapu.na bodhi~nca aggadhamma~nca; nibbaana~nca labhassu, ya.m sacchikarii dvipadase.t.tho. 428. Seeing her, I rose up from our seat and offered it to her. I paid homage to her feet when she had sat down, [and] I gave her food. 429. I satisfied her completely with food and drink and hard food and whatever was stored there, and I said, "Noble lady, I wish to go forth." 430. Then my father said to me, "You should practise the Doctrine in this very place, child. Satisfy ascetics and twice-born brahmans with food and drink." 431. Then my lamenting and raising my hands in respectful salutation, I said to my father, "Evil indeed was the action I did. I shall destroy it."* 432. Then my father said to me, "Attain awakening and the foremost Doctrine, and obtain quenching, which the Best of Men realized." *Cf M I 93 (MLDB 188), where there is mention of the Jains' belief in "annihilation of past action through performance of piercing austerities, etc." RD: And seeing her we rose, and I prepared A seat for her, and as she sat I knelt, Then gave her food, both boiled and dried, (428) And water - dishes we had set aside - And satisfied her hunger. Then I said: 'Lady, I wish to leave the world.' 'Why here,' (429) My father said, 'dear child, is scope for thee To walk according to the Norm. With food And drink canst gratify the holy folk And the twice-born. *404 But of my father I, (430) Weeping and holding out clasped hands, besought: 'Nay, but the evil karma I have done, That would I expiate and wear away.' *405 (431) Then father said: 'Win thou Enlightenment And highest Truth, and gain Nibbana. That Hath He, the Best of Beings, *406 realized.' (432) *404 Brahmins. *405 Nijjaressaami. This was the ascetic aspect taken of the religious life. As a Jainist opinion, it is criticized by the Buddha in the 'Devadaha Sutta,' Majjhima Nikaaya, ii. 214 ff. *406 Dvipada, lit., 'bipeds,' an epithet of the Buddha I do not find elsewhere. 435. "Maataapituu abhivaada, yitvaa sabba~nca ~naatiga.navagga.m; sattaaha.m pabbajitaa, tisso vijjaa aphassayi.m. 436. "Jaanaami attano satta, jaatiyo yassaya.m phalavipaako; ta.m tava aacikkhissa.m, ta.m ekamanaa nisaamehi. 437. "Nagaramhi erakacche, suva.n.nakaaro aha.m pahuutadhano; yobbanamadena matto, so paradaara.m aseviha.m. 438. "Soha.m tato cavitvaa, nirayamhi apaccisa.m cira.m; pakko tato ca u.t.thahitvaa, makka.tiyaa kucchimokkami.m. 439. "Sattaahajaataka.m ma.m, mahaakapi yuuthapo nillacchesi; tasseta.m kammaphala.m, yathaapi gantvaana paradaara.m. 433. I saluted my mother and father and all the group of my relatives, and seven days after going forth, I attained the three knowledges. 434. I know my [last] seven births. I shall relate to you this [action] of which this is the fruit and result. Listen to it with attentive mind. 435. In the city of Erakaccha I was a goldsmith, possessing much wealth. Intoxicated by the pride of my youth, I had sexual intercourse with another's wife. 436. I fell from there and was cooked in hell. I cooked for a long time, and rising up from there, I entered the womb of a female monkey. 437. A great monkey, leader of the herd, castrated me when I was seven days old. This was the fruit of that action for me because of having seduced another's wife. RD: Then to my mother and my father dear, And all my kinsfolk tribe I bade farewell. And only seven days had I gone forth Ere I had touched and won the Threefold Lore. (433) Then did I come to know my former births, E'en seven thereof, and how e'en now I reap The harvest, the result, that then I sowed. That will I now declare to thee, an thou Wilt listen single-minded to my tale. (434) In Erakaccha's *407 town of yore l lived, A wealthy craftsman in all works of gold. Incensed by youth's hot blood, a wanton, I Assailed the virtue of my neighbours' wives. (435) Therefrom deceasing, long I cooked *408 in hell, Till, fully ripened, I emerged, and then Found rebirth in the body of an ape. (436) Scarce seven days I lived before the great Dog-ape, the monkeys' chief, castrated me. Such was the fruit of my lasciviousness. (437) *407 Buddhist India, p. 40; Neumann, op. cit., 366 n. *408 To ripen or be cooked is the usual metaphor for a cause working out its effect. Note that 'hell' here (niraya) is really purgatory. No form of being, for Buddhism, was eternal. === to be continued, connie #80299 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:51 am Subject: Perfections Corner (58) nichiconn Dear All, http://www.zolag.co.uk/ - The Perfections Leading to Enlightenment by Sujin Boriharnwanaket; translated by Nina van Gorkom. Chapter 8: The Perfection of Determination. continued... We can see that it is extremely difficult to accumulate the perfections which lead to the attainment of the supreme wisdom of the Buddha. When he had penetrated the truth of the realities that are arising and falling away at the present moment, he was able to eradicate all defilements completely and attain Buddhahood. The person who has the supreme aspiration to become a Sammaasambuddha, should have eight qualifications: the human state, the male sex, the cause (which are the necessary supporting conditions), the sight of the Teacher, the going forth, the achievement of noble qualities, extreme dedication and strong desire. As regards the first qualification, the human state, this is necessary for the fulfilment of his aspiration. As to the second qualification, the male sex, a woman cannot become a Buddha. The third qualification is the cause (hetu), and this means that in the life when he aspires to be the Sammaasambuddha, he must be endowed with the necessary supporting conditions. As to the fourth qualification, the sight of the master, he must be in the presence of a Sammaasambuddha. His aspiration will only succeed when it is made in the presence of a living Buddha, not after he has finally passed away. His aspiration will not succeed when it is made at the foot of the Bodhi-tree, before a shrine, in front of an image, in the presence of Paccekabuddhas (silent Buddhas) or the Buddha's disciples. The aspiration only succeeds when made in the presence of a Buddha. When he has not met a Buddha in person, the power that is necessary to confirm his dedication is lacking. ..to be continued, connie #80300 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Dec 18, 2007 11:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/... upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and James) - In a message dated 12/19/2007 12:29:34 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... quotes the Buddha: "- suffering due to pain (dukkhadukkhataa) is painful bodily and mental suffering; - suffering due to formations (sa.nkhaaradukkhataa) is all conditioned phenomena of the three planes, because they are oppressed by rise and fall; - suffering due to change (viparinaamadukkhataa) is pleasant feeling, which brings suffering when it comes to an end." ============================= Sarah, in your opinion, why is not the 3rd an instance of the 2nd, specifically of dukkha due to falling/cessation? With metta, Howard #80301 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta as a strategy jonoabb Hi Howard upasaka@... wrote: > [Jon:] > I think the discovery you mention here occurs because of interest in and > exposure to the teachings, and coming to understand better and better > the way things are as described in the teachings, rather than because of > anything that might be called a "practice". > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I agree with what you wrote there before the second comma - as a partial > answer. The Buddha never taught that his path of practice consisted of only > listening and considering. > Yes, I agree; the path of practice does not consist of only listening and considering. The factors I mentioned in my message go far beyond that, I think. Those factors I mentioned are: - an interest in the teachings - exposure to the teachings - coming to understand better the way things are as described in the teachings To my understanding, the references in the texts to listening to the teachings are not to the volitional activity of listening as such, but to hearing the teachings explained in a manner that is appropriate for and pertinent to one's particular level of understanding and other accumulated tendencies wholesome and unwholesome (including especially wrong view). And as you will appreciate, this involves being associated with the right person/people. In conventional terms it may (correctly) be described as listening to the teachings. But it is to be understood as something that is dependent on one's past accumulated merit and other factors. And that's what I mean by "exposure to the teachings". > I would say it is not a > matter of 'looking' or 'observing', since dhammas cannot be seen by looking. > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > That's completely false, Jon, IMO. We observe paramattha dhammas all the > time. In fact, in a sense that is all we ever actually observe. What is > missing is clarity of observation. steadiness of observation, and insight into > and understanding of what is observed. This is an interesting and important point, and worth taking some time over, I believe. I do not think it correct to say that we observe paramattha dhammas all the time (or at all, for that matter). What I think is the situation is that paramattha dhammas are arising all the time, but are not seen for what they truly are. Seeing is arising now and is experiencing arisen visible object, hearing is experiencing sound, mind-door consciousness is thinking about the visible and audible objects being experienced, and so on. But are any of these dhammas being seen as just an impersonal element? I suspect not; for us there are always people and things "in" the visible object, meaning "in" the sound, etc. Jon #80302 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta special vs. anicca and dukkha (was, Report ...) jonoabb Hi James Thanks for coming in with your comments. buddhatrue wrote: > I did some research into this subject and I must say that I agree > with both of you. How? Well, read this sutta: > > "Monks, these seven perceptions, when developed & pursued, are of > great fruit, of great benefit. They gain a footing in the Deathless, > have the Deathless as their final end. Which seven? The perception > of the unattractive, the perception of death, the perception of > loathsomeness in food, the perception of distaste for every world, > the perception of inconstancy, the perception of stress in what is > inconstant, the perception of not-self in what is stressful. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an07/an07.046.than.html > > So, contemplation of anicca and dukkha are of very high importance, > but contemplation of anatta (in that which is dukkha) is also > important. What I get from this teaching is that an understanding > and an appreciation of all three characteristics is important for > insight. I agree with your conclusion here. > (That is why the followers of KS should stop focusing > solely on anatta and thinking that anatta alone will lead to > nibbana). Except that in this thread it's Deiter and Alex who have been arguing for a special role for anatta!! ;-)), while the "followers of KS" have been pointing out that anatta is really a characteristic of conditioned dhammas, one of 3 such characteristics each of which must each be fully realised if final enlightenment is to be attained. (So in this thread you are on the same side as the "followers" ;-)) Jon #80303 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anicca=/Dukkha jonoabb Dear Asanka Welcome to the list from me. Undiyaralale Karunarathne wrote: > Dukka is consequence of Anicca. Three Basics of the Dharama is Anicca, Dukkha and Anathma. How can Anicca and dukkha can be equal. They has three different meanings. You can understand them by reading and listening but it will not enough. You have to do meditation upon that three. its Maha Vipassana of 40 ways. > I agree that anicca and dukkha are not one and the same thing. I'd be interested to hear your own understanding of what each term, as used by the Buddha, means. As I just said in a post to another member (Howard), I understand anicca, dukkha and anattaa to be characteristics of dhammas. Is this how you understand the texts also? Looking forward to seeing more of you on the list. Jon PS We'd all be interested to hear a little bit about your background and interest in the Dhamma, if you'd care to say something. #80304 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 12:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dukkha: From the PTS Pali-English Dictionary upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - Dukkhata, in its weakest sense, is inadequacy/insufficiency/imperfection. The question is: "Imperfection with respect to what?" The only proper answer, and the reason that 'dukkha' (or 'dukkhata') is almost always translated as 'suffering', even though I think to do so is often misleading, is that the "dukkha" sense of imperfection is the sense of not being a source for perfect sukha, of falling short for "our" true happiness, which, of course, pertains to experience, actual and potential. All conditioned dhammas ultimately fail to satisfy - for a number of reasons, chief of which is that they are what they are independent of our wishes (their objectivity), and they cease ("no good " for pleasant conditions) and (re)arise ("no good" for unpleasant conditions). Rise and fall, cessation of pleasantness, etc are all dukkha only in that they are bound to fail to satisfy and even can cause distress. Their unsatisfactoriness pertains to the experiencing of them, actual and potential, by sentient beings (NB: using "human speak" here.) There is, indeed, a subtlety to the ill-nature of conditioned dhammas. Deep understanding of the dukkha nature of conditioned dhammas includes seeing the abrasiveness of their rise and fall (sankharadukkhata), the abrasiveness being due to our tendency to cling. That felt abrasiveness is a kind of "spiritual friction" remedied only by releasing. Letting the word 'dukkha' go for a bit, and zeroing in, instead, on what is really important: Conditioned dhammas, will always fall short as sources of perfect and lasting satisfaction. The bottom line is that more important than all these discussions of the fine nuances of the word 'dukkha' is the fact that rather than perfect and lasting satisfaction, joy, and peace being found in conditioned dhammas, they are found exactly in the *relinquishment* of conditioned dhammas and derivative concepts (conventional objects). The Buddha was the teacher of emptiness (not-self and no-self) and of relinquishment. The realization of the former and the attaining of the latter are the death knell for dukkata in every useful sense of the word. With metta, Howard #80305 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin (and James) - In a message dated 12/19/2007 12:56:12 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sukinder@... writes: Hi Howard, (*James and others), =========== Sukin: But when I read your statement about "decay is no problem in and of itself" I had exactly the same reaction as Nina. I thought, "Why must it be a matter of either a problem or not a problem?" ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Sukin, that's ordinary, informal English. The point is that decay is a mere fact, except as grasping makes it otherwise. In and of itself, decay is perfectly neutral. It is just as it is. It is merely "such". Suk: Yes, that is what I understood you to be saying. However there seemed also to be some unnecessary idea projected. From my perspective being "merely such" applies equally and in the same way to all three characteristics. In other words they are all what they are without having to relate to experience. To you apparently, this applies to Anicca and Anatta, but not to Dukkha. For Dukkha to be "merely such" you see the need to factor tanha /experience otherwise you think that it is meaningless. ================================ Sukin, thank you very much for your lengthy post and the considerable expenditure of effort that must have been required to produce it. I hope that it will be helpful to many here. I find that I've gotten to a point that I'm unable to further clarify my understanding of this matter. Since I wrote you last I've written a few additional posts on this topic, and I'm afraid my well has run dry. So please forgive me for not continuing. With metta & appreciation, Howard #80306 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:25 am Subject: Re: Loooong Post Re: [dsg] Re: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's .../James upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and TG) - In a message dated 12/19/2007 2:32:40 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard (& TG), --- upasaka@... wrote: > As for 'sankhara', I think that 'formation' falls short as > translation, > because it tends to not explicitly include the meaning of a > "fabricational > mental operation", which is one of its central meanings. ... S: Could you give an example of this sankhara,'fabricational mental operation'? .... > Simply put, but not as simply as I'd like, the sankhara are > "fabricational > activities and their products". The only thing excluded from the range > of the > term 'sankhara', then, is nibbana. ... S: Again, pls would you elaborate on what you mean by these "fabricational activities and their products". I'm particular interested to know if these are included in any khandha and if so, which? I'm asking because I think there are many different ideas about 'sankhara' floating around and it's important for us to clarify whether we're on the same page or not with this one. TIA! Metta, ================================ I have in mind the operations of thinking & conceptualizing & reifying, willing, desiring, emotionally proliferating, and so on. Basically, it is the namas of the sankharakkhanda plus sa~n~na. What did you think I had in mind? With metta, Howard #80307 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta as a strategy upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 12/19/2007 8:11:26 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, jonabbott@... writes: > I would say it is not a > matter of 'looking' or 'observing', since dhammas cannot be seen by looking. > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > That's completely false, Jon, IMO. We observe paramattha dhammas all the > time. In fact, in a sense that is all we ever actually observe. What is > missing is clarity of observation. steadiness of observation, and insight into > and understanding of what is observed. This is an interesting and important point, and worth taking some time over, I believe. I do not think it correct to say that we observe paramattha dhammas all the time (or at all, for that matter). What I think is the situation is that paramattha dhammas are arising all the time, but are not seen for what they truly are. Seeing is arising now and is experiencing arisen visible object, hearing is experiencing sound, mind-door consciousness is thinking about the visible and audible objects being experienced, and so on. But are any of these dhammas being seen as just an impersonal element? I suspect not; for us there are always people and things "in" the visible object, meaning "in" the sound, etc. ============================= You have said here that you disagree, and then you confirm exactly what I said. Ah, well! With metta, Howard #80308 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] - Nirodha truth_aerator Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: ... > S: When we read suttas, we have to consider the context carefully to > understand whether mundane or supramundane jhana is being referred to. As >>>> If there are suttas that talk about mundane and supramundane Jhanas, please show them to me. Jhanas can be used for clinging ("nibbana" here and now, Wrong View in DN#1), or for LETTING GO OF CLINGING. > Scott and I have been suggesting, as you prefer to limit your studies to Suttas only (and probably 4 Nikayas only), it's easy to miss a lot of the wealth of detail without further explanation. The teachings are very > subtle. > ... >>> What if the detail is "2nd quality" ? After all, lets remember, BUDDHA WAS THE BEST. He wouldn't even give his order to Sariputta, much less some later commentator who never even seen Buddha or his Noble disciples face to face. > ... > S: I haven't checked your references, but even for those skilled in jhana and developing insight, the different kinds of consciousness arise at different moments. In this sense, there is always a separation. > .... Well, in that split second moments there is a separation. What I am saying is that there is NO SUCH THING as "vipassana vehicle" vs "samatha vehicle". Jhana practice is also an Insight practice capable of Arahantship. Real time insight happens as high as the base of NOTHINGNESS. (mn111) > <...> > > But how does one get the direct experience that ALL dhammas > > (including Citta) arise and fall away by conditions? > ... > S: By developing satipatthana. >>> Or Jhana which includes the satipathana. And even IF you claim that satipathana and Jhana are different, remember that even 4th Jhana can last as quick as a snap of the fingers (AN 1.397) which would mean that in an hour session of "vipasanna" you could have had many moments of going in and out of Jhana . >>>>>>>>> First of all, the clear distinction between namas and rupas has to be known. When these dhammas are known more and > more precisely, it is clear that they are conditioned and that they arise and fall away. > ... JHANA > >Cessation shows > > this blatanly clear that even Vinnana is impermanent and can cease. > ... > S: I'm totally confused by your use of 'cessation'. Sometimes (in this thread), you are referring to nirodha samapatti (to be attined only by > anagamis and arahants, skilled in all jhanas as discussed), and sometimes you are referring to the falling away and cessation of all conditioned > dhammas. Of course vinnana (consciousness) is impermanent and ceases. > ... Sorry for not being clear. Here I was talking about Nirodha Samapatti (Lets call it 9th Jhana for short). 2nd) Where in the suttas does it say that only Anagamins and Arahants can reach 9th Jhana? For example Alara Kalama and Udakka Ramaputta were not even sotapannas and they were VERY close to 9th Jhana. I am sure that they could reach Nirodha Samapatti very quickly under Buddha's guidance. > > Depending on wisdom, mindfulness and observational sharpness, etc, > > the result can be higher or lower stages of Ariahood. > > > > Without seeing cessation of consciousness how can you have direct > > experience that even (mind)consciousness isn't the ultimate ground of > > being? Inference and logic may not be powerful enough to do this! > ... > S: Sorry, I don't know what you're talking about. Please clarify > 'cessation' first above. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== Nirodha Samapatti, although even Arahatship can be reach only from 1st Jhana. Some people need more some less, the practice of LETTING GO - which is what Jhana is all about. ------- Here is entire AN9.36 Sutta "I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana... the second jhana... the third... the fourth... the dimension of the infinitude of space... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of nothingness. I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. "'I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana.' Thus it has been said. In reference to what was it said? There is the case where a monk, withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He regards whatever phenomena there that are connected with form, feeling, perception, fabrications, & consciousness, as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a disintegration, an emptiness, not-self. He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' "Suppose that an archer or archer's apprentice were to practice on a straw man or mound of clay, so that after a while he would become able to shoot long distances, to fire accurate shots in rapid succession, and to pierce great masses. In the same way, there is the case where a monk... enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born of withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He regards whatever phenomena there that are connected with form, feeling, perception, fabrications, & consciousness, as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a disintegration, an emptiness, not-self. He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' "Staying right there, he reaches the ending of the mental fermentations. Or, if not, then — through this very dhamma-passion, this very dhamma-delight, and from the total wasting away of the first five of the fetters1 — he is due to be reborn [in the Pure Abodes], there to be totally unbound, never again to return from that world. "'I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana.' Thus was it said, and in reference to this was it said. (Similarly with the other levels of jhana up through the dimension of nothingness.) "Thus, as far as the perception-attainments go, that is as far as gnosis-penetration goes. As for these two spheres — the attainment of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception & the attainment of the cessation of feeling & perception — I tell you that they are to be rightly explained by those monks who are meditators, skilled in attaining, skilled in attaining & emerging, who have attained & emerged in dependence on them." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.036.than.html -- Lots of Metta, Alex #80309 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Fwd: just a 'hello' and my best wishes nilovg Dear Sarah, thank you for transferring this message. It is so kind he still thinks of us. Please convey my best wishes to him when you write to him. There is something I would like to mention. As you always say: Dhamma is the best medicine. Even when sick or in pain, or being tired, having lack of energy, it does help to consider Dhamma or write about the Dhamma, for example by way of posts to dsg. His helpful posts can help so many people. Nina. Op 19-dec-2007, om 10:49 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Please tell all at DSG that my metta is with them. My thoughts are > > with you all. I will be in contact again as soon as my health > improves. > > With metta and every blessing. > > Pannabahhulo Bhikkhu #80310 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:54 am Subject: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 7, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, The last day of a long and strenuous bus journey we traveled from Gaya to Nålandå and then on to Patna. The road from Gaya to Nålandå was full of deep holes, and while the bus was trying to avoid these holes it was rocking to and fro, from side to side, like a boat going on a rough sea. We had lunch in the Thai monastery of Nålandå where we offered dåna to the monks. After Nålandå the bus was frequently held up in the towns and villages where huge, sometimes frightenings crowds celebrated the last day of the Hindu festival of Durka Pujjå. We arrived in Patna around nine in the evening and this was the end of our two weeks journey. This extremely long day caused me to have severe stomach aches while sitting in the bus and during these moments I was considering painful feeling and pondering over it. Later on, in Patna, Acharn Sujin reminded me of the difference between awareness and thinking: "There is still the idea of, `it is my pain'. Even though pain has a characteristic it is still me, me, me. There can be thinking, `pain is not mine, it is just a reality', but pain arises and falls away while there is thinking about it. Do we really know nåma and rúpa? We should know that pain is a reality which is nåma, but is there development of understanding of any kind of dhamma so that insight knowledge, vipassanå ñåna can arise? Everyone knows that there is pain, but it is `my pain' until it is understood as just a reality. The concept of me or mine is deeply rooted, until understanding is developed to the stage that nåma is realized as nåma and rúpa as rúpa. There can be awareness of a reality as nåma, as just the reality that experiences, even if it is not clear yet. It is developing, there can be some understanding of the characteristic of nåma. When paññå has been developed to the degree of vipassanå ñåna the understanding of nåma and rúpa will be clearer. How can that degree of understanding arise if there are no moments of developing understanding now? Paññå has to begin." When sati of satipatthåna arises, it can be aware of realities that appear through the six doorways. One can begin to be aware of nåma, the reality that experiences, and rúpa, the reality that does not experience, even though their characteristics are not yet clearly understood. There can gradually more understanding of nåma and rúpa. ******* Nina. #80311 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 8:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] paramattha dhamma, wasSutta vs Abhidhamma nilovg Hi Alex, Op 18-dec-2007, om 23:33 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Are you refering to Paramattha dhammas being "ephemeral, so > insignificant" ? ------- N: Yes, those paramattha dhammas that are not nibbaana. ------- > > A: 2nd) We aren't arguing anatta. ------- N: You said that the Buddha did not teach paramattha dhammas. Even though you do not find the term paramattha (except once, as Ven. Dhammanando quoted) in the suttas, he did teach that all dhammas are anatta. -------- > > N: > A correct understanding of what paramattha dhamma is brings > you to > > anattaa. -------- > > A: More accurately would be to say: A correct understanding of > ANICCA + > DUKHA = Anatta. ------ N: all three characteristics should be understood. Anicca and dukkha were also understood by some wise people before the Buddha's time, but not anattaa. As for me, I would like to finish this thread. Otherwise there will be no end. -------- Nina. #80312 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dukkha: From the PTS Pali-English Dictionary TGrand458@... Hi Sarah Re: S: Is there not attachment all the time to transient pleasant feelings? Is it not this attachment which brings grief? TG Response: Then why not just say "Attachment Dukkha"? ... which is much more fundamental than this rather "surface" example of it. Actually, my sense is that the three standard interpretations (of the three types of dukkha) are unusually shallow and surface explanations of what normally would be significant and deep explanations by the Buddha. Therefore, I don't trust them...i.e., the standard interpretations. The overlap between the 2nd and 3rd dukkhas interpretation raises a flag in my mind that there is something more going on than the standard interpretations suggests. The traditional interpretations seem to be focusing solely on "dukkhottic" explanations of the three types of feeling. That leaves the third explanation of dukkha, that of change, to be just one aspect of dozens of types of dukkha the Suttas list. It just doesn't seem to me to be a compelling category. Not worthy of its own classification in a "three tiered" formula. The second type of dukkha according to tradition, that of formations, basically covers all "potential Dukkha" ... while the first covers the immediate experience of dukkha. Based on the strategy of the traditional interpretation, that seems to me to be all you would need to list. However, I don't look at it that way because I have a different outlook as to what the three types of Dukkha are about. My own sense in reading them, which may be utterly wrong, is that Sankhara Dukkha has more to do with mental formations that generate kamma. The third Dukkha then would be due to impermanence. While the first is more obviously direct pain. All Dukkhas by necessity are dealing with conditionality IMO. With this approach (my approach), there are three significantly different conditional aspects that all have great bearing on the matter of Dukkha. Worthy of being separately classified IMO. TG OUT .................................................................... #80313 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? TGrand458@... James: Craving is dukkha. When that craving is gone there is no more dukkha. There is no such thing as "residual dukkha". Hi James Yea, not convinced. ;-) I'm not sure how anyone as familiar with the Suttas as you appear to be can not be aware that the living body of an Arahant can still experience pain ... or to think that THAT is somehow not dukkha. Oh well. TG #80314 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? TGrand458@... Hi James One more comment... Read the Angulimala Sutta. In that Sutta, after Angulimala becomes enlightened, he is struck by sticks, clods, etc. The Buddha tells him ... "Bear it, brahmin! Bear it, brahmin! You are experiencing here and now the result of deeds because of which you might have been tortured in hell for many years..." Surely if there is no Dukkha, there is no need for the Buddha to encourage Angulimala to "bear it." TG #80315 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 10:12 am Subject: Absorption 'Concentration' Vs Buddha's wise Jhanic Ecstasy truth_aerator Once upon a though... I was thinking and reading. Did Buddha really teach concentration? First lets remember that word such as: Ekaggata DOES NOT mean concentration! Ekagga= calm, tranquil pg 184 (A new course in reading Pali). Furthermore the detailed lists of what happens in Jhana (such as MN111 and Jhana sutta) show that it isn't what we mean by 'concentration'. Not only that, but it implies "crushing mind with mind" - a tactic which Buddha to be found NOT to work (MN 36 or 26 ) "The realization arises right within oneself that 'This concentration (samadhi? the translation is incorrect here) is peaceful, exquisite, the acquiring of serenity, the attainment of unity, not kept in place by the fabrications of forceful restraint.' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.027.than.html Furthermore lets see what forceful restraint does. It applies FORCE to keep the mind still. It is like trying to use force of your hands to keep fan from spinning (rather than simply turning it off). What will happen in this case (assuming you won't get your hands cut)? The blades of the fan won't move until you either let go, or until the blades break off (from the spinning part). Of course this examply is silly, it is much better to simply turn off electricity! But this example what happens with absorption/concentration. One tries to use FORCE as opposed to Anatta wisdom to stop the spinning blades of a fan (which here I used a similie for the changing mind). Forceful restraint also has a disadvantage in depth. It requires that one keep applying force for the concentration to happen and to last. This application of force, is a disturbance that would keep one from going to a much deeper state in which there isn't an possibility of exertion. Thus attainment of such states as Cessation of Perception & Feeling (CPF) may not be possible with concentration that requires forceful application in order to be concentrated. Maybe this explains why only Anagamins & Arahats are claimed (in the commentaries, never in Sutta's to my knowledge) to be able to enter CPF. In MANY years of such self mental torture the mind may be broken to stay on one object. But the question is: Is broken mind a good thing? Concidering the talk about Nimittas (mental hallucinations) as signifying absorption, we may conclude that it is potentially not very healthy. Is the following a noble 8fold path? When it comes to meditation it seems reasonable to make it consisten with N8P. Neither indulging in mental proliferation nor forceful mind mortification (crushing mind with mind). Furthermore what does forceful does regarding hindrances? You desire to stay on that one spot and you do NOT want for the mind to move from it. So we have a subtle desire (for the mind to stick to one spot and subtle aversion for disturbances). Furthermore denying experiences through mental repression can really condition the mind into denial and closed mindedness. Obviously these aren't Buddhist values. Buddhist mind is supposed to be "Enlarged" as opposed to contracted! In the Suttas when speaking about Jhana, Buddha didn't emphasize LACK of awareness. Quite the opposite, he emphasized the LARGE SCOPE OF FULL BODY MINDFULNESS. "And furthermore, with the abandoning of pleasure & pain — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither- pleasure-nor-pain. He sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness. Just as if a man were sitting covered from head to foot with a white cloth so that there would be no part of his body to which the white cloth did not extend; even so, the monk sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness. There is nothing of his entire body unpervaded by pure, bright awareness. And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, any memories & resolves related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers & settles inwardly, grows unified & centered. This is how a monk develops mindfulness immersed in the body. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.119.than.html Some teachers claim that when one is in Jhana, even if you were to be hit with a Baseball bat or if someone would change your position , you wouldn't know or feel it. Is that the Mindfulness, pure and bright awareness? It is actually quite easy to get into feel nothing, see nothing state. Use a hammer and hit your head! Similiar state and no need to spend (I've heard that even for a monks it may take 10-15 years to get into full absorption). Thank Buddha he didn't teach concentration. Upacara (access) , Khanika (momentary) , Appana (fixed) samadhi are NOT MENTIONED IN THE SUTTAS, I wonder why? :). BTW, Abhidhammikas believe that we perceive only one citta (or object) at a time. This actually means that theoretically speaking we are constantly in a form of momentary concentration... Another crucial thing: One MUST be able to cognize change while in the Jhana. Buddha was able to do that and that is one of the reasons why he wasn't satisfied even with "neither perception nor non perception". Turning a blind eye to change may make one mistake Jhana for Nibbana and it would certainly may make jhana appear stable, something for the ego to stand on. But if the mind isn't beaten into stillness, then change will be apperent and it will cause the meditator to go deeper and deeper until reaching Cessation. Another thing. When you concentrate hard you get headaches! When you have headaches it is hard to experience piti-sukha rapture & happiness. Also another result of treating Samadhi or Jhana as concentration is the breaking the path into two paths (not found in the suttas). You can't really have insight if you are in blind-deaf- cognitionless trance. Considering the denial and suppresion of experience (not to mention possible mental breakage) which happens with every form of one-pointed concentration - it is questionable if Insight will be able to properly arise? ------- 4 similies to the Jhanas found in the Kayagatasati (Mindfulness of the Body) sutta. 1st Ecstasy: He permeates & pervades, suffuses & fills this very body with the rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal. Just as if a skilled bathman or bathman's apprentice would pour bath powder into a brass basin and knead it together, sprinkling it again & again with water, so that his ball of bath powder — saturated, moisture-laden, permeated within & without — would nevertheless not drip; even so, the monk permeates... this very body with the rapture & pleasure born of withdrawal. There is nothing of his entire body unpervaded by rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal. 2nd Ecstasy: He permeates & pervades, suffuses & fills this very body with the rapture & pleasure born of composure. Just like a lake with spring- water welling up from within, having no inflow from the east, west, north, or south, and with the skies supplying abundant showers time & again, so that the cool fount of water welling up from within the lake would permeate & pervade, suffuse & fill it with cool waters, there being no part of the lake unpervaded by the cool waters; even so, the monk permeates... this very body with the rapture & pleasure born of composure. There is nothing of his entire body unpervaded by rapture & pleasure born of composure. 3rd Ecstasy: "And furthermore, with the fading of rapture, he remains in equanimity, is mindful & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' He permeates & pervades, suffuses & fills this very body with the pleasure divested of rapture. Just as in a lotus pond, some of the lotuses, born & growing in the water, stay immersed in the water and flourish without standing up out of the water, so that they are permeated & pervaded, suffused & filled with cool water from their roots to their tips, and nothing of those lotuses would be unpervaded with cool water; even so, the monk permeates... this very body with the pleasure divested of rapture. There is nothing of his entire body unpervaded with pleasure divested of rapture. 4th Ecstasy: He sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness. Just as if a man were sitting covered from head to foot with a white cloth so that there would be no part of his body to which the white cloth did not extend; even so, the monk sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness. There is nothing of his entire body unpervaded by pure, bright awareness. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.119.than.html Notice: a) The sutta is called mindfulness of the physical body. It starts with postures, elements, 32 parts, recollection of death. b) It goes into Jhanas where the description IS OF THE BODY. It would not only do pali injustice, but it doesn't fit the sutta to reinterpret "kaya" as a mental group as opposed to lit. physical body. Also remember that jhanas (ecstasy) are "pleasant abidings here and now". It is more appropriate to call them "Ecstasy" rather than a state which is like being knocked out with a hammer. Ecstasy (from the Greek Ýêóôáóéò, to be outside oneself (ancient Greek: åîßóôçìé (existimi) meaning stand outside where åî (ex) means out as in exit)) is a category of altered states of consciousness or trancelike states in which an individual transcends ordinary consciousness ... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecstasy (emotion) Ecstasy (religion), state of exaltation in which the self is transcended. The word comes from Greek roots meaning "standing outside," and it covers a range of phenomena from mysticism to spirit possession and shamanism. ... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecstasy (religion) Ecstasy, (or ekstasis) from the Ancient Greek, Ýê-óôáóéò (ex-stasis), to be or stand outside oneself, a removal to elsewhere (from ex-: out, and stasis: a stand, or a standoff of forces). en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecstasy (philosophy) (Greek) [from ekstasis displacement, standing out from the proper place, hence rising above] A transference of consciousness from the physical plane to another inner and superior plane, accompanied by awareness and memory of the experience. ... www.theosociety.org/pasadena/etgloss/ea-el.htm a state of elated bliss wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn Jhanas fit the above descriptions more than calling them "concentration". Also Samadhi: The name in India for spiritual ecstasy. It is a state of complete trance, induced by means of mystic concentration. www.theosociety.org/pasadena/key/key-glo3.htm I disagree with the trance & concentration part, but we do see that it is "spiritual ecstasy". No wonder that Parama-ditthadhamma-nibbanavadins considered Ecstasy 1- 4 to be "Nibbana here and now". We also find that each level of Jhana feels better and better and that IT IS RAPTURE NOT OF THE FLESH. "http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn36/sn36.031.than.html" Lets remember that placing hammer in the temple would not be classed under Jhana (Ecstasy) which is what Visudhimagga likes to misinterpret Jhana as. No wonder Visuddhimagga "Jhana" requires seeing lights and objects... You'd probably see the same if you used the hammer... You think this is funny? I've read about some "experimenter" who tried to awaken Kundalini energy by hitting his buttocks against the floor... Talking about Visuddhimagga (VsM), it has totally misunderstood what Ecstasy (Jhana) and Arupa Jhana are about. For example I've read that in VsM Metta would bring you to 3rd Jhana and Upekha Brahma Vihara to 4th Jhana. But if we check the suttas, it is wrong! In Samyutta Nikaya pg 1607 46. 54 (4) Metta - 4th Jhana, Compassion - 5th, Altruistic joy - 6th, Equinimity -7th! (pg 1611) Equinimity (Upekha brings to base of NOTHINGNESS!). Furthermore, in Metta Sutta it shows that Metta has to be practiced in ALL postures and ALL the time. This means that if this is fully developed Metta, then it is abiding in 4th Ecstasy during daily activities. Furthermore in other suttas it says that if metta is practiced with insight, the 5 fetters are worn through and one is reborn in Pure Abodes (this proves again that it is 4th Ecstasy). But when he has no trafficking with views, Is virtuous, and has perfected seeing, And purges greed for sensual desires, He surely comes no more to any womb. - Sutta-nipata, vv. 143-152 Here, bhikkhus, a certain person abides with his heart imbued with loving-kindness extending... over the all-encompassing world. Now whatever therein (during that state of contemplation) exists classifiable as form, classifiable as a feeling (of pleasure, pain, or neutrality), classifiable as perception, classifiable as determinative acts, or classifiable as consciousness, such ideas he sees as impermanent, as liable to suffering, as a disease, as a cancer, as a barb, as a calamity, as an affliction, as alien, as being worn away, as void, as not-self. On the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears (as a non-returner) in the retinue of the Gods of the Pure Abodes- Anguttara Nikaya, 4:126 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/wheel007.html Also another thing: Does physical breathing disappear in 4th Ecstasy and in Arupa Ecstasy? At first it seems to be the case, especially if we read MN43 where Kaya-Sankhara is defined as in-out breathing. However if we check the Anapanasati sutta step #4 (calming the kaya- sankhara) we will notice that the breath IS present in ALL 16 steps of Anapanasati, even with 4th step to calm kaya-sankhara. If the breath would totally disappear, then one would be UNABLE to do steps 5-16. Furthermore it seems that breathing IS present even in arupa Jhana. "If a monk should wish, 'May I, with the complete transcending of perceptions of [physical] form, with the disappearance of perceptions of resistance, and not heeding perceptions of diversity, [perceiving,] 'Infinite space,' enter & remain in the dimension of the infinitude of space,' then he should attend closely to this very same concentration through mindfulness of in-&-out breathing. [up to ] -> "If a monk should wish, 'May I, with the complete transcending of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, enter & remain in the cessation of perception & feeling,' then he should attend closely to this very same concentration through mindfulness of in-&-out breathing. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn54/sn54.008.than.html The above quote is very interesting. It suggests the breathing IS present even in Arupa Jhana, also a note needs to be made: a) in 8th one needs to come out and recollect the fact that one was breathing b) in the cessation (Nirodha Samapatti) one cannot recollect anything that happened in the state while one is there and after. It is interesting just how some people described anapanasati leading to "Jhana" VsM style... Apparently one is supposed to get to a stage where the breath (and 5 senses) are not felt at all, then the nimitta appears, than one observes the Nimitta, and then through that nimitta one goes into Jhana. This is NOT mentioned in the suttas! This appears like absorption + mental kasina meditation. Furthermore IF the breath ceases, then Mindfulness of Breathing ceases. If one is no longer mindful of breathing, than one cannot continue doing all 16 steps of Anapanasati and thus one's progress in Anapanasati stops. The only place where once you are in it you don't percieve the breath is the 8th Ecstasy (Neither perception nor non perception), which is true to its name. The breath (prematurely) ceases when one is focusing too strongly on the breath, which is one-pointedness concentration. Here is another thing, if one restricts one's awareness to one point (ie the breath) then one can't get into real Arupa Ecstasy. Why? For example "Infinite Space" for example doesn't talk about smallness of awareness, quite the opposite - it talks about EXPANDED, IMMESURABLE & ENLARGED awareness. This is quite different from restricted & contracted awareness. A question: What about breathing in Arupa Jhana (Ecstasy) how does it feel. There is no label "in" breath - "out" breath. There is just the breath, without spatial perceptions. In fact body feels non existent, unless there is contact (ie bodily pain). Another thing: How long can a Jhana(Ecstasy) last? Some say that once one is in Jhana, it must last for hours, otherwise it cannot really be Jhana. However in AN1.397 we find that even 4th Ecstasy (Jhana) can last for 1 second! http://halfsmile.org/buddhadust/www.buddhadust.org/TheOnes/OnesInPali3 94-494.htm#397 Also, any Jhana or immaterial attainment, or Cessation of Perception & feelings can last for a second http://halfsmile.org/buddhadust/www.buddhadust.org/TheOnes/OnesInPali3 94-494.htm#454 Thus this fixes controversy regarding becoming a Sotapanna. In a certain Sutta (Magga Samyutta), Ven. Sariputta has said that one who does N8P is a sotapanna. Literally it would mean that one needs to reach 4th Jhana (Ecstasy). But there are many instances where after a short lecture by the Buddha, someone who has never heard Dhamma became a Sotapanna. At first these two types of cases seem to be contradictory. It appears that 4th Ecstasy is required, but in some cases people got awakened through listening. However if we go with SUTTA (as opposed to VsM) interpretation of "Jhana", then two types of events are NOT contradictory. Through paying lots of attention to Buddha's teaching a pupil could theoretically get into 4th Jhana (Ecstasy) for that split second - thus achieving N8P at that moment. Lets remember that "Achievement" and "Mastery" are different things. A sotapanna & sakadagamin does NOT have to master 4 Jhanas (Ecstasies) - Only Anagamin do. Anyhow it has been a long writing... More could be said about Satipathana in Jhana (up to base of nothingness MN111), etc etc. Ultimately we won't satisfy the hunger through reading the menu. Eating the food will. Am I saying 'no study, go sit facing a wall?' . Absolutely not. Sutta study is a big MUST. If you read only 50 pages per day, then you'll finish Main Nikays in about 4 month. After this if you aren't pushing toward the stream (or there already), the cultivation of Buddhist Jhana (Ecstasy of Letting Go and seeing clearly) will. Buddha's teaching is about letting go, finding ultimate freedom. Jhana is a temporal state of letting go, of freedom from burning passions of sensuality. If one uses instructions found in the main suttas, hasn't commited heineous crimes, then one can become a high Ariya. It is possible IF YOU TRY. I strongly believe in the ability to go up a level in as little as a WEEK (Buddha has said from pujjhana to Arahant, but I'm being conservative here). The reason why it is harder to do this today is: a) We aren't illiterate farmers, thus it is harder for us to cultivate the nessesery calm (AND PATIENCE!!!) required. b) We don't have a Buddha who could give us the RIGHT subject of meditation that fits our temperament. So we have to use a bit more discrimination for B) and try to do as much sense restrait as possible for A (which means we have to limit reading certain unbeneficial works). Here is fairly good site to try to figure out one's temperament and probably the most beneficial subject. http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism//tinhtut.htm Anyhow: "Winners find solutions, Losers find excuses." Lots of Metta, Alex #80316 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 6:17 am Subject: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) upasaka_howard Hi, TG & James & ALL(!) - In a message dated 12/19/2007 12:44:34 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: Hi James One more comment... Read the Angulimala Sutta. In that Sutta, after Angulimala becomes enlightened, he is struck by sticks, clods, etc. The Buddha tells him ... "Bear it, brahmin! Bear it, brahmin! You are experiencing here and now the result of deeds because of which you might have been tortured in hell for many years..." Surely if there is no Dukkha, there is no need for the Buddha to encourage Angulimala to "bear it." TG =============================== Let's go into this deeply - we three and others too! I think this is an immensely important matter. Need an arahant intentionally "bear" anything? If it is a burden for an arahant that has to be "borne", what exactly does that imply? Would s/he prefer that the pain be gone - that conditions be other than as they are? If yes, how is that not aversion? It is said that the living arahant has put an end to ignorance, craving, and aversion - a complete extinction and uprooting of all defilements. If there is the need to "bear" what is unpleasant, this awakened state of a living arahant is not at all what it is said to be, and, so, this is a VERY important matter and one that calls for unambiguous settling. I encourage everybody to contribute to this, not so much in terms of opinion or favored beliefs, but more in terms of alternative ways to translate the Pali of this this sutta into English, in terms of ways to interpret the quoted material, and in terms of other suttas and commentary that will throw some light on this issue. I find this matter perplexing and of great importance. We should not just end up leaving this matter with a shrug of the shoulders. If we can end this year with a full and satisfying resolution of this issue, I think that alone will make this a great year for DSG. With metta, Howard #80317 From: "karunarathnata" Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:56 am Subject: Re: Anicca=/Dukkha karunarathnata Dear Jon, Thank you very much for asking about me and my veiw. Anicca is nature of changing the things. Every Nama and Roopa are changing. There is nothing which exists at least fraction of second. Consider your one finger and see it. It will change after 10 years. That means it change within 10 years. Within 1 Year, Within 1hour. Within 1second, Within 1over 10000.. second. People think their body and soul ( In Buddist there is no concept call Soul) will exist long time. It is false. Every physical things also has a cycle of dying and birth.That is not raincarnation of one thing. It is like this. Consider flame of a candle. brightening things are Carbon particles, but every time its not a same particle. Particles are always changing. After one burnt anothe will come and will brighten. We call it one flame. Though my English skills are not enough to explain the Anicca there are lot of things i have to say. Dukka and anathma also same. If you are interesting then i will write more. I am a Sri lankan citizen and Buddhist from birth. When I am 10 years old start to study the Dharma in depth. Sri Lanka is the Land of Dharma.( but now its the worst island in world due to corrupted politics) Now I finished my Enginering Digree and waiting for a job. #80318 From: "karunarathnata" Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 8:33 am Subject: Re: paramattha dhamma, wasSutta vs Abhidhamma Dear Friends,. Actually Anatta is completely different thing from Anicca and Dukka. In shorten form , When you realize there is a no person call 'I' and there is no concepts call my and me. Then you have realized Anatta by your self. Native meaning of Anatta is 'No Soul' That means you have no soul which exists only in now or forever. You are only collection of 5 mass. Roopa, Vedana, Sanna, Sanskara and Vinnana. Metta Asanka. #80319 From: "colette" Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:12 am Subject: Sorry for interupting ksheri3 Good Day Group, I have just received a beautiful picture of THE TIGERS NEST, a monestary in Bhutan. Does anybody have any information or references that may help illuminate this beautiful bldg. that I can research? Any help would be appreciated. Happy Holidays to all. toodles, colette #80320 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:17 pm Subject: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) truth_aerator Dear All, > > Surely if there is no Dukkha, there is no need for the Buddha to encourage Angulimala to "bear it." > > TG >>>> There is Physical Dukkha and Mental Dukha. As I understand it, Arahants DO NOT have mental Dukkha at all. But they DO have physical dukha and perhaps dukha of having 5 aggregates & 6 senses. Regarding Dukha: Ultimately EVERYTHING IN SAMSARA IS DUKKHA. Even the highest meditative attainments (Jhana + Immaterial) are Dukkha in a sense that they are fabricated and impermanent. Nirodha Samapatti is not ultimate happiness in a sense that it can only last 7 days max at a time. Now here we have something interesting. Why would Buddha tell an ARAHANT to tolerate the pain? Arahant isn't supposed to have ANY mental problems & even the Physical pain can be reduced significantly (Sariputta being hit by a Yakkha with enough strength to split a mountain yet he felt only a slight headache !!!??). Is it fault with translation "Bear it" or with our understanding of Arahatship? Also in Lakkhanasamyutta there are mentions of Arahant MahaMogallana smiling at the fact that he was no longer be reborn (as a hungry ghost). --- 3) The Emotions of the Buddha It is on rare occasions in the canon that Gautama Buddha showed emotions. But a few cases in the canon suggest that Gautama Buddha felt uneasy and reproached his disciples when they misunderstood and wrongly interpreted his teachings. As the Dharma was his great discovery, his life's work and his message to the suffering world, he would not tolerate his own monks who misrepresented it through carelessness or ill-will. This was the case particularly when their task was to pass this message down to future generations. SŒti, a fisherman's son, is a good example. He wrongly understood the master's teaching that consciousness survived the body and took another form in the new life. Upon hearing this, Gautama cried out: "Foolish man, to whom have you ever known me to teach the Dhamma in that way? Foolish man, in many discourses have I not stated consciousness to be dependently arisen, since without a condition there is no origination of consciousness? But you, foolish man, have misrepresented us by your wrong grasp and injured yourself and stored up much demerit."[42] Ari ha, a former vulture-trainer, was another monk who was reproached by the Buddha in a similar manner for his misunderstanding of the Dharmavinaya. The Buddha blamed him for being a foolish and misguided man.[43] The commentary explains that while reflecting in seclusion, Ari ha came to the conclusion that there would be no harm for bhik·us to engage in sexual relations with women, and he therefore maintained that this should not be prohibited by the monastic rules.[44] In both cases the monks were of humble origins and probably did not have any education at all, so they had difficulty in understanding the Buddha's teaching in its philosophical dimensions. But the two topics concerning a fundamental doctrine and a fundamental practice are crucial in the understanding of the Buddha's teachings. It therefore appears that the Buddha reproached them with personal feeling. In these two cases, it may perhaps be argued that the Buddha was not angry, but what he said concerning Devadatta suggests that he was angry at least in the literary sense of the word. Devadatta intrigued for the leadership of the Sangha and asked the Buddha to hand over it to him. The Buddha said: "Not even to SŒriputta and Moggallana would I hand over the Order, and would I to thee, vile one, to be vomited like spittle?"[45] In the AºguttaranikŒya, we find the following saying of Gautama Buddha when înanda made inquiries on Devadatta: "And so long as, înanda, I saw a bright spot in Devadatta, even the prick-end of a horse-hair in size, I declared not: 'Devadatta is wayward gone, hell-bound for a kalpa, unpardonable' – but it was when I saw none, that I declared thus…"[46] The same comment is also found in the Chinese counterpart, the EkottarŒgama.[47] This statement is not unlike a curse, and arguably motivated by anger. The Devadatta incident was a bitter experience in the life of Gautama Buddha, because as a monk and disciple in his own community, Devadatta had tried with a certain success to split the Order the Buddha had established with much effort. Therefore, whenever Devadatta was mentioned, Gautama Buddha would speak of him as a bad person of evil intention. The Sangha was the disseminator of the Buddha's message to the world. Gautama was very concerned about the split of the Sangha for he had seen what had happened to Jaina monks in the last few years of his life.[48] The VibhŒ·Œ, with reference to Devadatta, mentions that the bad karma entailed by the destruction of the Sangha is graver or heavier than that of shedding the blood of the Buddha. The split of the Sangha was explained as the destruction of the dharmakŒya while shedding the blood of the Buddha harms the rèpakŒya.[49] Apart from these, there are at least two cases in the MahŒparinibbŒnasutta that illustrate the Buddha displaying emotions. These consisted in feeling appreciation towards beautiful things. The first incident was when the Licchavis of VesŒl´, wearing cloths of different colours and adorned with various kinds of ornaments, approached the Buddha in carriages. Gautama said to his disciples: "O brethren, let those of the brethren who have never seen the TŒvatiµsa gods, gaze upon this company of the Licchavis, behold this company of the Licchavis, compare this company of the Licchavis, for they are even as a company of TŒvatiµsa gods."[50] The second incident occurred after the Buddha and înanda had returned from a begging tour in VesŒl´. The Buddha addressed înanda: "How delightful a spot, înanda, is VesŒl´, and how charming the Udena Shrine, and the Gotamaka Shrine…"[51] These two incidents are also mentioned in the Chinese translations of the MahŒparinirvŒöasètra.[52] These pieces of literature suggest that the Buddha had emotions which he manifested in different ways. If a sense of appreciation shows the compassion of Gautama Buddha, then anger definitely shows the human side of him because a Buddha, at least by definition, is a person who has eliminated the three evils: greed, hatred and ignorance. These incidents reveal the human aspect of the Buddha. http://www.whpq.org/visitor/200206/200206/001-1.htm --- Lots of Metta, Alex #80321 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:27 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,220 Vism.XVII,221 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 220. As to the clause 'With the sixfold base as condition, contact': Contact is briefly of six kinds With eye-contact and others too; According to each consciousness It is in detail thirty-two. 221. Briefly, with the clause 'With the sixfold base as condition, contact', there are only six kinds beginning with eye-contact, that is to say, eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, and mind-contact. But in detail the five profitable resultant and the five unprofitable resultant beginning with eye-contact make ten; the rest, which are associated with the twenty-two kinds of mundane resultant consciousness, make twenty-two. So all these come to thirty-two ((34)-(65)), like the consciousness with formations as condition given above. ******************************* 220. sa.laayatanapaccayaaphassapadavitthaarakathaa sa.laayatanapaccayaa phassapade -- sa.leva phassaa sa"nkhepaa, cakkhusamphassaaadayo. vi~n~naa.namiva dvatti.msa, vitthaarena bhavanti te.. 221. sa"nkhepena hi sa.laayatanapaccayaa phassoti cakkhusamphasso, sotasamphasso, ghaanasamphasso, jivhaasamphasso, kaayasamphasso, manosamphassoti ime cakkhusamphassaadayo cha eva phassaa bhavanti. vitthaarena pana cakkhusamphassaadayo pa~nca kusalavipaakaa, pa~nca akusalavipaakaati dasa, sesaa dvaviisati-lokiyavipaakavi~n~naa.nasampayuttaa ca dvaviisatiiti eva.m sabbepi sa"nkhaarapaccayaa vuttavi~n~naa.namiva dvatti.msa honti. #80322 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 4:47 pm Subject: Re: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina et buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: I've never suggested or hinted that sankhara (dhammas) don't exist, > James! Seeing now is a sankhara dhamma. Visible object appearing is a > sankhara dhamma. So is hearing, sound, feeling, perception, like, > dislike.... All conditioned dhammas are sankhara dhammas. Of course they > exist! I'll be glad to see any comment I've ever given which has led you > to your conclusion above. There are no such things as "sankhara dhammas". Sankhara are formations and dhammas are phenomenon. You are confusing the two and that is making this discussion impossible. I posted to this once to Howard but I will go ahead and post it again: Sankhara are fabrications, constructions, things put together. These would include: trees, rocks, flowers, people, animals, computers, etc. and mental fabrications (thoughts- which are constructed in the mind), body, feeling, perception. Dhammas are phenomenon, characteristics, `nature' of things. These would include: citta (consciousness), rupa (heat, cold, hardness, softness, fluidity, color, cohesion, movement, etc.), and nibbana. Sankharas are fabrications and therefore can be sub-divided. Dhammas are phenomenon and therefore cannot be sub-divided. It was my understanding that the students of KS believe that the only things which are real are dhammas and that sankhara (constructions) are not real but are only concepts. Is this a fair summary? Now, are we on the same page or is your understanding of these two terms different? Metta, James #80323 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? buddhatrue Hi TG, > > Surely if there is no Dukkha, there is no need for the Buddha to encourage > Angulimala to "bear it." > > TG Again, I see this sutta entirely differently than you do. The Buddha was telling Angulimala to "Bear with it" as a way of saying "Accept it". This is your kamma you must accept it. Think about the circumstance: Angulimala had gone on alms rounds and he was jumped. He came back to the Buddha with his head busted open and bleeding, his bowl broken, and his robes torn to shreads- not the way an arahant monk should be treated! The Buddha tells him that he must accept that type of treatment because that is his kamma. If anything, Angulimala was surprised, puzzled, as to why this happened to him. The Buddha explained why. So, Angulimala goes into seclusion into the forest (as he can't go on alms rounds anymore) and radiates compassion to those who attacked him. He didn't experience any type of dukkha whatsoever from this attack. Metta, James #80324 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:13 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,220 Vism.XVII,221 nichiconn dear Vism study followers, Path of Purity, p.678 (see dsg #80321) As to the clause "conditioned by sixfold sense, contact comes to pass," In brief eye-contact and so on make six, In detail thirty-two, like consciousness. Briefly, "Conditioned by sixfold sense, contact comes to pass" means there are six contacts: namely the contact of eye, of ear, of nose, of tongue, of body, of mind. In all these are thirty-two as in the case of consciousness, mentioned above, which is conditioned by activities, namely, ten made up of five moral results beginning with eye-contact and so on and five immoral results, and the remaining twenty-two which are associated with the worldly resultant consciousness. === connie #80325 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:15 pm Subject: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) buddhatrue Hi Howard, I posted to TG about this sutta. I don't agree with his interpretation. And, I agree with you that this is a very, very important subject. TG wrote to me that his and my understanding of the Dhamma is not that far different. But, if TG believes that an arahant can experience dukkha of any sort, then I think our understanding of the dhamma is worlds apart! Metta, James #80326 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:28 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) TGrand458@... Hi James and Howard I for one consider this topic of little importance. We are just speculating on what an arahant can experience and its a near waste of time. We'll never know for sure unless we become one. If you think this is a very very important subject, then I guess you're right. Our view of Dhamma is worlds apart. TG #80327 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:44 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) TGrand458@... In a message dated 12/19/2007 12:18:41 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: We should not just end up leaving this matter with a shrug of the shoulders. If we can end this year with a full and satisfying resolution of this issue, I think that alone will make this a great year for DSG. Hi Howard An impossibility I'm afraid. However, my thrust on the issue is due to the many many Sutta passages that show Arahants desiring a pleasant abiding vs am unpleasant one. (Excuse me, I have to go stretch my aching back.) OK, back again. ;-) Buddha recommended meditation for Arahants to both ... set a good example, and to have a pleasant abiding. It seems to me that Arahants were discerning enough to prefer a pleasant abiding over "walking into a wall," for example. Though I firmly believe there was no self-view involved in such actions, I do think that "pleasant conditions" were wisely preferred over "unpleasant conditions." The Sutta on the "two darts" is the most direct explanation of the matter that I'm aware of. Aside from that, all we can do is speculate on exactly what an Arahant experiences. The benefits of Arahantship are overwhelming, and whatever side one is on regarding this issue should not in anyway affect one's motivation for making progress in that direction. TG #80328 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/... upasaka_howard Hi, James (and Sarah) - In a message dated 12/19/2007 7:47:13 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: I've never suggested or hinted that sankhara (dhammas) don't exist, > James! Seeing now is a sankhara dhamma. Visible object appearing is a > sankhara dhamma. So is hearing, sound, feeling, perception, like, > dislike.... All conditioned dhammas are sankhara dhammas. Of course they > exist! I'll be glad to see any comment I've ever given which has led you > to your conclusion above. There are no such things as "sankhara dhammas". Sankhara are formations and dhammas are phenomenon. You are confusing the two and that is making this discussion impossible. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: James, in the suttas, the word 'dhamma' is an informal one that merely means "thing" - so everything is included under 'dhamma'. As for 'sankhara', it seems to me that you are using it in the sense of what I call an "aggregation", by which I mean a dynamic, integrated aggregate of interrelated phenomena. 'Sankhara' actually has several senses, and that is but one. That sense makes it correspond to what Sarah would call "pa~n~natto" (I assume that is the singular.) But please note that Nyanaponika includes the following as part of his definition of 'sankhara ': ******************************* 4. It occurs further in the sense of anything formed (saá¹…khata, q.v.) and conditioned, and includes all things whatever in the world, all phenomena of existence. This meaning applies, e.g. to the well-known passage, "All formations are impermanent... subject to suffering" (sabbe saá¹…khÄ?ra aniccÄ? ... dukkhÄ? ). In that context, however, s. is subordinate to the still wider and all-embracing term dhamma (thing); for dhamma includes also the Unformed or Unconditioned Element (asaá¹…khata-dhÄ?tu), i.e. NibbÄ?na (e.g. in sabbe dhammÄ? anattÄ? , "all things are without a self"). ****************************** -------------------------------------------------------- I posted to this once to Howard but I will go ahead and post it again: Sankhara are fabrications, constructions, things put together. These would include: trees, rocks, flowers, people, animals, computers, etc. and mental fabrications (thoughts- which are constructed in the mind), body, feeling, perception Dhammas are phenomenon, characteristics, `nature' of things. These would include: citta (consciousness), rupa (heat, cold, hardness, softness, fluidity, color, cohesion, movement, etc.), and nibbana. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: This seems to me to be an idiosyncratic definition. It makes 'dhamma' and 'lakhana' synonymous. Consciousness isn't a quality but an operation. The same for feeling, recognition, and so on. As for hardness, warmth, sights, sounds, and so on, if they are qualities, what are they qualities OF? We only think of hardness as a quality, because we think that a table, for example, is the reality and hardness is just a feature of that reality. But the opposite is closer: The hardness is a reality, and the table an aggregation, viewed as a unit, and one of whose elements is hardness. ----------------------------------------------------- Sankharas are fabrications and therefore can be sub-divided. Dhammas are phenomenon and therefore cannot be sub-divided. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: As I surmised, you are restricting the term 'sankhara' to refer to aggregations (aka pa~n~natti). So, you are dividing "the world" into concepts and realities just as Sarah does, only she calls the first "pa~n~natti" and you call them "sankhara". ---------------------------------------------- It was my understanding that the students of KS believe that the only things which are real are dhammas and that sankhara (constructions) are not real but are only concepts. Is this a fair summary? ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Hah! I was right! ========================= With metta, Howard #80329 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:18 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) upasaka_howard Hi, TG (and James) - The subject is the nature of the ultimate goal of Dhamma practice. I see that as important. With metta, Howard #80330 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:22 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 12/19/2007 9:45:20 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: Hi Howard An impossibility I'm afraid. However, my thrust on the issue is due to the many many Sutta passages that show Arahants desiring a pleasant abiding vs am unpleasant one. (Excuse me, I have to go stretch my aching back.) OK, back again. ;-) Buddha recommended meditation for Arahants to both ... set a good example, and to have a pleasant abiding. It seems to me that Arahants were discerning enough to prefer a pleasant abiding over "walking into a wall," for example. Though I firmly believe there was no self-view involved in such actions, I do think that "pleasant conditions" were wisely preferred over "unpleasant conditions." The Sutta on the "two darts" is the most direct explanation of the matter that I'm aware of. Aside from that, all we can do is speculate on exactly what an Arahant experiences. The benefits of Arahantship are overwhelming, and whatever side one is on regarding this issue should not in anyway affect one's motivation for making progress in that direction. TG ============================== I don't get it. If an arahant wishes to obtain what is pleasant and remove what is unpleasant, how is s/he any different from you or I with regard to tanha? Wanting what is pleasant and wanting the absence of what is unpleasant is exactly the nature of samsara! With metta, Howard #80331 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 8:29 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/... buddhatrue Hi Howard, > ****************************** Okay, so sakharas are things; and dhammas are things; so sakhara dhammas must be thingies? Okay, that clears it up for everyone! LOL! Metta, James #80332 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:47 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) TGrand458@... In a message dated 12/19/2007 9:26:49 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: I don't get it. If an arahant wishes to obtain what is pleasant and remove what is unpleasant, how is s/he any different from you or I with regard to tanha? Wanting what is pleasant and wanting the absence of what is unpleasant is exactly the nature of samsara! With metta, Howard Hi Howard I'm just reporting incidences from the Suttas. I'm not proffering anything of my own. An Arahants experience is no doubt profoundly different from ours including those of their "motivations." Arahants do not seem to be indifferent phenomena, but seem to want the greater good for all concerned including "themselves." Many, including the Buddha, seemed to prefer solitude over contact with people. (The Buddha teaches with the idea if dismissing folks, etc.) Arahants seem to have their own classification of desires. The difference is...their desires are based on insight, ours are based largely on ignorance. TG #80333 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 9:11 pm Subject: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) buddhatrue Hi TG and Howard, Anicca doesn't = dukkha for the arahant: Ven. Sariputta said, "Friends, just now as I was withdrawn in seclusion, this train of thought arose to my awareness: 'Is there anything in the world with whose change or alteration there would arise within me sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair?' Then the thought occurred to me: 'There is nothing in the world with whose change or alteration there would arise within me sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn21/sn21.002.than.html Metta, James #80334 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:02 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) TGrand458@... In a message dated 12/19/2007 10:11:53 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: Hi TG and Howard, Anicca doesn't = dukkha for the arahant: Ven. Sariputta said, "Friends, just now as I was withdrawn in seclusion, this train of thought arose to my awareness: 'Is there anything in the world with whose change or alteration there would arise within me sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair?' Then the thought occurred to me: 'There is nothing in the world with whose change or alteration there would arise within me sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair.'" _http://www.accesstohttp://www.ahttp://wwhttp://www.achttp://wwhttp_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn21/sn21.002.than.html) Metta, James Hi James I completely agree! TG #80335 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Thu Dec 20, 2007 1:12 am Subject: Need info: Karma with respect to no-existing-selves dacostacharles HI ALL, I have to write a paper on Karma, and I would like to add to the paper, a view of karma with respect to no-existing-selves (persons). Actually, I would like to present as many views as possible, so if there are others, please and them to this thread. IMPORTANT: I am not looking to debate the correctness or validity of the individual views. Please make that another thread. I just want the views. e.g., I am including the classical Indian view of "reward and punishment, spanning an eternity of life-times." Charles DaCosta #80336 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Thu Dec 20, 2007 1:44 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Sutta vs Abhidhamma dacostacharles Hi all, I am sorry for butting in without reading all the post first. However, I have to ask: is it really important how valid or canonical the Abhidamma is in comparison to the Suttras? Personally, I believe the Buddha had not expected people to be comparing and contrasting every thing he said - For the sake of arguing which are correct meanings, and which are more reliable texts/interpretations. I believe the Buddha expected us to search his teachings (even those we drought are really his) to see if we can fine a teaching that is related to what we as individuals may be going through; and, from this single teaching, find the prescription (or part of it), i.e., medicine, to bring the individual a little closer to freedom from suffering, even if this freedom is only temporary. This is regardless of how contradictory the teaching, or its interpretation, may appear to other teachings. The bottom line: (1) If the Abhidarma helps you, use it, and understand it will not be useful to everybody else; (2) If it doesn't help you, than don't use it, nor should you feeling that you have to prove it is not valid; (3) If a single group of teachings was enough to bring everybody to enlightenment, I believe the Buddha would have stop there, just to avoid confusing us more; and (4) If all the teachings should agree or should mean the same thing, than they can't cover every situation. Don't get me wrong, I understand the desire to debate an issue or prove a point correct. I just don't want you to forget, sometimes we are Just Debating, and to follow an Asian custom, we drink tea together and save the rest of the debate for later. Charles DaCosta #80337 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 20, 2007 2:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anicca=/Dukkha nilovg Dear Asankha, Op 19-dec-2007, om 16:56 heeft karunarathnata het volgende geschreven: > Anicca is nature of changing the things. Every Nama and Roopa are > changing. There is nothing which exists at least fraction of second. > Consider your one finger and see it. It will change after 10 years. > That means it change within 10 years. Within 1 Year, Within 1hour. > Within 1second, Within > 1over 10000.. second. People think their body and soul ( In Buddist > there is no concept call Soul) will exist long time. It is false. > Every physical things also has a cycle of dying and birth.That is not > raincarnation of one thing. It is like this. Consider flame of a > candle. brightening things are Carbon particles, but every time its > not a same particle. Particles are always changing. After one burnt > anothe will come and will brighten. We call it one flame. > > Though my English skills are not enough to explain the Anicca there > are lot of things i have to say. Dukka and anathma also same. If you > are interesting then i will write more. ------- N: Do not worry about your English. You have explained anicca with examples that are understandable for everybody. i like them very much. Please explain dukkha as you see it. Nina. #80338 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 20, 2007 3:10 am Subject: Re: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) nilovg Hi Howard, Op 19-dec-2007, om 20:17 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Let's go into this deeply - we three and others too! I think this > is an > immensely important matter. > Need an arahant intentionally "bear" anything? If it is a burden > for an > arahant that has to be "borne", what exactly does that imply? Would > s/he > prefer that the pain be gone - that conditions be other than as > they are? If yes, > how is that not aversion? -------- N: I compared the Thai and Co, but the Co. does not mention anything about this phrase, and apparently there was no problem. My PTS has: 'Do you endure it, brahman, do you endure it, brahman.' Thai also uses this meaning. The co mentions only that he was called brahman since he had the aasavas destroyed. Let us look at the context. The Buddha wanted to explain about kamma and vipaaka, he explained that also arahats still can receive results of evil deeds committed before they became arahat. They cannot commit any new kamma. The Buddha thought of us all when he explained this. 'Do you endure it" is more in the sense of: this ought to be endured. Of course Angulimala had no more aversion. But we, the listeners, need this exhortation. We can learn a lesson about akusala vipaaka. It can be so harsh, so difficult to endure, but we better be patient and cope with it with right understanding of kamma and vipaaka. Once Kh Sujin said to me: 'I am prepared to endure any kind of vipaaka.' And true, it is better to endure it now than in hell. I hope you can now have a very peaceful old and new year. Nina. #80339 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Thu Dec 20, 2007 3:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? rjkjp1 Dear James Avccording to the commentary no one attacked Angulimala. Rather they would, for instance, throw some rubbish out the window not realising a Bhikkhu was underneath. robert #80340 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/... upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 12/19/2007 11:30:11 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: Okay, so sakharas are things; and dhammas are things; so sakhara dhammas must be thingies? Okay, that clears it up for everyone! LOL! ============================== Ah, thank goodness. You've zeroed in on the crux of the matter and fin ally put it to rest. ;-) With metta, Howard #80341 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Dec 20, 2007 4:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha? buddhatrue Hi Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > +++++++\ > Dear James > Avccording to the commentary no one attacked Angulimala. Rather they > would, for instance, throw some rubbish out the window not realising > a Bhikkhu was underneath. > robert Huh? The sutta states differently: Then Ven. Angulimala, early in the morning, having put on his robes and carrying his outer robe & bowl, went into Savatthi for alms. Now at that time a clod thrown by one person hit Ven. Angulimala on the body, a stone thrown by another person hit him on the body, and a potsherd thrown by still another person hit him on the body. So Ven. Angulimala ¡X his head broken open and dripping with blood, his bowl broken, and his outer robe ripped to shreds ¡X went to the Blessed One. The Blessed One saw him coming from afar and on seeing him said to him: "Bear with it, brahman! Bear with it! The fruit of the kamma that would have burned you in hell for many years, many hundreds of years, many thousands of years, you are now experiencing in the here- &-now!" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.086.than.html He was hit with clods of dirt, rocks, and a potsherd (broken and sharp piece of pottery). That doesn't sound like rubbish accidently falling on Angulimala. Metta, James #80342 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:18 am Subject: Perfections Corner (59) nichiconn Dear All, http://www.zolag.co.uk/ - The Perfections Leading to Enlightenment by Sujin Boriharnwanaket; translated by Nina van Gorkom. Chapter 8: The Perfection of Determination. continued... As to the fifth qualification, the going forth, he must have gone forth into the homeless state, either as an ascetic or as a bhikkhu who believes in the doctrine of kamma and its appropriate result. His aspiration does not succeed when he lives as a layman. At the time he makes his resolution to become a Sammaasambuddha, he should have gone forth, because a monk is stronger in his determination than a layman. As to the sixth qualification, the achievement of noble qualities, we read in the Commentary to the "Basket of Conduct": " 6) The achievement of noble qualities (gunasampatti): the achievement of such noble qualities as the direct knowledges (abhi~n~naa), etc. For the aspiration only succeeds when made by one who has gone forth and gained the eight meditative attainments (samaapatti) and the five mundane types of direct knowledge; it does not succeed for one devoid of these qualities. Why? Because one devoid of them is incapable of investigating the paaramiis. It is because he possesses the necessary supporting conditions and the direct knowledges that the Great Man, after he has made the aspiration, is able to investigate the paaramiis by himself." As to the seventh qualification, extreme dedication, we read: "(7) Extreme dedication (adhikaara): extreme devotion. The aspiration only succeeds for one endowed with the aforesaid qualities who at the time has such strong devotion for the Buddhas that he is prepared to relinquish his very life for them." During the Bodhisatta's life as Sumedha, people were clearing the way for the Buddha Diipa'nkara, but since they were not yet ready, Sumedha threw himself on the road so that the Buddha would tread on him instead of walking on the mud. ..to be continued, connie #80343 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:18 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (72) nichiconn Dear Friends, Part 8 15. Cattaaliisanipaato 1. Isidaasiitheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 440. "Soha.m tato cavitvaa, kaala.m karitvaa sindhavaara~n~ne; kaa.naaya ca kha~njaaya ca, e.lakiyaa kucchimokkami.m. 441. "Dvaadasa vassaani aha.m, nillacchito daarake parivahitvaa; kiminaava.t.to akallo, yathaapi gantvaana paradaara.m. 442. "Soha.m tato cavitvaa, govaa.nijakassa gaaviyaa jaato; vaccho laakhaatambo, nillacchito dvaadase maase. 443. "Vo.dhuuna na"ngalamaha.m, saka.ta~nca dhaarayaami; andhova.t.to akallo, yathaapi gantvaana paradaara.m. 444. "Soha.m tato cavitvaa, viithiyaa daasiyaa ghare jaato; neva mahilaa na puriso, yathaapi gantvaana paradaara.m. 438. I fell from there, and dying in the Sindhava forest, entered the womb of a one-eyed, lame she-goat. 439. Castrated, and carrying children around for twelve years, I was worm eaten, afflicted indeed, unfit, because of having seduced another's wife. 440-441. I fell from there and was born to a cow belonging to a cattle dealer, a lac-red calf. I was castrated. For twelve months I pulled a plough and a cart,* blind indeed, afflicted, unfit, because of having seduced another's wife. 442. I fell from there and was born of a household slave in the street, as neither a woman nor a man, because of having seduced another's wife. *This paada is truncated. For suggested readings, see EV II, p159. RD: Therefrom deceasing in the woods of Sindh, Reborn the offspring of a one-eyed goat (438) And lame; twelve years a gelding, gnawn by worms, Unfit, I carried children on my back. Such was the fruit of my lasciviousness. (439) Therefrom deceasing, I again found birth, The offspring of a cattle-dealer's cow, A calf of lac-red hue; in the twelfth month (440) Castrated, yoked, I drew the plough and cart, Purblind and worried, driven and unfit. Such was the fruit of my lasciviousness. (441) Therefrom deceasing, even in the street I came to birth, child of a household slave, Neither of woman nor of man my sex. Such was the fruit of my lasciviousness. (442) ===to be continued, connie #80344 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Dec 20, 2007 12:21 am Subject: Re: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) upasaka_howard Hi, James (and TG) - In a message dated 12/20/2007 12:11:44 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: Hi TG and Howard, Anicca doesn't = dukkha for the arahant: Ven. Sariputta said, "Friends, just now as I was withdrawn in seclusion, this train of thought arose to my awareness: 'Is there anything in the world with whose change or alteration there would arise within me sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair?' Then the thought occurred to me: 'There is nothing in the world with whose change or alteration there would arise within me sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn21/sn21.002.than.html Metta, James ================================ Yes, this is a good sutta for pointing that out. Still, all conditioned dhammas, due in part to their impermanence fail as sources of lasting satisfaction (for anyone), and that is a sense in which they are dukkha. More generally, for whatever reason, conditioned dhammas are dukkha in that they are not sources of genuine satisfaction for anyone, worldling or arahant. They simply do not satisfy. Relinquishing our clinging to them does, which the arahant already has done. There still does remain that problem of "Bear it, Brahman!" which I would like to see some responses to. With all the expert pariyati folks here, I do hope to get some insightful comments on that. With metta, Howard #80345 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Dec 20, 2007 1:17 am Subject: Re: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/20/2007 6:11:10 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 19-dec-2007, om 20:17 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Let's go into this deeply - we three and others too! I think this > is an > immensely important matter. > Need an arahant intentionally "bear" anything? If it is a burden > for an > arahant that has to be "borne", what exactly does that imply? Would > s/he > prefer that the pain be gone - that conditions be other than as > they are? If yes, > how is that not aversion? -------- N: I compared the Thai and Co, but the Co. does not mention anything about this phrase, and apparently there was no problem. My PTS has: 'Do you endure it, brahman, do you endure it, brahman.' Thai also uses this meaning. The co mentions only that he was called brahman since he had the aasavas destroyed. Let us look at the context. The Buddha wanted to explain about kamma and vipaaka, he explained that also arahats still can receive results of evil deeds committed before they became arahat. They cannot commit any new kamma. The Buddha thought of us all when he explained this. 'Do you endure it" is more in the sense of: this ought to be endured. Of course Angulimala had no more aversion. But we, the listeners, need this exhortation. We can learn a lesson about akusala vipaaka. It can be so harsh, so difficult to endure, but we better be patient and cope with it with right understanding of kamma and vipaaka. Once Kh Sujin said to me: 'I am prepared to endure any kind of vipaaka.' And true, it is better to endure it now than in hell. I hope you can now have a very peaceful old and new year. Nina. =========================== Thank you for this, Nina! The translation 'Do you endure it, brahman, do you endure it, brahman.' is way more palatable to me than the translation that has the Buddha urging "Bear with it, brahman! Bear with it!" The PTS version has the Buddha simply confirming, as I see it, that Angulimala, merely observes unpleasant phenomena without aversive reaction. That's WAY better, not being an urging to tolerate! My online dictionary gives two meanings for 'endure', the 1st of which still is VERY problematical, but the second of which is just fine and accords with reading I gave above. The two are as follows: 1 : to undergo (as a hardship) especially without giving in : _SUFFER _ (javascript:lookWord('suffer');) 2 : to regard with acceptance or tolerance intransitive senses I also wish you and Lodewijk a lovely Christmas and a healthy, happy, loving, and fruitful new year! :-) With metta, Howard #80346 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:35 am Subject: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 7, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, There are seven kinds of rúpa that appear all the time in daily life: visible object appears through the eye-door, sound through the ear- door, odour through the nose-door, and flavour through the tongue- door. Through the bodysense there is the experience of solidity, appearing as hardness or softness, temperature, appearing as heat or cold, and motion, appearing as motion or pressure. After these rúpas have been experienced through their relevant sense-doors, they are experienced through the mind-door. Afterwards other mind-door processes of cittas arise that know concepts on account of the rúpas that have been experienced. Processes of cittas experiencing rúpas through the sense-door and then through the mind-door arise and fall away extremely rapidly. We do not notice it that a particular rúpa is experienced through the mind-door after it has been experienced through a sense-door. We are ignorant of the mind-door process. Nåmas, citta and cetasika, are experienced only through the mind- door. When there is awareness of seeing it has arisen in a sense-door process and then fallen away, but its characteristic still appears and it can be object of mindfulness arising in another process. We listen to the Dhamma and in this way we have more understanding of the reality appearing at this moment, be it nåma or rúpa, be it kusala or akusala. When understanding based on listening has been developed there are conditions for the arising of direct awareness of the characteristics of nåma and rúpa as they appear one at a time. When satipatthåna has been developed more thoroughly, stages of vipassanå ñåna, insight knowledge, can be reached. The first stage is: distinguishing the difference between the characteristic of nåma and the characteristic of rúpa, nåma-rúpa-pariccheda-ñåna. This kind of paññå realizes through the mind-door the difference between nåma and rúpa. A moment of insight knowledge is different from the moments when nåma and rúpa seem to appear together, such as seeing and visible object. When insight knowledge arises there is no self, nåma and rúpa appear one at a time as non-self. There is no world, no thinking of concepts of person or thing, there is nothing else appearing but nåma and rúpa. When nåma and rúpa appear as they are through the mind-door, there is no doubt about what nåma is and what rúpa is, and no confusion about what the mind-door is. There is no thinking about the different doorways, the cittas arising in a sense-door process and the mind- door process succeed one another extremely rapidly. After the moments of vipassanå ñåna have fallen away, doubt arises again, and thus, one has to continue developing insight so that the following stages of vipassanå ñåna can arise. However, one should be detached and not try to reach higher stages. Acharn Sujin said: "Ignorance and desire are hindrances to the development of vipassanå. One should not be interested in it whether the next stage of vipassanå ñåna arises or not, otherwise there are expectations again. It does not matter when the next stage of vipassanå ñåna arises. With vipassanå ñåna paññå has reached another level. Paññå is non-self." ******** Nina. #80347 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:59 am Subject: Re: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) nilovg Hi Howard, Op 20-dec-2007, om 15:17 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > The translation 'Do you endure it, brahman, do > you endure it, brahman.' is way more palatable to me ------- N: The Pali is even more beautiful: AddasÄ? kho bhagavÄ? Ä?yasmantaṃ a.ngulimÄ?laṃ dÅ«ratova Ä?gacchanta.m (approaching from far), disvÄ?na Ä?yasmanta.m aá¹…gulimÄ?la.m etadavoca (spoke thus): adhivÄ?sehi tva.m brÄ?hma.na, adhivÄ?sehi tva.m brÄ?hma.na, yassa kho tvaṃ kammassa vipÄ?kena bahÅ«ni vassÄ?ni bahÅ«ni vassasatÄ?ni bahÅ«ni vassasahassÄ?ni (many hundreds, etc. of years) niraye pacceyyÄ?si (you would boil). adhivÄ?sehi tva.m brÄ?hma.na: You brahman, be patient. Adhivaasana khanti is patience with regard to one's surroundings. Thus as to hardship we have to endure in our daily life. The imperative meaning as I took it: one ought to be patient, as a lesson for us all. Angulimala had the highest patience, he had accumulated all the perfections, patience included. Otherwise he could not have become an arahat. Nina. #80348 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Dec 20, 2007 7:04 am Subject: Re: Sutta vs Abhidhamma truth_aerator Hi Charles, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles DaCosta" wrote: However, I have to ask: is it really important how valid or canonical the Abhidamma is in comparison to the Suttras? ><>>> It is VERY important. Buddha DHAMMA IS THE BEST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It should NEVER be diluted. I hope that you understand that it is in the best interest of ALL that Liberating Buddha Dhamma remains. > > Personally, I believe the Buddha had not expected people to be comparing and contrasting every thing he said - >>> Actually he did: Investigation of Dhamma, Investigation of him, learning more and more of his Dhamma implies comparing & contrasting. If you simply take it on faith, then you risk of only having shallow if any understanding. But if you examine the teachings, then you'll know them better. > > (1) If the Abhidarma helps you, use it, and understand it will not be useful to everybody else; >>> That is good advice. Were there any people liberated by studying Abhidhamma Pitaka? If so who? > > (2) If it doesn't help you, than don't use it, nor should you feeling that you have to prove it is not valid; >>>> Except that Buddha Dhamma is the best and it needs to be protected from "corruption from within". Do you think Mara is lying on a coach drinking beer and eating popcorn watching the latest Paranimittavasavatin Superbowl XXXXIV ? > (3) If a single group of teachings was enough to bring everybody to > enlightenment, I believe the Buddha would have stop there, just to avoid confusing us more; and >>> And he did. Remember the parable of being shot with an Arrow? Later people (Marayanists) started to ADD, a lot of new teachings. In fact all the commentaries + developments are much larger than 4 Main Nikayas. Lots of Metta, May the DHAMMA be with you!!!! Alex #80349 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Dec 20, 2007 4:47 am Subject: From Two Suttas: The Imperturbable Nature of an Arahant upasaka_howard SN 21.2 Upatissa Sutta About Upatissa (Sariputta) Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu PTS: S ii 274 CDB i 714 ____________________________________ Source: Transcribed from a file provided by the translator. ____________________________________ Copyright © 1999 Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight edition © 1999 For free distribution. This work may be republished, reformatted, reprinted, and redistributed in any medium. It is the author's wish, however, that any such republication and redistribution be made available to the public on a free and unrestricted basis and that translations and other derivative works be clearly marked as such. ____________________________________ At Savatthi. There Ven. Sariputta addressed the monks: "Friends!" "Yes, friend," the monks responded. Ven. Sariputta said, "Friends, just now as I was withdrawn in seclusion, this train of thought arose to my awareness: 'Is there anything in the world with whose change or alteration there would arise within me sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair?' Then the thought occurred to me: 'There is nothing in the world with whose change or alteration there would arise within me sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair.'" When this was said, Ven. Ananda said to Ven. Sariputta, "Sariputta my friend, even if there were change & alteration in the Teacher would there arise within you no sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair?" "Even if there were change & alteration in the Teacher, my friend, there would arise within me no sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair. Still, I would have this thought: 'What a great being, of great might, of great prowess, has disappeared! For if the Blessed One were to remain for a long time, that would be for the benefit of many people, for the happiness of many people, out of sympathy for the world; for the welfare, benefit, & happiness of human & divine beings.'" "Surely," [said Ven. Ananda,] "it's because Ven. Sariputta's I-making & mine-making and obsessions with conceit have long been well uprooted that even if there were change & alteration in the Teacher, there would arise within him no sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair." And in AN 6.55, speaking of an Arahant, the Buddha says the following: "Just as if there were a mountain of rock — without cracks, without fissures, one solid mass — and then from the east there were to come a powerful storm of wind & rain: the mountain would neither shiver nor quiver nor shake. And then from the west... the north... the south there were to come a powerful storm of wind & rain: the mountain would neither shiver nor quiver nor shake. In the same way, even if powerful forms cognizable by the eye come into the visual range of a monk whose mind is thus rightly released, his mind is neither overpowered nor even engaged. Being still, having reached imperturbability, he focuses on their passing away. And even if powerful sounds... aromas... flavors... tactile sensations... Even if powerful ideas cognizable by the intellect come into the mental range of a monk whose mind is thus rightly released, his mind is neither overpowered nor even engaged. Being still, having reached imperturbability, he focuses on their passing away." #80350 From: "R. K. Wijayaratne" Date: Thu Dec 20, 2007 3:31 pm Subject: Roots * rwijayaratne Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammâ Sambuddhassa! <...> Taken from AccessToInsight.org1 Translated from Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu SUMMARY: There are three unwholesome roots of greed, hatred and delusion. Greed, hatred and delusion are unskillful (not good). Whatever a person does in greed, hatred and/or delusion through bodily actions, verbal actions and mental actions is also unskillful (not good). Whatever suffering is wrongly inflicted on another being through beating, imprisonment, confiscation, blaming, banishment by a person with his/her mind overcome with greed, hatred and/or delusion thinking 'I am/I want to be powerful' is also unskillful (not good). This is how many unskillful (not good) qualities come up with greed, hatred and/or delusion as the root cause. Such a person (above) is called someone who speaks at the wrong time, speaks what is unfactual, speaks what is irrelevant, speaks contrary to the Dhamma (teachings) and Vinaya (training rules). This is because they wrongly inflicted suffering on another through beating ... etc (with a mind overcome with greed, hatred and/or delusion). When s/he is told what factual they do not acknowledge it but rather deny it. When s/he is shown the unfactual as unfactual, s/he doesn't make an effort to untangle (the untruths) and see that. Such a person with his mind overcome by unskillful (not good) qualities born of greed, hatred and/or delusion and consumed by these, lives suffering right here and now feeling threatened, turbulent, feverish, and after death can expect a bad destination (e.g. lower realms, hell). Just as a sal, birch or aspen tree is smothered and surrounded (wrapped) by parasitic vines falls into misfortune and disaster; such a person expect a bad destination following death. ROOTS Anguttara Nikâya 3.69 - Mula Sutta2 "Monks, there are these three roots of what is unskillful. Which three? Greed is a root of what is unskillful, aversion is a root of what is unskillful, delusion is a root of what is unskillful. "Greed itself is unskillful. Whatever a greedy person fabricates by means of body, speech, or intellect, that too is unskillful. Whatever suffering a greedy person — his mind overcome with greed, his mind consumed — wrongly inflicts on another person through beating or imprisonment or confiscation or placing blame or banishment, [with the thought,] 'I have power. I want power,' that too is unskillful. Thus it is that many evil, unskillful qualities/events — born of greed, caused by greed, originated through greed, conditioned by greed — come into play. "Aversion itself is unskillful. Whatever an aversive person fabricates by means of body, speech, or intellect, that too is unskillful. Whatever suffering an aversive person — his mind overcome with aversion, his mind consumed — wrongly inflicts on another person through beating or imprisonment or confiscation or placing blame or banishment, [with the thought,] 'I have power. I want power,' that too is unskillful. Thus it is that many evil, unskillful qualities — born of aversion, caused by aversion, originated through aversion, conditioned by aversion — come into play. "Delusion itself is unskillful. Whatever a deluded person fabricates by means of body, speech, or intellect, that too is unskillful. Whatever suffering a deluded person — his mind overcome with delusion, his mind consumed — wrongly inflicts on another person through beating or imprisonment or confiscation or placing blame or banishment, [with the thought,] 'I have power. I want power,' that too is unskillful. Thus it is that many evil, unskillful qualities — born of delusion, caused by delusion, originated through delusion, conditioned by delusion — come into play. "And a person like this is called one who speaks at the wrong time, speaks what is unfactual, speaks what is irrelevant, speaks contrary to the Dhamma, speaks contrary to the Vinaya. Why...? Because of having wrongly inflicted suffering on another person through beating or imprisonment or confiscation or placing blame or banishment, [with the thought,] 'I have power. I want power.' When told what is factual, he denies it and doesn't acknowledge it. When told what is unfactual, he doesn't make an ardent effort to untangle it [to see], 'This is unfactual. This is baseless.' That's why a person like this is called one who speaks at the wrong time, speaks what is unfactual, speaks what is irrelevant, speaks contrary to the Dhamma, speaks contrary to the Vinaya. "A person like this — his mind overcome with evil, unskillful qualities born of greed... born of aversion... born of delusion, his mind consumed — dwells in suffering right in the here-&-now — feeling threatened, turbulent, feverish — and at the break-up of the body, after death, can expect a bad destination. "Just as a sal tree, a birch, or an aspen, when smothered & surrounded by three parasitic vines, falls into misfortune, falls into disaster, falls into misfortune & disaster, in the same way, a person like this — his mind overcome with evil, unskillful qualities born of greed... born of aversion... born of delusion, his mind consumed — dwells in suffering right in the here-&-now — feeling threatened, turbulent, feverish — and at the break-up of the body, after death, can expect a bad destination. "These are the three roots of what is unskillful. Notes 1. More suttas from AcessToInsight.org can be found here http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sutta.html 2. This sutta can be found in full here http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.069.than.html <....> #80351 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:32 pm Subject: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) buddhatrue Hi Howard (and TG), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Yes, this is a good sutta for pointing that out. Still, all conditioned > dhammas, due in part to their impermanence fail as sources of lasting > satisfaction (for anyone), and that is a sense in which they are dukkha. > More generally, for whatever reason, conditioned dhammas are dukkha in > that they are not sources of genuine satisfaction for anyone, worldling or > arahant. They simply do not satisfy. Relinquishing our clinging to them does, > which the arahant already has done. There is something in the way that you have worded this that makes me uncomfortable. You aren't saying it as directly as TG has, but it seems that you are saying that conditioned, impermanent dhammas are still dukkha for the arahant. What is dukkha is "I-making" or "mine-making". When you say of the five khandas: "This is me, this is myself", then that is dukkha. When you no longer say of the five khandas "This is me, this is myself" then there is no more dukkha. So, it has to be stressed that the dukkha quality isn't inherent in the khandas, it is inherent in the clinging due to ignorance. Therefore, the teaching of the Abhidhamma which states that rupa has the characteristic of dukkha without an observer is ridiculous. Not only that, it confuses and distorts what the Buddha taught in the Four Noble Truths. Dukkha is the result of clinging, not the result of impermanence. Additionally, the citta which is to be liberated is itself impermanent- so if dukkha was an inherent characteristic of the citta then liberation would be impossible. But dukkha isn't inherent; it is the ignorance and clinging which causes the dukkha. So, to me, it doesn't make any sense to say that conditioned dhammas aren't satisfying to the arahant. Conditioned dhammas are neither satisfying nor unsatisfying to the arahant. The Buddha taught the different between the arahant alive and the arahant dead, and there is little difference: "Monks, there are these two forms of the Unbinding property. Which two? The Unbinding property with fuel remaining, & the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining. And what is the Unbinding property with fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is an arahant whose fermentations have ended, who has reached fulfillment, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the fetter of becoming, and is released through right gnosis. His five sense faculties still remain and, owing to their being intact, he is cognizant of the pleasant & the unpleasant, and is sensitive to pleasure & pain. His ending of passion, aversion, & delusion is termed the Unbinding property with fuel remaining.1 And what is the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is an arahant whose fermentations have ended, who has reached fulfillment, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the fetter of becoming, and is released through right gnosis. For him, all that is sensed, being unrelished, will grow cold right here. This is termed the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining."2 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/iti/iti.2.028-049.than.html#iti-044 Metta, James #80352 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina et sarahprocter... Hi James, --- buddhatrue wrote: > There are no such things as "sankhara dhammas". Sankhara are > formations and dhammas are phenomenon. ... S: Dhammas (realities) can be sankhara (i.e conditioned dhammas = 5 khandhas) or asankhara (i.e unconditioned = nibbana) .... > Sankhara are fabrications, constructions, things put together. These > would include: trees, rocks, flowers, people, animals, computers, etc. > and mental fabrications (thoughts- which are constructed in the mind), > body, feeling, perception. > > Dhammas are phenomenon, characteristics, `nature' of things. These > would include: citta (consciousness), rupa (heat, cold, hardness, > softness, fluidity, color, cohesion, movement, etc.), and nibbana. > > Sankharas are fabrications and therefore can be sub-divided. Dhammas > are phenomenon and therefore cannot be sub-divided. It was my > understanding that the students of KS believe that the only things > which are real are dhammas and that sankhara (constructions) are not > real but are only concepts. Is this a fair summary? > > Now, are we on the same page or is your understanding of these two > terms different? ... S: Very different. Thanks for the helpful detail here. In the context of D.O., sankhara refers to cetana (intention) or kamma which produces results. In the context of the khandhas, sankhara refers to the 4th khandha, sankhara khandha. This includes cetana and all other cetasikas (mental factors), excluding vedana and sanna which have their own khandhas. In a broader context still of 'sabbe sankhara', all the khandhas, i.e. all conditioned dhammas, are included. Sankharas only ever refer to realities, to paramatha dhammas, never to trees, rocks, mental ideas or concepts. Here are a couple of quotes from the Vism.: ch XIV, 131 "Now it was said above, 'Whatever has the characteristic of forming should be understood, all taken together, as the formations aggregate'. And here too, what is said to have the characteristic of forming is that which has the characteristic of agglomerating.* What is that? It is formations themselves, according as it is said, 'They form the formed, bhikkhus, that is why they are called formations' (S.iii,87). "They have the characteristic of forming. Their function is to accumulate. They are manifested as intervening. Their proximate cause is the remaining three [immaterial] aggregates. So according to characteristic, etc., they are singlefold. And according to kind they are threefold, namely, (1) profitable, (II) unprofitable, and (III) indeterminate." [*"' " The characteristic of agglomerating" means the characteristic of adding together (sampi.n.dana): then they are said to have the function of accumulating, for the dhammas in the formations aggregate are so described because volition is their basis' (Pm.484)" ... S: The text here is referring to all cetasikas other than vedana and sanna. They accumulate or 'form up'. Wisdom arising now accumulates. So does attachment. The text continues to list all these cetasikas (mental factors) as included in sankhara khandha. No concepts, only paramatha dhammas. This is why sankharas/sankhara dhammas are dhammas. I hope this clarifies the misunderstanding. Thank you for indicating your reasoning above. Metta, Sarah ======= #80353 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:10 am Subject: Re: Loooong Post Re: [dsg] Re: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's .../James sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- upasaka@... wrote: > --- upasaka@... wrote: > >H: Simply put, but not as simply as I'd like, the sankhara are > > "fabricational > > activities and their products". The only thing excluded from the > range > > of the > > term 'sankhara', then, is nibbana. > ... <...> >H: I have in mind the operations of thinking & conceptualizing & > reifying, > willing, desiring, emotionally proliferating, and so on. Basically, it > is the > namas of the sankharakkhanda plus sa~n~na. What did you think I had in > mind? .... S: By the 'namas of the sankharakkhandha', do you have anything else in mind but the 50 cetasikas which make up sankharakkhandha, i.e cetana and the rest? If not, then it's clear and we agree. When you refer to 'fabricational activities and their products', this isn't at all clear to me. As you'll have seen in my response to James, 'fabricational activities' or 'fabrications' can mean very different things to different people, so I wished to make sure there was no misunderstanding here. Metta, Sarah ========= #80354 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 3:00 am Subject: [dsg] Re: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's Interpretation of the Dhamma/Nina et buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > I hope this clarifies the misunderstanding. Thank you for indicating your > reasoning above. Thank you for your efforts to explain your understanding of these terms, but I'm afraid your explanation doesn't do much for me. Your explanation is complete gobbledegook to me. > Metta, > > Sarah > ======= > Metta, James ps. And I see from your other post that you don't agree with Howard's definitions either. It seems that this is hopeless. #80355 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 4:22 am Subject: Perfections Corner (60) nichiconn Dear All, http://www.zolag.co.uk/ - The Perfections Leading to Enlightenment by Sujin Boriharnwanaket; translated by Nina van Gorkom. Chapter 8: The Perfection of Determination. continued... As to the eighth qualification, we read: " (8) Strong desire (chandataa): wholesome desire, the wish for accomplishment. One possessed of the aforesaid qualities must have strong desire, yearning, and longing to practise the qualities issuing in Buddhahood. Only then does his aspiration succeed, not otherwise." This shows us the Buddha's great compassion. Due to his great compassion we still have the opportunity to listen to the Dhamma today. We read further on about the aspiration of the Bodhisatta who is endowed with these eight factors: "Its characteristic is rightly resolving to attain the supreme enlightenment. Its function is to yearn, 'Oh, may I awaken to the supreme perfect enlightenment, and bring well-being and happiness to all beings!' It is manifest as the root-cause for the requisites of enlightenment. Its proximate cause is great compassion, or the achievement of the necessary supporting conditions. Since it has as its object the inconceivable plane of the Buddhas and the welfare of the whole immeasurable world of beings, it should be seen as the loftiest, most sublime and exalted distinction of merit, endowed with immeasurable potency, the root-cause of all the qualities issuing in Buddhahood. Simultaneous with its arising, the Great Man enters upon the practice of the vehicle to great enlightenment, mahaabodhiyaanapa.tipatti. He becomes fixed in his destiny, irreversible, and therefore properly gains the designation 'bodhisattva'. His mind becomes fully devoted to the supreme enlightenment in its completeness, and his capacity to fulfil the training in the requisites of enlightenment becomes established." Here we see the Buddha's great compassion for all of us. We do not need to fulfill immensely difficult tasks, compared in the texts to crossing the worldsystems that are extremely hot, or going through a jungle of thorny creepers; we do not need to accumulate the perfections for as long as an incalculable period and a hundred thousand aeons. The Buddha, whose excellent qualities are incomparable, extended his great compassion to us. He became a Sammaasambuddha so that we could gain the benefit of the Dhamma he taught to all people. He taught the Dhamma to us who can investigate and consider it, and this is the condition for pa~n~naa to arise that leads to the eradication of our defilements and the realization of the four noble Truths. ..to be continued, connie #80356 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 4:22 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (72) nichiconn Dear Friends, Part 9 15. Cattaaliisanipaato 1. Isidaasiitheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 445. "Ti.msativassamhi mato, saaka.tikakulamhi daarikaa jaataa; kapa.namhi appabhoge, dhanikapurisapaatabahulamhi. 446. "Ta.m ma.m tato satthavaaho, ussannaaya vipulaaya va.d.dhiyaa; oka.d.dhati vilapanti.m, acchinditvaa kulagharasmaa. 447. "Atha so.lasame vasse, disvaa ma.m pattayobbana.m ka~n~na.m; orundhatassa putto, giridaaso naama naamena. 448. "Tassapi a~n~naa bhariyaa, siilavatii gu.navatii yasavatii ca; anurattaa bhattaara.m, tassaaha.m viddesanamakaasi.m. 449. "Tasseta.m kammaphala.m, ya.m ma.m apakiirituuna gacchanti; daasiiva upa.t.thahanti.m, tassapi anto kato mayaa"ti. 443. In my thirtieth year, I died. I was born as a little girl ina cart driver's family [that was] poor, with little wealth, much oppressed by creditors. 444. Then, because of the large amount of interest that had accumulated, a caravan leader removed me from my family home and dragged me off wailing. 445. Then in my sixteenth year, his son, Giridaasa by name, saw me as a maiden of marriageable age and took me into his house. 446. He had another wife, virtuous, possessed of good qualities, and famous, affectionate towards her husband. I stirred up enmity with her. 447. This was the fruit of that action for me, that they went, rejecting me, although I served them like a slave girl. Even of that I have now made an end. RD: At thirty years of age I died, and was reborn A girl, the daughter of a carter, poor And of ill-fortune, and oppressed with debts Incurred to usurers. To pay the sum (443) Of interest that ever grew and swelled, In place of money, *409 woeful little me The merchant of a caravan dragged off, Bearing me weeping from my home. (444) Now in my sixteenth year, when I Blossomed a maiden, that same merchant's son, Giridaasa the name of him, loved me And made me wife. Another wife he had, (445) A virtuous dame of parts and of repute, Enamoured of her mate. And thus I brought Discord and enmity within that house. (446) Fruit of my karma was it thus that they, In this last life, have slighted me, e'en tho' I waited on them as their humble slave. Well! of all that now have I made an end! (447) *409 I have discussed this passage in 'Early Economic Conditions in North India' (J.R.A.S., 1901, 880, n. 1) thus: In the second line, which Dr. Neumann renders 'Vom Tische Reicher lasen wir die Reste auf,' I take the compound dhanikapurisapaatabahulamhi (Commentary: i.naayikaana.m purisaana.m adhipatanabahule bahuuhi i.naayikehi abhibhavitabbe) to mean 'fallen into the power of usurers.' This leads up to the next line, giving a point to it which is lacking in the rendering alluded to. I am unable to classify the metre throughout this poem, from the first line: nagaramhi kusumanaame Paa.taliputtamhi pathaviyaa to the last: daasii va upa.t.thahanti.m tassa pi anto kato mayaa === to be continued, connie ::::::::::::::::: *CAF Rhys Davids: Psalms of the Sisters, with the Chronicle from the Commentary by Dhammapaala entitled 'The Elucidation of the Highest Meaning'. PTS 1909 @ http://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/davids/psalms/psalms.html *Wm Pruitt: The Commentary on the Verses of the Theriis: Theriigaathaa-A.t.thakathaa, Paramatthadiipanii VI by Aacariya Dhammapaala. PTS 1999 *txt/cy: vri cscd, tipitaka.org ::::::::::::::::: #80357 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 6:43 am Subject: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 7, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, So long as enlightenment has not been attained, the idea of self has not been eradicated yet and one has to continue developing satipatthåna so that higher stages of insight can be reached and eventually enlightenment can be attained. At this moment lobha and dosa may appear, but they do not appear as merely dhammas, elements devoid of self. Acharn Sujin said, "Kusala and akusala appear, but it is 'us' all the time. We think of kusala or akusala that has fallen away with an idea of self." Someone asked, when lobha and dosa are realized as only nåmas, whether their different characteristics are also known. They have different characteristics but now we do not know them yet as nåmas. When paññå has been developed to the degree of insight knowledge, their characteristics do not change, but they are realized as nåma elements devoid of self. Paññå realizes akusala as dhamma and kusala as dhamma, it realizes all that appears as dhamma. We discussed different sounds that can be loud or soft, and different flavours that can be sweet or sour. Someone wondered whether these different characteristics appear when there is awareness and they are realized as just rúpa. Acharn Sujin answered: "Citta can experience everything, there is no need to use the names low or loud sound. Citta can know everything and paññå can understand everything that appears." It is the same with the different flavours, their characteristics cannot be altered; they are, for example, sweet or sour and they appear as such. Paññå can realize them as only rúpa, and this is different from thinking of concepts, such as an apple that is sour or sugar that is sweet. There can be awareness of realities as they naturally appear, we should not imagine that there is a neutral sound or a neutral flavour. Someone had doubts whether it would ever be possible to attain insight knowledge. Acharn Sujin answered that what the Buddha taught is the truth and that what is true can be realized. If we do not know the characteristic of the reality appearing at this moment we cannot realize the four noble Truths and become enlightened. The understanding of the four noble Truths is not merely knowing their names: the noble truth of dukkha, of the origin of dukkha, of the cessation of dukkha and of the way leading to the cessation of dukkha. Dukkha is the truth that all conditioned phenomena are impermanent and thus unsatisfactory, that they are no refuge. The origin of dukkha is craving: so long as there is craving we are in the cycle of birth and death and there is no end to dukkha. The cessation of dukkha is nibbåna. The way leading to the cessation of dukkha is the eightfold Path. The Truth of dukkha has to be understood, the Truth of the origin of dukkha, craving, has to be abandoned, the Truth of the cessation of dukkha, nibbåna, has to be realized, and the Truth of the way leading to the cessation of dukkha has to be developed. ****** Nina. #80358 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:01 am Subject: Re: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 12/21/2007 1:32:21 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: Hi Howard (and TG), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Yes, this is a good sutta for pointing that out. Still, all conditioned > dhammas, due in part to their impermanence fail as sources of lasting > satisfaction (for anyone), and that is a sense in which they are dukkha. > More generally, for whatever reason, conditioned dhammas are dukkha in > that they are not sources of genuine satisfaction for anyone, worldling or > arahant. They simply do not satisfy. Relinquishing our clinging to them does, > which the arahant already has done. There is something in the way that you have worded this that makes me uncomfortable. You aren't saying it as directly as TG has, but it seems that you are saying that conditioned, impermanent dhammas are still dukkha for the arahant. -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I take 'dukkha ' in its sense of property-of-dhammas as meaning nothing more than 1) Not being a condition for genuine satisfaction, and 2) Being a requisite (but not necessarily sufficient) condition for dissatisfaction (i.e., for 'dukkha' in its sense of experiential-condition). Nobody - arahant, lesser ariyan, or worldling finds genuine sastisfaction in conditioned dhammas, and in that sense they are dukkha, 1) is satisfied. And so is 2) satisfied: The fact that an arahant has no attachment of any sort to any dhammas rules out suffering for him or her. That has nothing to do with the fact of conditioned dhammas being requisite for suffering. They simply are insufficient, because tanha is requisite as well. Non-arahants, because they do crave and have attachment, and because there are the conditioned dhammas to cling to, do suffer, but they would not were there no conditioned dhammas for them to cling to to. ----------------------------------------------------------------- What is dukkha is "I-making" or "mine-making". When you say of the five khandas: "This is me, this is myself", then that is dukkha. When you no longer say of the five khandas "This is me, this is myself" then there is no more dukkha. So, it has to be stressed that the dukkha quality isn't inherent in the khandas, it is inherent in the clinging due to ignorance. ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Two points: I'm not discussing what *causes* dukkha but what it *is*. And there are two different senses relevant to Dhamma. One of these is suffering, a condition of sentient beings, which is what you discuss here. The other, derivative from the first, is as a property-of-dhammas, which I discuss above. -------------------------------------------------------------- Therefore, the teaching of the Abhidhamma which states that rupa has the characteristic of dukkha without an observer is ridiculous. ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: If there were no consciousness (informally, if there were no sentient beings), there would be no dukkhata. The notions of not satisfying and of conditioning suffering would be empty in that case. (Actually, from my perspective, there would be no dhammas at all without consciousness- but that's a hot potato I'd best leave untouched.) The bottom line on this issue is that I agree that 'dukkha' only has meaning given the existence of consciousness, and it pertains to it. So, on this point I think we agree. -------------------------------------------------------------- Not only that, it confuses and distorts what the Buddha taught in the Four Noble Truths. Dukkha is the result of clinging, not the result of impermanence. -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Dukkha in the sense of "suffering" has multiple conditions that serve as cause. There is no clinging without something to cling to, which makes the objects of clinging among the conditions for suffering. And one basis for objects serving as a condition for suffering is that they do not last. It is crystal clear that we suffer at the death of a loved one based not only on our clinging to them but also certainly on their having existed and on their having ceased. So, impermanence IS among the conditions for suffering. ------------------------------------------------------------- Additionally, the citta which is to be liberated is itself impermanent- so if dukkha was an inherent characteristic of the citta then liberation would be impossible. --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Suffering is not an inherent characteristic of mind. It is conditioned, and when the conditions no longer arise, neither does suffering. It is important to distinguish the senses of 'dukkha'. -------------------------------------------------------------- But dukkha isn't inherent; it is the ignorance and clinging which causes the dukkha. -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Who is arguing to the contrary (as regards dukkka-as-suffering)? Not I. ------------------------------------------------------------ So, to me, it doesn't make any sense to say that conditioned dhammas aren't satisfying to the arahant. ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: An arahant does not gain satisfaction from dhammas. An arahant is unconditionally satisfied, being free and without requirement. ---------------------------------------------------------- Conditioned dhammas are neither satisfying nor unsatisfying to the arahant. ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: That is correct, but it contradicts your last statement. ---------------------------------------------------------- The Buddha taught the different between the arahant alive and the arahant dead, and there is little difference: "Monks, there are these two forms of the Unbinding property. Which two? The Unbinding property with fuel remaining, & the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining. And what is the Unbinding property with fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is an arahant whose fermentations have ended, who has reached fulfillment, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the fetter of becoming, and is released through right gnosis. His five sense faculties still remain and, owing to their being intact, he is cognizant of the pleasant & the unpleasant, and is sensitive to pleasure & pain. His ending of passion, aversion, & delusion is termed the Unbinding property with fuel remaining.1 And what is the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is an arahant whose fermentations have ended, who has reached fulfillment, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the fetter of becoming, and is released through right gnosis. For him, all that is sensed, being unrelished, will grow cold right here. This is termed the Unbinding property with no fuel remaining."2 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/iti/iti.2.028-049.than.html#iti-044 Metta, James ================================= With metta, Howard #80359 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:05 am Subject: Re: Loooong Post Re: [dsg] Re: My Understanding of Ajahn Sujin's .../James upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 12/21/2007 4:10:31 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard, --- upasaka@... wrote: > --- upasaka@... wrote: > >H: Simply put, but not as simply as I'd like, the sankhara are > > "fabricational > > activities and their products". The only thing excluded from the > range > > of the > > term 'sankhara', then, is nibbana. > ... <...> >H: I have in mind the operations of thinking & conceptualizing & > reifying, > willing, desiring, emotionally proliferating, and so on. Basically, it > is the > namas of the sankharakkhanda plus sa~n~na. What did you think I had in > mind? .... S: By the 'namas of the sankharakkhandha', do you have anything else in mind but the 50 cetasikas which make up sankharakkhandha, i.e cetana and the rest? If not, then it's clear and we agree. When you refer to 'fabricational activities and their products', this isn't at all clear to me. As you'll have seen in my response to James, 'fabricational activities' or 'fabrications' can mean very different things to different people, so I wished to make sure there was no misunderstanding here. Metta, Sarah ================================ It seem to me that we agree on this matter. With metta, Howard #80360 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 11:16 am Subject: Re: Dukkha of ruupas. was: Does Anicca = Dukkha?) nilovg Hi Howard, excuse me for the hot potatoe. Op 21-dec-2007, om 16:01 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > If there were no consciousness (informally, if there were no sentient > beings), there would be no dukkhata. The notions of not satisfying > and of > conditioning suffering would be empty in that case. (Actually, from my > perspective, there would be no dhammas at all without > consciousness- but that's a hot > potato I'd best leave untouched.) The bottom line on this issue is > that I agree > that 'dukkha' only has meaning given the existence of > consciousness, and it > pertains to it ------- N:Those who have developed ruupa-jhaana and see the disadvantage of ruupa can be reborn in the non-percipient plane, asa~n~nasatta plane. During that life there is no naama, only ruupa. This is possible because of the right conditions. For them there is not the end of dukkha, they have not reached the end of rebirth and have to be reborn again. Ruupas arise and fall away, these are impermanent, dukkha and non-self. Perhaps this helps to see that ruupas alone are also dukkha. Nina #80361 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 7:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dukkha of ruupas. was: Does Anicca = Dukkha?) upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/21/2007 2:17:11 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: N:Those who have developed ruupa-jhaana and see the disadvantage of ruupa can be reborn in the non-percipient plane, asa~n~nasatta plane. During that life there is no naama, only ruupa. This is possible because of the right conditions. For them there is not the end of dukkha, they have not reached the end of rebirth and have to be reborn again. Ruupas arise and fall away, these are impermanent, dukkha and non-self. Perhaps this helps to see that ruupas alone are also dukkha. =========================== Nope, sorry. It does not. Rupas are dukkha in not being sources of satisfaction. That pertains to experience and is not independent of experience. So long as there is no consciousness, there are no objects of consciousness and no suffering. That fact that conciousness re-arises and does so with tanha not uprooted guarantees that suffering re-arises as well. All dukkha has its basis in dissatiisfaction, and that requires consciousness. With metta, Howard #80362 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:45 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha of ruupas. was: Does Anicca = Dukkha?) truth_aerator Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > ------- > N:Those who have developed ruupa-jhaana and see the disadvantage of ruupa >>> Disadvantage of Rupa or Sanna? I think the "Arupa" Jhanas are where you really see disadvantage of Rupa. >>>> can be reborn in the non-percipient plane, asa~n~nasatta plane. > During that life there is no naama, only ruupa. >>> What about Vinnana? Vinnana is probably still there, just no "sanna". >>> > For them there is not the end of dukkha, they have not reached the > end of rebirth and have to be reborn again. >>> Here the suffering is due to IMPERMANENCE of the state. Ruupas arise and fall > away, these are impermanent, dukkha and non-self. > Perhaps this helps to see that ruupas alone are also dukkha. > Nina > WHile EVERYTHING is Dukkha, it MUST be percieved to have any effect. A sentientless rock doesn't feel anything. Lots of Metta, Alex #80363 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:31 pm Subject: Rationality & irrationality of Craving, Clinging, Wrong View truth_aerator Once upon a time this train of thought has arisen. How much of Craving, (Clinging) & Wrong View is intellectual (rational) mistakes and how much of it is non-rational tendency? For example many smokers may KNOW intellectually that smoking is bad. Some of them may even know nitty bitty details about "how much nicotines is here. What sort of diseases can arise, where do these cigarettes come from, from what are they made, their effects on nama & rupa, and many other details". But how easy is it to quit? Very hard! This is why you see so much business in selling "quit smoking" patches and stuff. Often hard and long battle with this addiction (clinging) takes place. Same is here. We are addicting to Craving & Clinging something (be it mental or physical. Becoming or anihhilation). Will simply reading about this uproot the tendency completely? No, for most of us the addiction is simply too strong to uproot quickly through reading about various namas & rupas. While we absolutely require 'rational' help of the Buddha found in suttas such as "Anattalakhana", something more is required for us. For example in entire Ditthisamyutta the Buddha kept saying that "clinging to 5 aggregates causes wrong view to arise". Clinging is what comes from Craving, and as we know that the Craving is often non-rational (an Alchoholic may KNOW that drinking is bad - but he simply cannot resist another 6pack), we have to use something other than reason to deal with it. Remember that Dhamma is ATAKKÁVACARA. Buddha has taught an 8fold path (it is quite scary how many people today convince us in a 7fold path). One of the very neglected limbs is FORMAL JHANIC MEDITATION. If it is done in a proper way then clinging to 5 aggregates will diminish as it was said by Buddha himself: --- 'I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana.' Thus it has been said. In reference to what was it said? There is the case where a monk, withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He regards whatever phenomena there that are connected with form, feeling, perception, fabrications, & consciousness, as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a disintegration, an emptiness, not-self. He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' "Suppose that an archer or archer's apprentice were to practice on a straw man or mound of clay, so that after a while he would become able to shoot long distances, to fire accurate shots in rapid succession, and to pierce great masses. In the same way, there is the case where a monk... enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born of withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He regards whatever phenomena there that are connected with form, feeling, perception, fabrications, & consciousness, as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a disintegration, an emptiness, not-self. He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.036.than.html ---- Notice how even the 4Noble truths are practiced WITHIN Jhana. Infact Proper Buddhist Jhana is like a gym where you exercise letting go and 4 4 Noble truths! Eventually the 'letting go muscles' will grow strong enough to let go of clinging enough to remove the basis for Wrong View. Furthermore, notice that INSIGHT is practice WHILE IN JHANA and as such there is no need to separate between "vehicles". Some people have raised doubts about the Validity of MN111 (a chief Jhana includes Insight) sutta. Some say it is abhidhammic addon, etc. Few objections: a) In mn111 there are 4 Rupa Jhanas, not 5 as in Abhidhammic analysis b) No "momentary, access, absorption concentration" c) AN 9.36 sutta says something VERY similiar, 5 aggregates are present real time in the Jhanas and Arupa's - up to base of Nothingness. Remember, Buddhist don't clear their mind from 6 sense consciousness. They clear their mind from GREED, ANGER & Delusion. Greed & Anger are two sides of "Craving" & delusion is connected with Wrong View. All of these 3 roots of unwholesome are to be treated with a Rehab called "Noble 8fold path" which btw is fulfilled WHILE one is doing formal meditation. Lots of Metta, Alex #80364 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:22 pm Subject: Aware & Settled! bhikkhu0 Friends: Once the Blessed One was staying at Vesali in Ambapali's grove. There and then he taught the Bhikkhus about Awareness this way: Bhikkhus a Noble Friend should remain: Aware and Settled! And how does a Noble remain Aware? In this: Such Noble Friend sees any Body as just a frame of matter - a mere transient physical form - thereby keeping any lust and rejection arised for and of this world under firm Control. Aroused, Composed, and Alert. Such Noble Friend sees any Feeling as just a reaction to sense contact - a mere short-lived mental response -thereby keeping any desire and aversion arised for this world under firm Control. Just Eager, Calm and Clear. Such Noble Friend sees any Mind as just a passing moods - a mere ever-changing complex habitual mental formation - thereby keeping any craving and anger arised from this world under firm Control. Keen, Balanced and Attentive. Such Noble Friend sees any Reality as just an actual fact - a mere drifting apparent and momentary phenomena - thereby keeping any attraction and repulsion arised from this world under firm Control. Aloof Above, at Ease and Aware. Thus is a Noble Aware... And how does a Noble remain Settled? In this: When going out; When returning such Noble Friend is continuously settled in awareness of exactly that… When looking forward; When gazing backward such Noble Friend is continuously settled in awareness of just exactly that… When bending a leg; When stretching an arm such Noble Friend is continuously settled in awareness of only exactly that… When wearing a robe; When bearing a bowl such Noble Friend is continuously settled in awareness of exactly that When eating; When drinking; When chewing; When tasting When swallowing such Noble Friend is continuously settled in awareness of exactly that… When using the toilet; When walking, standing, sitting, lying When sleeping and waking up; When speaking and when keeping silent such Noble Friend is continuously settled in awareness of exactly that Thus is A Noble Settled... A Bhikkhu should remain Aware and Settled, Bhikkhus. This is our instruction to you. --- Samyutta Nikaya - Kindred Sayings V On the four foundations of Awareness Comments. Unfailing Continuity of Awareness the crucial issue here! That settled unfailing Awareness of all moments as they pass by mind flickering in time, can disable and eliminate the otherwise domineering autopilot always pleasure-seeking monkey-mind! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) .... #80365 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 4:27 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 3. corvus121 Hello again DC Thank you for your very interesting comments from a traditional Sinhala perspective. If I may, I would like to pick out a few items for comment and then attempt to answer your question at the end. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, DC Wijeratna wrote: My understanding of the Dhamma, really the teaching of the Buddha is at odds with not only that of Bhikkhu Bodhi, but, in general, with the Western i:nterpretation of the teaching of the Buddha. I want to stress the fact that I am not talking of "Buddhism," the religion practised by the Buddhists, whether they be Theravaadins or Mahaayaanist. I am talking about the teaching of the Buddha. Andrew: I have read a number of people make similar comments on DSG (including KenH). I am very open to people questioning the validity of the Western interpretation of the teaching of the Buddha. DSG serves a useful role in that regard. DC: For us the Buddha is the teacher. The Buddha was not a god or God. We don't believe; we don't have faith. Those are meaningless terms in relation to our behaviour, as far as we are concerned. We behave on the basis of knowledge: not on the basis of the unknown and the unknowable. Andrew: When I first became interested in Buddhism, the only resources available to me were books about Dhamma written by modern authors. When I finally got round to reading translations of the Pali canon itself, one thing that came as a surprise to me was how often the Buddha stressed the importance of saddha (faith/confidence). He variously described it as a treasure or a jewel etc. So when you say that you "don't have faith", are you referring to saddha or to something different? What do you see as the place or role of saddha? DC: Interpretation is a form of communication: a piece of text-- originally spoken, now wriiten, a medium--language for our purposes, and a reader or listener--for verbal communication. Here is an excerpt from a book which explains the process beautifully: "By definition communication via language is a process of relating between persons dependent on a reader/hearer who, upon reading hearing a given word or group of words, grasps the 'same meaning as the writer/speaker had in mind in using those words." Please note the words "SAME MEANING". > "The sender and the receiver (author and reader; speaker and listener), as individuals, have differing backgrounds, environments, peer-groups, political affiliations, problems, loyalties, loves etc., all of which profoundly affect his use of words and the mental associations he entertains on hearing certain terms." And when the gap is 2500 years, communication is (almost) impossible. Andrew: You make a very valid point about communication. I think it is quite remarkable that the teachings are still available today at all due to the efforts of the Sangha, especially in Sri Lanka. DC: Now I have written quite a lot for the day. I'll send my observations progressively. No hurry, "Khantii parama.m tapo titikkhaa". (Ovaada paatimokkha). Andrew: Verse 184 "Enduring patience is the highest austerity". DC: Now I am a follower of the Buddha!!! That is from Dhammapada, it is the stanza that follows "sabba paapassa akarana.m, kusalassa upasampadaa, sacitta pariyodapana.m, eta.m Buddhaanasaasana.m" This is all the Dhamma we we will ever need, until we reach nibbaana. For twenty years, this was the daily advice of the BUDDHA to the MONKS unitl the vinaya rules were declared. Andrew: Verse 183 "To avoid all evil, to cultivate good and to cleanse one's mind - this is the teaching of the Buddhas." DC: Now from a different perspective, only dhamma that you need to understand is the Four Noble Truths as given in the Dhammacakkappavattana sutta. Andrew: Not sure what you mean by "a different perspective". Do you mean "same teaching, different form" or do you mean that Verse 183 was suitable for bhikkhus in the Buddha's time but the Dhammacakkappavattana sutta is more suited to us today? DC: Well one question. What is your definition of 'understanding?' Andrew: To answer this question, I had a quick look at the Shorter OED on Historical Principles. "Understanding" in English connotes reasoning and intellect. Thinking. What is more, historically, it connotes an intellectual acceptance of something as true or existent based upon received information. So, to me, understanding is a shallow level of comprehension based upon an intellectual examination and acceptance of the subject. In Dhamma terms, I will go out on a limb and suggest that understanding is the intellectual rejection of wrong views and the intellectual acceptance of right views. This acceptance involves saddha, the presence of which allows for further development/progress. Understanding is *not* clear, direct and undefiled knowledge of whatever is currently being experienced. A mind with understanding is the forerunner of wholesome action - Dhammapada verse 1. Am I on the right track? Feel free to shock me some more!! Best wishes Andrew #80366 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 5:29 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 3. truth_aerator Hi Andrew, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > My understanding of the Dhamma, really the teaching of the Buddha is at odds with not only that of Bhikkhu Bodhi, but, in general, with > the Western i:nterpretation of the teaching of the Buddha. I want to stress the fact that I am not talking of "Buddhism," the religion > practised by the Buddhists, whether they be Theravaadins or > Mahaayaanist. I am talking about the teaching of the Buddha. >>>> Then the Blessed One said to Ven. Ananda, "Now, if it occurs to any of you — 'The teaching has lost its authority; we are without a Teacher' — do not view it in that way. Whatever Dhamma & Vinaya I have pointed out & formulated for you, that will be your Teacher when I am gone. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.5-6.than.html#top > > DC: Well one question. What is your definition of 'understanding?' > > Andrew: To answer this question, I had a quick look at the Shorter > OED on Historical Principles. "Understanding" in English connotes > reasoning and intellect. Thinking. What is more, historically, it > connotes an intellectual acceptance of something as true or existent based upon received information. So, to me, understanding is a shallow level of comprehension based upon an intellectual examination and acceptance of the subject. In Dhamma terms, I will go out on a limb and suggest that understanding is the intellectual rejection of wrong views and the intellectual acceptance of right views. >>>>>> "And how is a monk learned? His evil, unskillful qualities that are defiled, that lead to further becoming, create trouble, ripen in stress, and lead to future birth, aging, & death have streamed away. This is how a monk is learned. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.039.than.html#t-10 "And which is comprehension? Any ending of passion, ending of aversion, ending of delusion. 1 This is called comprehension." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.023.than.html "And what is right view? Knowledge with regard to stress, knowledge with regard to the origination of stress, knowledge with regard to the cessation of stress, knowledge with regard to the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: This is called right view. "And what is right resolve? Resolve aimed at freedom from sensuality, at freedom from ill will, at harmlessness: This is called right resolve. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.008.than.html "And what is ignorance? Not knowing stress, not knowing the origination of stress, not knowing the cessation of stress, not knowing the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: This is called ignorance." - SN 12.2 Lots of Metta, Alex #80367 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 6:00 pm Subject: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Howard: > Two points: I'm not discussing what *causes* dukkha but what it *is*. > And there are two different senses relevant to Dhamma. One of these is > suffering, a condition of sentient beings, which is what you discuss here. The other, > derivative from the first, is as a property-of-dhammas, which I discuss > above. > -------------------------------------------------------------- Okay, we will have to disagree on this matter. I don't believe that the cause of dukkha can be separated from dukkha. In other words, craving and dukkha are the same thing to me. To me, there is no "dukkha quality" of the world separate from the craving of sentient beings. Existence is caused by craving and existence is dukkha, they are inexorably tied together: "And this, monks is the noble truth of the origination of dukkha: the craving that makes for further becoming ¡X accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there ¡X i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non- becoming." Metta, James ps. This will have to be all from me for a while. My recent flurry of DSG activity has made me very behind with grading papers. :-) #80368 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:04 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 12/21/2007 9:00:51 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: This will have to be all from me for a while. My recent flurry of DSG activity has made me very behind with grading papers. :-) =============================== Yeah, sure! And denial ain't just a river in Egypt! LOL! (I always hated grading! ;-) With metta, Howard #80369 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 3:26 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) TGrand458@... Sallatha Sutta The Dart Translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera Alternate translation: _Thanissaro_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn36/sn36.006.than.html) _Nyanaponika_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn36/sn36.006.nypo.html) PTS: S iv 207 CDB ii 1263 ____________________________________ Source: From _Contemplation of Feeling: The Discourse-grouping on the Feelings (WH 303)_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanaponika/wheel303.html) , translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera (Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1983). Copyright © 1983 Buddhist Publication Society. Used with permission. ____________________________________ Copyright © 1983 Buddhist Publication Society. Access to Insight edition © 1998 For free distribution. This work may be republished, reformatted, reprinted, and redistributed in any medium. It is the author's wish, however, that any such republication and redistribution be made available to the public on a free and unrestricted basis and that translations and other derivative works be clearly marked as such. ____________________________________ "An untaught worldling, O monks, experiences pleasant feelings, he experiences painful feelings and he experiences neutral feelings. A well-taught noble disciple likewise experiences pleasant, painful and neutral feelings. Now what is the distinction, the diversity, the difference that exists herein between a well-taught noble disciple and an untaught worldling? "When an untaught worldling is touched by a painful (bodily) feeling, he worries and grieves, he laments, beats his breast, weeps and is distraught. He thus experiences two kinds of feelings, a bodily and a mental feeling. It is as if a man were pierced by a dart and, following the first piercing, he is hit by a second dart. So that person will experience feelings caused by two darts. It is similar with an untaught worldling: when touched by a painful (bodily) feeling, he worries and grieves, he laments, beats his breast, weeps and is distraught. So he experiences two kinds of feeling: a bodily and a mental feeling. "Having been touched by that painful feeling, he resists (and resents) it. Then in him who so resists (and resents) that painful feeling, an underlying tendency of resistance against that painful feeling comes to underlie (his mind). Under the impact of that painful feeling he then proceeds to enjoy sensual happiness. And why does he do so? An untaught worldling, O monks, does not know of any other escape from painful feelings except the enjoyment of sensual happiness. Then in him who enjoys sensual happiness, an underlying tendency to lust for pleasant feelings comes to underlie (his mind). He does not know, according to facts, the arising and ending of these feelings, nor the gratification, the danger and the escape, connected with these feelings. In him who lacks that knowledge, an underlying tendency to ignorance as to neutral feelings comes to underlie (his mind). When he experiences a pleasant feeling, a painful feeling or a neutral feeling, he feels it as one fettered by it. Such a one, O monks, is called an untaught worldling who is fettered by birth, by old age, by death, by sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair. He is fettered by suffering, this I declare. "But in the case of a well-taught noble disciple, O monks, when he is touched by a painful feeling, he will not worry nor grieve and lament, he will not beat his breast and weep, nor will he be distraught. It is one kind of feeling he experiences, a bodily one, but not a mental feeling. It is as if a man were pierced by a dart, but was not hit by a second dart following the first one. So this person experiences feelings caused by a single dart only. It is similar with a well-taught noble disciple: when touched by a painful feeling, he will no worry nor grieve and lament, he will not beat his breast and weep, nor will he be distraught. He experiences one single feeling, a bodily one. "Having been touched by that painful feeling, he does not resist (and resent) it. Hence, in him no underlying tendency of resistance against that painful feeling comes to underlie (his mind). Under the impact of that painful feeling he does not proceed to enjoy sensual happiness. And why not? As a well-taught noble disciple he knows of an escape from painful feelings other than by enjoying sensual happiness. Then in him who does not proceed to enjoy sensual happiness, no underlying tendency to lust for pleasant feelings comes to underlie (his mind). He knows, according to facts, the arising and ending of those feelings, and the gratification, the danger and the escape connected with these feelings. In him who knows thus, no underlying tendency to ignorance as to neutral feelings comes to underlie (his mind). When he experiences a pleasant feeling, a painful feeling or a neutral feeling, he feels it as one who is not fettered by it. Such a one, O monks, is called a well-taught noble disciple who is not fettered by birth, by old age, by death, by sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair. He is not fettered to suffering, this I declare. "This, O monks, is the distinction, the diversity, the difference that exists between a well-taught noble disciple and an untaught worldling." #80370 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 3. nilovg Dear Andrew, DC, I appreciate your dialogue very much, please continue. Alex, you collected very good texts for the topic discussed, thank you. Nina. Op 22-dec-2007, om 2:29 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > And which is comprehension? Any ending of passion, ending of > aversion, ending of delusion. 1 This is called comprehension." #80371 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:48 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 3. corvus121 Hello Nina and Alex Thank you for your kind words and interest. Thank you, Alex, for your citations: > "And how is a monk learned? His evil, unskillful qualities that are > defiled, that lead to further becoming, create trouble, ripen in > stress, and lead to future birth, aging, & death have streamed away. > This is how a monk is learned. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.039.than.html#t-10 > > > "And which is comprehension? Any ending of passion, ending of > aversion, ending of delusion. 1 This is called comprehension." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.023.than.html > > > "And what is right view? Knowledge with regard to stress, knowledge > with regard to the origination of stress, knowledge with regard to > the cessation of stress, knowledge with regard to the way of practice > leading to the cessation of stress: This is called right view. > > "And what is right resolve? Resolve aimed at freedom from sensuality, > at freedom from ill will, at harmlessness: This is called right > resolve. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.008.than.html > > "And what is ignorance? Not knowing stress, not knowing the > origination of stress, not knowing the cessation of stress, not > knowing the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: This > is called ignorance." - SN 12.2 Alex, I think you have jumped in early and got to the point! As I understand it, DC has asked for my definition of the English word "understanding" and, although I am not sure, I think he may then say something about where this "understanding" fits into the Dhamma. In this regard, I note with some interest that your citation about comprehension seems to include no hint of anything "intellectual" - it is just an ending (of passion/aversion/delusion). Thanks for your input. Best wishes Andrew #80372 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta as a strategy jonoabb Hi Alex Alex wrote: > Anicca & dukha are also the element which make up Anatta. By clearly > comprehending anicca & dukha through DO, one realizes Anatta and > doesn't cling to anything as "I, ME, MINE". > Yes, but I thought you were advocating an "anattaa strategy". What you say here would more correctly be described as an "anicca/dukkha strategy"!! Seriously though, I think you'd agree that the key part of what you describe here is the *clearly comprehending* and *realizing*, and these are both aspects of panna. So if there's to be a strategy, I'd prefer to think of it as a "panna strategy" ;-)) > No. The 3 above are taught in an EMPERIC way, always grounding in > direct experience. > Yes, and such direct experience is again panna doing its work, I think. >> I don't think the texts make any connection between the removal of >> the > 10 fetters or the 3 roots and "putting anatta into action". > All the texts do that. 1st if you remove greed,anger and delusion (of > atta & rituals) then 10 fetters are removed. Since removing the > hindrances is a conscious and planned ACTION, this makes it a > strategy. > But you haven't explained how "anatta" (as a 'strategy') fits into the picture here. When you talk about "removal" (of the fetters, hindrances), are you referring to eradication (rather than temporary suppression)? If so, that occurs only at the moments of the 4 stages of enlightenment. Again, consider the role of panna in the attainment of magga citta. Jon #80373 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 5:04 am Subject: Perfections Corner (61) nichiconn Dear All, http://www.zolag.co.uk/ - The Perfections Leading to Enlightenment by Sujin Boriharnwanaket; translated by Nina van Gorkom. Chapter 8: The Perfection of Determination. continued... When we see the immense benefit of the Dhamma the Buddha taught because of his great compassion, we become humble and respectful. We become people who are "easily instructed", that is, openminded to the Dhamma, and in this way our defilements can gradually be eliminated. The foundation dhamma of relinquishment, caaga, pertains to the abandoning of defilements, it pertains to siila, our conduct through body and speech in daily life. We should investigate whether we already eliminated some of our wrong conduct through body and speech, or not yet, inspite of having listened to the Dhamma. The abandonment of defilements in our conduct is a condition for heedfulness in action and speech. We can notice this in someone who has pleasing manners, who is gentle and does not show anger; he does not cause uneasiness in others by a cross and fierce facial expression and harsh manners. Heedfulness in conduct is to be applied in daily life. When kusala citta arises our behaviour changes. Heedfulness in speech means that we have to give up wrong speech. Some people are straightforward, but this does not mean that they should speak disagreeable words and be heedless in speech. When they develop the kusala kamma which is the "straightening of one's views" (di.t.thujukamma), they have right view which knows when there is kusala that is to be developed and when there is akusala that is to be abandoned. The "straightening of one's views" can be accumulated and can become one's nature. ..to be continued, connie #80374 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 5:06 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (72) nichiconn Dear Friends, Part 10 15. Cattaaliisanipaato 1. Isidaasiitheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 402. "Nagaramhi kusumanaame, paa.taliputtamhi pathaviyaa ma.n.de; sakyakulakuliinaayo, dve bhikkhuniyo hi gu.navatiyo. 400. In the city named for a flower, Paa.taliputta, in the best part of the world, [there were] two bhikkhuniis, members of the Sakyan clan, possessed of good qualities. Tattha nagaramhi kusumanaameti "kusumapuran"ti eva.m kusumasaddena gahitanaamake nagare, idaani ta.m nagara.m paa.taliputtamhiiti saruupato dasseti. Pathaviyaa ma.n.deti sakalaaya pathaviyaa ma.n.dabhuute. Sakyakulakuliinaayoti sakyakule kuladhiitaro, sakyaputtassa bhagavato saasane pabbajitataaya eva.m vutta.m. 400. There, in the city (nagaramhi) named for a flower (kusuma-naame) means: in the city (nagare) that took its name from the sound of [the name of a] flower (kusuma-naamake), thus, the flower town (ku-suma-pura.m). Now, she shows that city through its own designation, Paa.taliputta. In the best part (ma.n.de) of the world means: being in the best part (ma.n.da-bhuute) of the entire world. Members of the Sakyan clan (Sakya-kula-kulinaayo) means: clan daughters (kula-dhiitaro) of the Sakyan clan (sakyakule). This is said because of the fact they had gone forth in the Teaching of the Blessed One, the Son of the Sakyans. 403. "Isidaasii tattha ekaa, dutiyaa bodhiiti siilasampannaa ca; jhaanajjhaayanarataayo, bahussutaayo dhutakilesaayo. 401. One of them was called Isidaasi. The second was called Bodhii. [Both] possessed virtue, delighted in the contemplation of the absorption state, and had great learning. They had shaken off the defilements. Tatthaati taasu dviisu bhikkhuniisu. Bodhiiti eva.mnaamikaa therii. Jhaanajjhaayanarataayoti lokiyalokuttarassa jhaanassa jhaayane abhirataa. Bahussutaayoti pariyattibaahusaccena bahussutaa. Dhutakilesaayoti aggamaggena sabbaso samugghaatitakilesaa. 401. One of them (tattha) means: [one] of these two bhikkhunii. Bodhii means: the therii having such a name. Delighted in the contemplation of the absorption state (jhaana-jjhaayana-rataayo) means: delighted (abhirataa) in the contemplation (jhaayane) of the mundane and supramundane absorption state (jhaanassa). Had great learning (bahu-ssutaa-yo) means: had great learning (bahu-ssutaa) through being accomplished in profound truth (pariyatti-baahusaccena). They had shaken off the defilements (dhuta-kilesaayo) means: with all their taints completely destroyed (samugghaatita-kilesaa) by the highest path. 404. "Taa pi.n.daaya caritvaa, bhattattha.m kariya dhotapattaayo; rahitamhi sukhanisinnaa, imaa giraa abbhudiiresun"ti.- 402. When they had wandered for alms, had their meal, and washed their bowls, happily seated in a lonely place, they uttered these words: Bhattattha.m kariyaati bhattakicca.m ni.t.thaapetvaa. Rahitamhiiti janarahitamhi vivitta.t.thaane. Sukhanisinnaati pabbajjaasukhena vivekasukhena ca sukhanisinnaa. Imaa giraati idaani vuccamaanaa sukhaa laapanaa. Abbhudiiresunti pucchaavissajjanavasena kathayi.msu. 402. When they had had their meal (bhatt'-attha.m kiriya) means: having performed their meal duty. In a lonely place (rahitamhi) means: in a secluded place devoid of people (jana-rahitamhi). Happily seated (sukha-nissinaa) means: happily seated because of the happiness of going forth and the happiness of seclusion. These words means: the happy utterances now being spoken. They uttered means: they explained through question and answer. to be continued, connie #80375 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 1:18 am Subject: Re: Dukkha, "Bearing Up", and Bodhi (Re: [dsg] Does Anicca = Dukkha?) upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 12/21/2007 11:27:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: Sallatha Sutta The Dart =============================== I've always loved this sutta, and I've always assumed that it is this "second dart" that is the dukkha that is brought to a final end with full awakening. That is the psychological dukkha that is ended with the uprooting of all defilements, as I see it. For worldlings and lesser ariyans, conditioned dhammas and concepts not only don't provide true and lasting satisfaction, but, in the presence of ignorance, craving, aversion, and attachment, which have not yet been uprooted, but also condition mental pain (the 2nd dart). Thus, relative to non-arahants, conditioned dhammas are dukkha in both those ways. In the arahant, with all defilements uprooted, the second dart has been removed, never to pierce again, but it still remains true that no satisfaction is obtained in dhammas. With metta, Howard #80376 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 6:43 am Subject: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 7, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, We read in the "Kindred Sayings" (V, The Great Chapter, Kindred Sayings about the Truths, Ch 2, The Foundation of the Kingdom of the Dhamma), that the Buddha, when he was dwelling at Isipatana, in the Deer-park, explained to the five disciples the four noble Truths. The Commentary to this Sutta, the "Såratthappakåsiní, explains about three "rounds"[1] of realizing the four noble Truths: knowledge of the truth, sacca ñåna knowledge of the task that has to be performed, kicca ñåna knowledge of the task that has been done, kata ñåna [2] We read in the Sutta referred to above (in § 2) that the Buddha, after he explained the four noble Truths, said: “ Monks, at the thought: This is the noble Truth about dukkha, - there arose in me, concerning things unlearnt before by Tathågatas [3], vision, insight, understanding and wisdom, there arose in me light. Monks, at the thought: This noble Truth about dukkha is to be understood... At the thought: This noble Truth about dukkha has been understood (by me),- there arose in me, concerning things unlearnt before by Tathågatas, vision, insight, understanding and wisdom, there arose in me light. Monks, at the thought: This is the noble Truth about the arising of dukkha... there arose in me light. Monks, at the thought: This arising of dukkha must be put away... Monks, at the thought: This arising of dukkha has been put away... there arose in me light.” In the same way the Buddha explained about the third noble Truth, the ceasing of dukkha: the comprehension of it, knowledge of the task, namely, that it is to be realized, and knowledge that it has been realized. He explained about the fourth noble Truth, the way leading to the ceasing of dukkha: the comprehension of it, knowledge of the task, namely that it has to be developed, and knowledge that it has been developed. Acharn Sujin referred very often to these three "rounds" or phases and explained that without the first phase, the firm understanding of what the four noble Truths are, there cannot be the second phase, the performing of the task, that is, satipatthåna, nor the third phase, the fruit of the practice, that is, the penetration of the true nature of realities. With regard to the first phase, she said that there should be the firm intellectual understanding of the first noble Truth, and that means understanding that there is dhamma at this moment, that everything that appears is dhamma. Dukkha is the characteristic of dhamma that arises and falls away at this moment. We cannot control what has arisen because of conditions. It only lasts for an extremely short time, it has to fall away. When seeing appears there cannot be hearing, hearing must have fallen away. There can only be one citta at a time experiencing an object. Seeing, hearing or thinking are insignificant dhammas that arise just for an extremely short moment and are then gone. They are impermanent and thus dukkha, unsatisfactory. -------- 1 In Påli parivattam, which means cycle or round. There are three rounds or intertwined phases, that is to say, one phase runs into the next one. As will be explained, when there is the second phase, the first phase is not abandoned, and when there is the third phase, the first and the second phases are not abandoned. 2 Sacca means truth and ñåna means knowledge; kicca means task; kata means what has been done. 3. Tathågata or "thus gone", an epithet of the Buddha. ******* Nina. #80377 From: "rahula_80" Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 7:53 am Subject: Paul Williams rahula_80 Hi, Has anyone read,"The Unexpected Way: On Converting from Buddhism to Catholicism" by Paul Williams. I would be interested if someone could provide a review or comment of the book. More spesifically, if someone could address Williams' critique of Buddhism, that would be great. Criticism 1: Williams writes: 'The question: why is there something rather than nothing? has become for me rather like what Zen calls a koan. It is a constant niggling question that has worried and goaded me (often, I think, against my will) into a different understanding, a different vision of the world and our place in it.' This question was first posed in a philosophically exact form by the great Catholic thinker, St Thomas Aquinas. Williams is dissatisfied with the answer of Buddhists (and other pragmatists) that things are simply the way they are, and that Buddhist practice involves coming to terms with this 'reality'. For Buddhism the world is an endless network of conditions, a process of actions and consequences, and it is meaningless to ask where, or why, it started. Williams doesn't deny the rationality of this position, but it does not satisfy him. He wants to know why things are this way, and he follows Aquinas' answer, that there must be a 'necessary being' whose existence is not conditioned or dependent. Enter 'God', the answer to all conceivable 'why?' questions. Criticism 2: Williams is also dismayed by the implications of the Buddhist teaching that rebirth does not offer a solution to the problem of death. For Buddhism – unlike, for example, Hinduism – the being that is reborn cannot be identified with the one that dies. The ending of one life merely conditions the start of another. Where does that leave you, Williams wonders? 'Unless I gained Enlightenment in this life, I – Williams – the person I am - would have no hope. For the rebirth of Williams that follows from not attaining enlightenment would not be the same person as Williams... Thus Buddhism appeared to me hope-less.' Thanks a lot in advance. Regards, Rahula P.S. Quotatin from: http://www.dharmalife.com/issue19/comment.html See also: http://www.angelfire.com/realm/bodhisattva/rebirth.html #80378 From: "Robert" Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 8:04 am Subject: ideation avalo1968 Hello DSG, There is one aspect of Khun Sujin's teachings that I am trying to understand and perhaps someone in this group can help clarify this point for me. I was reading a book called "Living Zen" by Robert Linssen ( a sort of mix of Zen and Krishnamurti ). There is a chapter called "Lucidity without Ideation". The author proposes that there is a state of mind which is: "a state of silent observation which is perfectly clear and intense, without ideas or distinct thoughts, without forms or symbols or words." He also makes the point that: "this silence of the mind and inner transparence cannot be the outcome of an act of discipline. The absence of fabrication and objectification by the mind cannot be the effect of the will of the 'I-process', but arises from an informal and transcendent understanding of an intuitive nature." Khun Sujin puts great stress on the study and naming of things (in Pali and English). In her teachings, do things ever cross over to the state of silent observation described above, or are you forever making reference to ideas and words? If they do reach this point of silent obeservation, how the words and the will to study condition the arising of what is beyond words and will? I would be interested in any thoughts someone in this group might have on this matter. Thank you, Robert A. #80379 From: "Robert" Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 8:22 am Subject: Re: Paul Williams avalo1968 Hello Rahula, May I offer a couple of observations on your posting: You quoted the author as follows: "For Buddhism the world is an endless network of conditions, a process of actions and consequences, and it is meaningless to ask where, or why, it started. Williams doesn'tdeny the rationality of this position, but it does not satisfy him..He wants to know why things are this way, and he follows Aquinas'answer, that there must be a 'necessary being' whose existence is not conditioned or dependent. Enter 'God', the answer to allconceivable 'why?' questions." I believe it is not a question of it being meaningless to ask, only that it is not useful, for there is no answer that can be given. These kinds of questions are not helpful in any sense of the word. He is not satisfied because he is seeking satisfaction where is can not be found. To follow Aquinas is to make up an answer out of thin air, and if he finds that momentarily satisfying, it will not be lastingly so. "Williams is also dismayed by the implications of the Buddhist teaching that rebirth does not offer a solution to the problem of death. For Buddhism – unlike, for example, Hinduism – the being that is reborn cannot be identified with the one that dies. The ending of one life merely conditions the start of another. Where does that leave you, Williams wonders? 'Unless I gained Enlightenment in this life, I – Williams – the person I am - would have no hope. For the rebirth of Williams that follows from not attaining enlightenment would not be the same person as Williams... Thus Buddhism appeared to me hope-less.'" Williams fails to see that the problem is not death, but the view of seeing death as a problem. This comes from the idea of "I" he further describes. He seems to have missed the point entirely in his readings on Buddhism. Regards, Robert A. #80380 From: Dieter Möller Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 8:30 am Subject: Dart Sutta - Contemplation of Feeling moellerdieter Hi Howard ,TG and all, the Dart Sutta is included in a rather long but obviously interesting essay 'Contemplation of Feeling ' by Ven. Nyanaponika see - as mentioned already by TG - http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanaponika/wheel303.html Any inclination to read and to discuss details..? with Metta Dieter #80381 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Paul Williams upasaka_howard Hi, Rahula - In a message dated 12/22/2007 10:53:59 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, rahula_80@... writes: Hi, Has anyone read,"The Unexpected Way: On Converting from Buddhism to Catholicism" by Paul Williams. I would be interested if someone could provide a review or comment of the book. More spesifically, if someone could address Williams' critique of Buddhism, that would be great. Criticism 1: Williams writes: 'The question: why is there something rather than nothing? has become for me rather like what Zen calls a koan. It is a constant niggling question that has worried and goaded me (often, I think, against my will) into a different understanding, a different vision of the world and our place in it.' ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: I can't imagine what sort of answer he would be looking for. Such a (non-)question is not answered in any real sense in any religion I know of, and I truly think that when the matter is considered deeply enough it is seen to be incoherent. --------------------------------------------------- This question was first posed in a philosophically exact form by the great Catholic thinker, St Thomas Aquinas. Williams is dissatisfied with the answer of Buddhists (and other pragmatists) that things are simply the way they are, and that Buddhist practice involves coming to terms with this 'reality'. For Buddhism the world is an endless network of conditions, a process of actions and consequences, and it is meaningless to ask where, or why, it started. Williams doesn't deny the rationality of this position, but it does not satisfy him. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: The answer to the question of what is reality is provided by awakening and not by thinking. But, like so many academics, he has been, and remains, "stuck in his head". ------------------------------------------------------- He wants to know why things are this way, and he follows Aquinas' answer, that there must be a 'necessary being' whose existence is not conditioned or dependent. Enter 'God', the answer to all conceivable 'why?' questions. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: That explains nothing. The same "problem" remains (or can be dismissed as a non-problem). Moreover, the Dhamma already countenances an independent, unconditioned reality - nibbana. I do hope that Professor Williams obtains some peace. I regret that he didn't pursue the Dhamma in such a way that the peace he seeks might have been obtained through it. --------------------------------------------------- Criticism 2: Williams is also dismayed by the implications of the Buddhist teaching that rebirth does not offer a solution to the problem of death. For Buddhism – unlike, for example, Hinduism – the being that is reborn cannot be identified with the one that dies. The ending of one life merely conditions the start of another. Where does that leave you, Williams wonders? ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: It seems that after all these years, he has missed the very core of the Dhamma. What "you" does he speak of? From moment to moment, old phenomena cease, and new phenomena conditioned by the old arise. Does he grieve over loss of active memory with rebirth? If so, he is simply suffering due to clinging to being. Right now, where is the "person" of Prof Williams' prior life? For that matter, where is the 2-year-old who later became Prof Williams? Does he grieve for them? I think not. There is always and only "now", and in that sense: What is there to fear or regret? Of course we DO fear and we DO regret. But that isn't the fault of the Dhamma. It is the fault of our not yet having pursued the Dhamma to the end of dukkha. ----------------------------------------------------- 'Unless I gained Enlightenment in this life, I – Williams – the person I am - would have no hope. For the rebirth of Williams that follows from not attaining enlightenment would not be the same person as Williams... Thus Buddhism appeared to me hope-less.' ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: All this says is that he is enmeshed in self, which, of course, is painful. So he is choosing to seek the comfort of the wrong views of self and eternalism instead of pursuing the path that truly leads to wisdom and peace. Understandable but regrettable. ----------------------------------------------------- Thanks a lot in advance. Regards, Rahula =========================== With metta, Howard #80382 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ideation upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 12/22/2007 11:04:16 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, avalo1968@... writes: Hello DSG, There is one aspect of Khun Sujin's teachings that I am trying to understand and perhaps someone in this group can help clarify this point for me. I was reading a book called "Living Zen" by Robert Linssen ( a sort of mix of Zen and Krishnamurti ). There is a chapter called "Lucidity without Ideation". The author proposes that there is a state of mind which is: "a state of silent observation which is perfectly clear and intense, without ideas or distinct thoughts, without forms or symbols or words." He also makes the point that: "this silence of the mind and inner transparence cannot be the outcome of an act of discipline. The absence of fabrication and objectification by the mind cannot be the effect of the will of the 'I-process', but arises from an informal and transcendent understanding of an intuitive nature." Khun Sujin puts great stress on the study and naming of things (in Pali and English). In her teachings, do things ever cross over to the state of silent observation described above, or are you forever making reference to ideas and words? If they do reach this point of silent obeservation, how the words and the will to study condition the arising of what is beyond words and will? I would be interested in any thoughts someone in this group might have on this matter. Thank you, Robert A. ================================= Just one comment: I think that there are definite similarities between the no-control perspective of Khun Sujin and the wu-wei perspective of Ch'an/Zen. Robert Kirkpatrick shares this view of the similarity, I believe. With metta, Howard #80383 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dart Sutta - Contemplation of Feeling upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter, TG, and all - In a message dated 12/22/2007 11:28:30 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard ,TG and all, the Dart Sutta is included in a rather long but obviously interesting essay 'Contemplation of Feeling ' by Ven. Nyanaponika see - as mentioned already by TG - http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanaponika/wheel303.html Any inclination to read and to discuss details..? with Metta Dieter ============================== At first glance, this certainly looks worthy of study. I've save a shortcut to it on my desktop, and I'll be looking it over soon. If any of us on DSG want to comment on parts of this, let's do so and go on from there. With metta, Howard #80384 From: "rahula_80" Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 8:46 am Subject: Re: Paul Williams rahula_80 Hi, More spesifically. From a book: Among the factors involved in his eventual rejection of Buddhism were (1) his conviction about the incoherence of the allegedly nondualistic introspective experiences at the heart of Buddhism, (2) the inability of Buddhism to account for the integrity of the human person, and (3) the inability of Buddhism to account for the contingency of the universe. In particular it was Buddhism's failure to address specifically the question, "why is there something instead of nothing?" that prompted Williams to look again at theism. As Williams puts it, "I have come to believe that there is a gap in the Buddhist explanation of things which for me can only be filled by God, the sort of God spoken of in the Christian tradition such as that of St Thomas Aquinas. The issue of contingency was critical for Williams, and he is worth quoting at length on this point "Why is there something rather than nothing? Why is there anything at all? And why is there a world in which, among other things, the processes (causation etc.) detected by the Buddha are the case? Why is it that this way is things is the way of things? As the Buddhist scriptures (sutras) have it: `Whether Buddhas occur or do not occur, the true way of things (Sanskrit:dharmata) remains.' Why? Why is it like that? The dharmata is not what we call `necessarily existent.' That is, there is no logical contradiction in a world in which things are not like that….Thus, the dharmata, the true way of things, is contingent. It could have been otherwise….We have a contingent fact or state of affairs, how things happen to be in the actual world, for which we are entitled to ask the reason….. An answer to that question – if there is one- would have to be a necessary being., a being about which it would make no sense to ask the question why that exist rather than not. For the theist God is the answer to this question, and God is needed to as the ultimate explanation for existence at any time, keeping things in whatever existence things have. I think I have to agree with the theist. #80385 From: "Robert" Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 9:09 am Subject: Re: Paul Williams avalo1968 Hello Rahula, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rahula_80" wrote: > > Hi, > > More spesifically. > > The issue of contingency was critical for Williams, and he is worth > quoting at length on this point > > "Why is there something rather than nothing? Why is there anything > at all? And why is there a world in which, among other things, the > processes (causation etc.) detected by the Buddha are the case? Why > is it that this way is things is the way of things? As the Buddhist > scriptures (sutras) have it: `Whether Buddhas occur or do not > occur, the true way of things (Sanskrit:dharmata) remains.' Why? > Why is it like that? The dharmata is not what we call `necessarily > existent.' That is, there is no logical contradiction in a world in > which things are not like that….Thus, the dharmata, the true way of > things, is contingent. It could have been otherwise….We have a > contingent fact or state of affairs, how things happen to be in the > actual world, for which we are entitled to ask the reason….. > > An answer to that question – if there is one- would have to be a > necessary being., a being about which it would make no sense to ask > the question why that exist rather than not. For the theist God is > the answer to this question, and God is needed to as the ultimate > explanation for existence at any time, keeping things in whatever > existence things have. > > I think I have to agree with the theist. > It is easy to see why Williams is dissatisfied with the teachings of the Buddha, for the Buddha specifically refuses to answer all of the questions that are of greatest interest to him. The Buddha taught the Four Noble Truths. If you are not interested in awakening and the path leading to awakening, you will not be interested in Buddhism. Williams seems to want an awakening that will give him a flash of insight into all kinds of metaphysical questions, whereas the Buddha teaches about a flash of insight that brings freedom from suffering, and has nothing to do with answering metaphysical questions. Regards, Robert A. #80386 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 9:13 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Anatta as a strategy truth_aerator Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex > > Alex wrote: > > Anicca & dukha are also the element which make up Anatta. By clearly > > comprehending anicca & dukha through DO, one realizes Anatta and > > doesn't cling to anything as "I, ME, MINE". > > > > Yes, but I thought you were advocating an "anattaa strategy". What you > say here would more correctly be described as an "anicca/dukkha strategy"!! > > Seriously though, I think you'd agree that the key part of what you > describe here is the *clearly comprehending* and *realizing*, and these > are both aspects of panna. So if there's to be a strategy, I'd prefer > to think of it as a "panna strategy" ;-)) > > > No. The 3 above are taught in an EMPERIC way, always grounding in > > direct experience. > > > > Yes, and such direct experience is again panna doing its work, I think. >>><> Lets call it the NOBLE 8FOLD PATH. Period. > >> I don't think the texts make any connection between the removal of > >> the > 10 fetters or the 3 roots and "putting anatta into action". > > All the texts do that. 1st if you remove greed,anger and delusion (of > > atta & rituals) then 10 fetters are removed. Since removing the > > hindrances is a conscious and planned ACTION, this makes it a > > strategy. > > > > But you haven't explained how "anatta" (as a 'strategy') fits into the > picture here. >>>> To completely let go of craving you utilizte Anatta as well as the rest of N8P. > When you talk about "removal" (of the fetters, hindrances), are you > referring to eradication (rather than temporary suppression)? If so, > that occurs only at the moments of the 4 stages of enlightenment. > Again, consider the role of panna in the attainment of magga citta. > > Jon > Removal is COMPLETE AND FOREVER removal. But before this can be done, temporary removal is good and still required (ie: to get to Jhana). Lots of Metta, Alex #80387 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 9:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 3. truth_aerator Hi Andrew, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > > Hello Nina and Alex > > Thank you for your kind words and interest. Thank you, Alex, for > your citations: > > > "And how is a monk learned? His evil, unskillful qualities that are > > defiled, that lead to further becoming, create trouble, ripen in > > stress, and lead to future birth, aging, & death have streamed > away. > > This is how a monk is learned. > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.039.than.html#t-10 > > > > > > "And which is comprehension? Any ending of passion, ending of > > aversion, ending of delusion. 1 This is called comprehension." > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.023.than.html > > > > > > "And what is right view? Knowledge with regard to stress, knowledge > > with regard to the origination of stress, knowledge with regard to > > the cessation of stress, knowledge with regard to the way of > practice > > leading to the cessation of stress: This is called right view. > > > > "And what is right resolve? Resolve aimed at freedom from > sensuality, > > at freedom from ill will, at harmlessness: This is called right > > resolve. > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.008.than.html > > > > "And what is ignorance? Not knowing stress, not knowing the > > origination of stress, not knowing the cessation of stress, not > > knowing the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: > This > > is called ignorance." - SN 12.2 > > Alex, I think you have jumped in early and got to the point! As I > understand it, DC has asked for my definition of the English > word "understanding" and, although I am not sure, I think he may then > say something about where this "understanding" fits into the Dhamma. > > In this regard, I note with some interest that your citation about > comprehension seems to include no hint of anything "intellectual" - > it is just an ending (of passion/aversion/delusion). > > Thanks for your input. > > Best wishes > Andrew > Andrew, Buddha didn't teach astrophysics and differential geometry to the illiterate peasants of India. He taught "Stress & its cessation". He fully knew the concepts, their range and their use. Also remember the arrow parable. Intellectual part is to know Anatta, 6 sixes, and other SUTTA materials. There were many cases where a person would hear at best, few suttas, would join the Sangha and become an Arahant in 7 days. Obviously he wouldn't have time to hear a lot. Also, Dhamma books were not yet printed in those times... Buddha was almost constantly walking from town to town and giving almost exact same teachings. Remeber, there were no tape recorders either. YOu'd have to follow Buddha for A LONG time in order to hear what you can read in a WEEK! Lots of Metta, Alex #80388 From: Dieter Möller Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 9:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Paul Williams moellerdieter Hi Rahula , I think that Williams looks from a philosophical perspective . The question ' why is there something instead of nothing?' , has been treated lately in detail by philosopher Martin Heidegger , who - it is said - was one of the last scholars of Metaphysics. But Buddhism addresses the (suffering) individual ..not interested to explain the world in last details ( people will always die before ......) So the scientific mind with its claim of objectivity will not be satisfied with the Dhamma ..at least not until the Noble Truths are recognised.. with Metta Dieter #80389 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 4:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Paul Williams upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter (and RobA, and Rahula) - In a message dated 12/22/2007 12:20:30 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Rahula , I think that Williams looks from a philosophical perspective . The question ' why is there something instead of nothing?' , has been treated lately in detail by philosopher Martin Heidegger , who - it is said - was one of the last scholars of Metaphysics. But Buddhism addresses the (suffering) individual ..not interested to explain the world in last details ( people will always die before ......) So the scientific mind with its claim of objectivity will not be satisfied with the Dhamma ..at least not until the Noble Truths are recognised.. with Metta Dieter ============================= Yes, you and Robert say much the same thing, and I think you are both correct. Prof Williams wants to know all the details of the poisoned arrow, all the while leaving it in to poison his system. With metta, Howard #80390 From: DC Wijeratna Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 10:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 3. dcwijeratna Hello, Andrew Thanks for your reply and the well-researched answer to my question. However, I'll begin at the beginning. 1. Western INTERPRETATION OF BUDDHISM The teaching of the Buddha was not meant to be interpreted. It was to be understood. [It is a good thing that most interpreters did not come across Einstein's theory of relativity!!!] By the teaching of the Buddha I mean the dhamma and vinaya propounded by the Buddha, All that is contained within the Four Noble Truths and the Paatimokkha rules. This business of interpreting started within the first century after the 'parinibbaana' of the Buddha. [You would notice that I used the word 'parinibbaana' rather than death or demise or extinction or any other English word that I know of. Parinibbaana is the end of sansaaric life. And not the end of life; what we refer to as death. This is also an illustration of the difficulty of translating Pali to English.] So there were 18 schools--early Buddhist schools-- by the time of the 3rd council. It is generally agreed that All these schools had more or less the same sutta pi.taka, and paatimokkha (vinaya) but Abhidhamma and Commentaries were different. The latter two are really attempts to explain the Dhamma by unenlightened (non-ariyans) individuals. Interpretation of the Suttas according to one's own whims and fancies started with the academic or comparative study of religion, in the Westen world. The people who tried to do this didn't 'understand' the teaching of the Buddha. [They were Christians. For them Christianity was derived form Judaism. So Buddhism was the product of the Vedas. See below] So they gave meaning to Pali words on the basis of what they thought it was. This trend developed to such an extent that now it is as if the Buddha's word has no 'intended meaning'. That is why each one seems to have his or her own interpretation. At least these people forget the fact that the Buddha could not have meant many different things with one set of words. 2. DSG serves a useful purpose ... I am not so sure of that. One of the things I noticed is that most people are arguing, debating or even abusing each other. A practice the Buddha deprecated: see Kalaama, and many others. The Buddha never encouraged discussion of 'metaphysical' things. Really anything that is not personally verified by experiencing. I will not elaborate on this for obvious reasons. 3. Preservation of the Buddha word Yes you are correct. We should be thankful to them for preserving the text. [But they couldn't preserve its spirit.] 4. Translation of Saddhaa as faith (confidence, trust, belief etc.) This is the work of Western Buddhist scholars. It appears in Childers, Pali dictionary published in 1875. However, if you look at Hardy's 'A Manual of Buddhism' he calls saddhaa 'purity'. This was published in 1854. Childers' dictionary doesn't give the etymology of the word. But look at the PTS dictionary of RhysDavids'. He derives it from Latin Cred-do. Monier Williams does the same thing [Sanskrit Dictionary]. All these people didn't have a clue to Dhamma. Rhys Davids says the Buddha was a born a hindu, lived a hindu and died a hindu. [See Manual of Buddhism by Rhys Davids, the words I mentioned may not be exact; I am writing from memory]. He goes on to say that the Buddha's enlightenment and 'kamma theory' and two others are mysteries in Buddhism. But what is most interesting is his Hibbert's lectures [1881] wherein he develops a brand-new kamma theory. Well that is interesting reading and absolute non-sense; better to read Alice in Wonderland. But it is his interpretation of Dhamma that formed the basis of Western interpretation of Dhamma. [His wife tried to introduce Self and God into Dhamma] The most extensive study of saddhaa is in Jayatilleke; Early Buddhist theory of Knoledge. He interprets saddhaa as the belief in the statements of the Buddha. The whole book is based on the idea, that knowledge is 'justified true belief'. Jayatilleke equates personal verification to justification. This theory whatever its merits and demerits are when applied to mundane knowledge is not applicable to knowledge of the 'ariyan' truths. Let' give a simple meaning to 'ariyan'; it is above the experience of normal human beings. Only those who travel the Buddhist path can have that knowledge after sammaa samaadhi. Now confidence, trust, faith all these are based on belief. But saddhaa is not. The word saddhaa is derived from the root dhaa with the prefix sa.n; dhaa means to hold, keep, etc. Saddhaa therefore means to keep hold etc of the practices that you leanr from your parents, teachers etc. It is not a term that has anything to do with knowledge. As far as Dhamma is concerned all of us are endowed with delusion or moha. We don't have knowledge [Buddhist knowledge]. There are three varieties of saddhaa according to the canon. Amuulikaa saddhaa--rootless, baseless, or foundationless saddhaa, saddhaa, and aakaaravatii saddhaa--aakaaravatii saddhaa is a diificult word to translate. Jayatilleke translates it as rational faith. This is WRONG. From the context in which it appears, for example viimamsaka sutta of MN, it is the state of the stream-enterer, an ariyan state. So we can't discuss it because we don't know what it is. The word aakaara means--the manner of doing something or a method; aakaaravantu means endowed with the manner of doing something; in this case, it refers to the ariyan path. Amuulikaa saddhaa is what most of us have; here we blindly follow the tradition. When we have saddhaa we accept the dhamma after listening to it and accept it because it is reasonable; then we follow it. Let me give an example to illustrate what I mean. Take lying. As children we learn from our elders that we should not lie. So we don't. But we also see our elders lying under certain circumstances; so will also lie in such circumstances. Suppose that you think about these matters carefully and conclude that it is bad to lie under ALL circumstances and decide never to lie, then saddhaa is born. You may still lie, but it would be by habit, never by design. This is how you acquire saddhaa. But remember that reference is to observable actions. This is very clearly explained Kaalaama sutta. There is no single word for faith in Dhamma. In the suttas the expression: "idameva sacca.m moghama~n~na.m" expresses the idea of faith or belief. The meaning of the expression is: this is the only truth; all else is delusion. So for Hindus, only Brahma, Christians God etc. 5. Different perspective The Buddha used the word dhamma more often than not to denote the path or the life of purity. Here I am concentrating on the ariyan truths as the dhamma. That is the distinction I had in mind. Dhammcakka is definitely meant for the monks--at least the majjhimaa pa.tipadaa or the middle path. which is also the "Noble Eightfold Path"--the fourth ariyan truth. We who live in the most extreme "kaamasukhallikhaanuyogii" society this world has ever seen (recorded history) cannot even think of that, unless we become bhikkhus; who observes all the siilas given in for example saama~n~naphala sutta. 6. In the teaching of the Buddha understanding (mundane) has nothing to do with the mind or mental states. Very simple, I don't know another's mind; please reflect on this; is there any way in which we can find out whether a person is lying or not. (or mad; we never judge a person to be mad by looking at his mind; we look at his behaviour) So the Buddha's criterion is: if your actions corresponds to your words, then you know and understand. You don't understand that killing is bad, if you intentionally kill even a mosquito. Same with lying and so on. When you understand it you will not kill under any circumstances. Here is an explanation of the word, tathaagata: "yathaavaadii tathaakaarii, tathaavaadii yathaakaarii" "Do what you say, say what you do". By the way this was the motto of BS 5750-which evolved into ISO 9001 on quality. When you are full of kusala (alobha, adosa and amoha), then your actions spring from kusala and you are an arahant. With mettaa, D. G. D. C. Wijeratna #80391 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 5:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dart Sutta - Contemplation of Feeling upasaka_howard Hi again, Dieter, TG, and all - To get the ball rolling, I'm copying below the Introduction of Ven Nyanaponika's article on vedana with some comments of mine interspersed: Introduction "To feel is everything!" — so exclaimed a German poet. Though these are rather exuberant words, they do point to the fact that feeling is a key factor in human life. Whether people are fully aware of it or not, their lives are chiefly spent in an unceasing endeavor to increase their pleasant feelings and to avoid unpleasant feelings. All human ambitions and strivings serve that purpose: from the simple joys of a humdrum existence to the power urge of the mighty and the creative joy of the great artist. All that is wanted is to have more and more of pleasant feelings, because they bring with them emotional satisfaction, called happiness. Such happiness may have various levels of coarseness or refinement, and may reach great intensity. These emotions, on their part, will produce many volitions and their actualizations. For the purpose of satisfying the "pleasure principle," many heroic deeds have been performed, and many more unheroic and unscrupulous ones. For providing the means to pleasurable feelings, thousands of industries and services have sprung up, with millions of workers. Technology and applied sciences, too, serve to a large extent the growing demands for sense-enjoyment and comfort. By providing questionable escape routes, these purveyors of emotional and sensual happiness also try to allay painful feelings like fear and anxiety. From this brief purview one may now appreciate the significance of the Buddha's terse saying that "all things converge on feelings." From such a central position of feeling it can also be understood that misconceptions about feelings belong to the twenty Personality Views, where the Aggregate of Feeling (vedana-kkhandha) is in various ways identified with an assumed self. Yet, feeling by itself, in its primary state, is quite neutral when it registers the impact of an object as pleasant, unpleasant or indifferent. Only when emotional or volitional additions are admitted, will there arise desire and love, aversion and hate, anxiety, fear and distorting views. But that need not be so. These admixtures are not inseparable parts of the respective feelings. In fact, many of the weaker impressions we receive during the day stop at the mere registering of a very faint and brief feeling, without any further emotional reaction. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I think this is important, and it bears a clear relevance to the matter of dukkha and the "second dart". ---------------------------------------------------- This shows that the stopping at the bare feeling is psychologically possible, and that it could also be done intentionally with the help of mindfulness and self-restraint, even in cases when the stimulus to convert feelings into emotions is strong. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree with that, provided that cultivated supporting conditions are in place. Many here will disagree, though, because intention is involved. ----------------------------------------------------- Through actual experience it can thus be confirmed that the ever-revolving round of Dependent Origination (paticca-samuppada) can be stopped at the point of Feeling, and that there is no inherent necessity that Feeling is followed by Craving. Here we encounter Feeling as a key factor on the path of liberation, and therefore, the Contemplation of Feeling has, in Buddhist tradition, always been highly regarded as an effective aid on that path. -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I note that some people have taken the position that guarding the senses and meditation amounts to the use of mindfulness etc to "stop at the point of feeling". I disagree with that. It is part of the practice, but in an important sense it is a *consequence* of the practice. The entire program of cultivation trains the mind in variety of ways, so that the wholesome operations of attention, calm, and mindfulness arise more frequently and more intensely. ----------------------------------------------------- The Contemplation of Feeling is one of the four Foundations of Mindfulness (satipatthana) and may be undertaken in the framework of that meditative practice aiming at the growth of Insight (vipassana). It is, however, essential that this Contemplation should also be remembered and applied in daily life whenever feelings are prone to turn into unwholesome emotions. Of course, one should not try to produce in oneself feelings intentionally, just for the sake of practice; they should rather be taken up for mindful observation only when they occur. There will be many such occasions, provided the mind is alert and calm enough to notice the feelings clearly at their primary stage. -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Also, more than attempting to intentionally forestall reaction to feelings, one should develop the habit of *noticing* the arising of reaction to feeling, and noticing the suffering produced by such reaction. This noticing cultivates wisdom, and the wisdom then leads to relinquishment. -------------------------------------------------------- In the Contemplation of Feelings, there should first be a mindful awareness of the feelings when they arise, and one should clearly distinguish them as pleasant, unpleasant (painful) or neutral, respectively. There is no such thing as "mixed feelings." ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yep! ------------------------------------------------------ Mindfulness should be maintained throughout the short duration of that specific feeling, down to its cessation. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: As possible. Practice makes perfect. ---------------------------------------------- If the vanishing point of feelings is repeatedly seen with increasing clarity, it will become much easier to trap, and finally to stop, those emotions, thoughts and volitions, which normally follow so rapidly, and which are so often habitually associated with the feelings. Pleasant feeling is habitually linked with enjoyment and desire; unpleasant feeling with aversion; neutral feeling with boredom and confusion, but also serving as background for wrong views. But when Bare Attention is directed towards the arising and vanishing of feelings, these polluting additives will be held a bay; or when they have arisen they will be immediately cognized in their nature, and that cognition may often be sufficient to stop them from growing stronger by unopposed continuance. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. Here he makes the right point, IMO. Mindfulness and calm attention lead to clear comprehension, wisdom, and relinquishment. --------------------------------------------- If feelings are seen in their bubble-like blowing up and bursting, their linkage with craving or aversion will be weakened more and more, until that bondage is finally broken. By that practice, attachment to likes and dislikes will be reduced and thereby an inner space will be provided for the growth of the finer emotions and virtues: for loving-kindness and compassion, for contentment, patience and forbearance. In this contemplation it is of particular importance to dissociate the feelings from even the faintest thoughts of "I" or "mine." There should be no ego-reference, as for instance "I feel (and, therefore, I am)." Nor should there be any thought of being the owner of the feelings: "I have pleasant feelings. How happy I am!" With the thought, "I want to have more of them" craving arises. Or, "I have pains. How unhappy I am!" and wishing to get rid of the pains, aversion arises. -------------------------------------------- Howard: We can't just say "No I-pollution" and expect that to work. But the repeated *noticing* of I-making and its hurtful effects will lead to its weakening. -------------------------------------------- Avoiding these wrong and unrealistic views, one should be aware of the feelings as a conditioned and transient process. Mindfulness should be kept alert and it should be focused on the bare fact that there is just the mental function of such and such a feeling; and this awareness should serve no other purpose than that of knowledge and mindfulness, as stated in the Satipatthana Sutta. As long as one habitually relates the feelings to a person that "has" them, and does so even during meditation, there cannot be any progress in that Contemplation. To be aware of the feelings without any ego-reference will also help to distinguish them clearly from the physical stimuli arousing them, as well as from the subsequent mental reactions to them. Thereby the meditator will be able to keep his attention focused on the feelings alone, without straying into other areas. This is the purport of the phrase "he contemplates feelings in the feelings" as stated in the Satipatthana Sutta. At this stage of the practice, the meditator will become more familiar with the Insight Knowledge of "Discerning mentality and materiality" (nama-rupa-pariccheda). Further progress, however, will require persistence in the mindful observations of the arising and passing away of every instant of feeling whenever it occurs. This will lead to a deepening experience of impermanence (anicca), being one of the main gates to final liberation. When, in Insight Meditation (vipassana), the vanishing moment of feelings becomes more strongly marked, the impermanent nature of the feelings will impress itself very deeply on the meditator's mind. This experience, gained also from other mental and bodily processes, will gradually mature into the Insight Knowledge of Dissolution (bhangañana). On reaching that stage, the meditator will find himself well on the road to further progress. It is within the practice of Insight meditation that the Contemplation of Feelings can unfold its full strength as an efficient tool for breaking the chain of suffering at its weakest link. But from this Contemplation, considerable benefits can be derived also by those who, in their daily life, devote only some quiet reflection to their feelings and emotions, even if done retrospectively. They will soon find that feelings and emotions are "separable." Even this reflective and retrospective contemplation can help them to a fuller awareness of feelings and emotions when they actually occur. This again can save them from being carried away by the emotional cross-currents of elation and dejection. The mind will then gradually reach a higher level of firmness and equipoise, just by that simple procedure of looking, or looking back at, one's feelings and emotions. This, however, should not, and need not, be made a constant practice, but should be taken up on suitable occasions and for a limited period of time until one has become familiar with the mechanism of feelings followed by emotions. Such an understanding of the process will result in an increasing control over one's emotional reactions, and this will happen in a natural, spontaneous way. One need not have fears that one's focusing the mind on the feelings and emotions, in the manner described, will lead to cold aloofness or an emotional withdrawal. On the contrary, mind and heart will become more open to all those finer emotions spoken of before. It will not exclude warm human relationships, nor the enjoyment of beauty in art and nature. But it will remove from them the fever of clinging, so that these experiences will give a deeper satisfaction, as far as this world of Dukkha admits. A life lived in this way may well mature in the wish to use the Contemplation of Feelings for its highest purpose: mind's final liberation from suffering. Nyanaponika Kandy, Sri Lanka January, 1983 With metta, Howard #80392 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 11:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dukkha of ruupas. was: Does Anicca = Dukkha?) nilovg Dear Alex, Op 21-dec-2007, om 22:45 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > N:Those who have developed ruupa-jhaana and see the disadvantage > of ruupa > >>> > Disadvantage of Rupa or Sanna? I think the "Arupa" Jhanas are where > you really see disadvantage of Rupa. ------- N: You are quite right. A typo: he sees the disadvantage of naama. > > >>>> > can be reborn in the non-percipient plane, asa~n~nasatta plane. > > During that life there is no naama, only ruupa. > >>> > > A: What about Vinnana? Vinnana is probably still there, just no > "sanna". ---------- Sa~n~na represents also citta. Compare: the fourth aruupa-jhaana: neither perception nor non- perception. Here sa~n~naa represents also feeling and the other naamas, as is explained. From Buddhist dictionnary, Nyanatiloka: -------- > > >>> > > For them there is not the end of dukkha, they have not reached the > > end of rebirth and have to be reborn again. > >>> > Here the suffering is due to IMPERMANENCE of the state. ------ N: Not only that. There is impermanence of each ruupa that arises and falls away. > > Ruupas arise and fall > > away, these are impermanent, dukkha and non-self. > > Perhaps this helps to see that ruupas alone are also dukkha. > > A: WHile EVERYTHING is Dukkha, it MUST be percieved to have any > effect. > A sentientless rock doesn't feel anything. ------- N: why should there be an effect? The Buddha said: All conditioned dhammas (sankhaara dhammas) are dukkha. This includes also the ruupas in the plane of asa~n~nasatta. Why should there be exceptions? It is independent of any feeling, there is no feeling in that plane. It is a characteristic inherent in ruupa. Nina. #80393 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 11:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ideation nilovg Dear Robert A. Op 22-dec-2007, om 17:04 heeft Robert het volgende geschreven: > Khun Sujin puts great stress on the study and naming of things (in > Pali and > English). In her teachings, do things ever cross over to the state > of silent > observation described above, or are you forever making reference to > ideas > and words? If they do reach this point of silent obeservation, how the > words and the will to study condition the arising of what is beyond > words > and will? ---------- N: She warns us that the development of understanding is not a question of naming. Dosa appears, and its characteristic can be 'studied' with mindfulness. When we name it, its characteristic is not known. Study is good as a foundation, but it is not enough. Intellectual understanding will be a condition for the arising of sati that is directly aware, without thinking. Sati is not thinking, she explained. We should know that clinging to self follows all the time, also when studying, or being aware. As to silent observation, one has to find out: is this sati that is aware of a characteristic? Is this sati that has arisen because of its own conditions, or is it directed by an idea of self who wishes to observe silently? Nina. #80394 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 7:15 am Subject: The Next Section Re: [dsg] Dart Sutta - Contemplation of Feeling upasaka_howard Hi again, Dieter, TG, and all - Here is the next section of Ven Nyanaponika's article with brief commentary by me: The Place of "Feeling" in Buddhist Psychology It should be first made clear that, in Buddhist psychology, "feeling" (Pali: vedana) is the bare sensation noted as pleasant, unpleasant (painful) and neutral (indifferent). Hence, it should not be confused with emotion which, though arising from the basic feeling, adds to it likes or dislikes of varying intensity, as well as other thought processes. Feeling, in that sense, is one of the five Aggregates or Groups of Existence (khandha), constituting what is conventionally called "a person." The specific factors operative in emotion belong to the Aggregate of Mental Formations (sankhara-kkhandha). Feeling is one of the four mental Aggregates which arise, inseparably, in all states of consciousness; the other three are perception, mental formations, and consciousness. Feeling arises whenever there is the meeting of three factors, i.e., sense-organ, object and consciousness. It is called the meeting of these three that, in Buddhist psychology, is called sense-impression (contact, impact; phassa), which is a mental, and not a physical process. It is sixfold, as being conditioned either by of the five physical senses or by mind. it is this sixfold sense-impression by which the corresponding six feelings are conditioned. In the formula of the Dependent Origination (paticca-samuppada), this is expressed by the link: "Sense-impression conditions Feeling" (phassa-paccaya vedana). When emotions follow, they do so in accordance with the next link of Dependent Origination: "Feeling conditions Craving" (vedana-paccaya tanha). The feeling that arises from contact with visual forms, sounds, odors, and tastes is always a neutral feeling. Pleasant or unpleasant feelings do not always follow in relation to these four sense perceptions; but when they follow, they are then an additional stage of the perceptual process, subsequent to the neutral feeling which is the first response. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: The foregoing can be perplexing, because it may seem that some odors and tastes are felt as pleasant or unpleasant. But if one attends carefully to experience, I think it does become clear that what he says about "an additional stage of the perceptual process" is correct. An odor or taste that seems to be pleasant or unpleasant can be seen to be one that leads either to pleasant or unpleasant thoughts or recollections, or, more often, I think, to bodily sensations that are pleasant or unpleasant, and we wrongly attribute the non-neutral feeling as applying to the odor or taste instead of to the resultant thought process or bodily sensations. ---------------------------------------------------------- But bodily impressions (touch, pressure, etc.) can cause either pleasant or unpleasant feelings. Mental impressions can cause gladness, sadness or neutral (indifferent) feeling. Feeling is one of those mental factors (cetasika) which are common to all types of consciousness. In other words, every conscious experience has a feeling tone, even if only that of a neutral or indifferent feeling, which also has a distinct quality of its own. Feeling by itself (if one could so separate it) is, as it was already said, the bare sensation noted as pleasant, painful or neutral. The subsequent emotional, practical, moral or spiritual values attached to that basic feeling are determined by other mental factors that subsequently arise in relation to that feeling, but, by way of classification, belong to the Aggregate of Mental Formations (sankhara-kkhandha). It is the quality of those other mental functions that makes the co-nascent feeling, too, to be either good or bad, noble or low, kammic or non-kammic, mundane or supramundane. Feeling may stop at the stage of bare sensation in all weak states of consciousness, but also when there is mindful control of feelings. In such cases, there is no evaluation of these feelings, emotionally or intellectually. ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I would sooner say "mindful attention" to such feelings than "mindful control" of them. By repeatedly seeing how reaction to feelings leads to suffering, revulsion to (i.e., a turning away from) reacting with craving and aversion is cultivated, and mindful attention then automatically results in a lessening of deleterious reaction to feeling and often even to complete non-reaction to it. ============================ With metta, Howard #80395 From: "Robert" Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ideation avalo1968 Hello Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > N: She warns us that the development of understanding is not a > question of naming. Dosa appears, and its characteristic can be > 'studied' with mindfulness. When we name it, its characteristic is > not known. Study is good as a foundation, but it is not enough. > Intellectual understanding will be a condition for the arising of > sati that is directly aware, without thinking. Sati is not thinking, > she explained. > We should know that clinging to self follows all the time, also when > studying, or being aware. > As to silent observation, one has to find out: is this sati that is > aware of a characteristic? Is this sati that has arisen because of > its own conditions, or is it directed by an idea of self who wishes > to observe silently? > Nina. > Intellectional understanding is a condition for the arising of sati that is directly aware, without thinking, sati that is aware of a characteristic. Yet, it appears to be aware of a characteristic without naming that characteristic. This is what interests me. This is what I call the experience of something, such as anger or desire. What I am having trouble understanding is how study and intellectuial analysis of these characteristics enhances our ability to experience. Thank you for your reply. It was helpful and appreciated. Robert A. #80396 From: "Larry" Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:30 pm Subject: Re: ideation lbidd2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" wrote: > > Hello DSG, > > There is one aspect of Khun Sujin's teachings that I am trying to > understand and perhaps someone in this group can help clarify this point > for me. > > I was reading a book called "Living Zen" by Robert Linssen ( a sort of mix > of Zen and Krishnamurti ). There is a chapter called "Lucidity without > Ideation". The author proposes that there is a state of mind which is: > > "a state of silent observation which is perfectly clear and intense, without > ideas or distinct thoughts, without forms or symbols or words." > > He also makes the point that: > > "this silence of the mind and inner transparence cannot be the outcome of > an act of discipline. The absence of fabrication and objectification by the > mind cannot be the effect of the will of the 'I-process', but arises from an > informal and transcendent understanding of an intuitive nature." > > Khun Sujin puts great stress on the study and naming of things (in Pali and > English). In her teachings, do things ever cross over to the state of silent > observation described above, or are you forever making reference to ideas > and words? If they do reach this point of silent obeservation, how the > words and the will to study condition the arising of what is beyond words > and will? > > I would be interested in any thoughts someone in this group might have on > this matter. > > Thank you, > > Robert A. > Hi Robert, I would say an abhidhamma analysis of "lucidity without ideation" is the paramattha dhamma of seeing consciousness, or other 5-door consciousness, without the cognitive reaction of a javana volitional formation. However, it isn't exactly insight. Insight requires understanding. The preliminary understanding is very similar to naming things but it is more a matter of recognition. This is the discrimination of nama and rupa, the purification of view, a glimpse of anatta. The "re" in "recognition" often references something that has been studied and contemplated. Lucidity without ideation could well arise from "transcendent understanding" but this isn't the understanding of insight which is, in a sense, obvious and ordinary--but also rare. We might say insight is penetrating analytical understanding. The "penetrating" part causes one to let go of something. As for intentionality, you can practice falling off a cliff but you don't really get it until you accidentally fall off a cliff. You can't intentionally let go of intention, which we often identify as me or mine. Larry #80397 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:37 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Anatta as a strategy scottduncan2 Dear Alex, A: "Removal is COMPLETE AND FOREVER removal. But before this can be done, temporary removal is good and still required (ie: to get to Jhana)." Scott: Why is 'temporary removal good and still required'? Can you elaborate on what function this serves in the end? It seems to me that it is simply a matter of when jhaana is in place, 'hindrances' (i.e., these particular mental factors) are not. Like when its dark it is not light. I don't see the purpose of developing concentration to the level of jhaana just because the hindrances are suppressed naturally by so doing. Sincerely, Scott. #80398 From: "shennieca" Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 1:24 pm Subject: Re: Preserving the Buddha's Teachings, Ch 4, no 3. shennieca Dear DC, It is wonderful! After 2500 years, what the Buddha taught is still applicable to our daily life. :-)) Especially "Do what you say, say what you do". Even the ISO standards are following the Buddha's teachings. It is truly wonderful! :D :-)) With metta & respect, Elaine #80399 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Dec 22, 2007 9:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta as a strategy upasaka_howard Hi, Scott (and Alex) - In a message dated 12/22/2007 3:37:36 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Alex, A: "Removal is COMPLETE AND FOREVER removal. But before this can be done, temporary removal is good and still required (ie: to get to Jhana)." Scott: Why is 'temporary removal good and still required'? Can you elaborate on what function this serves in the end? It seems to me that it is simply a matter of when jhaana is in place, 'hindrances' (i.e., these particular mental factors) are not. Like when its dark it is not light. I don't see the purpose of developing concentration to the level of jhaana just because the hindrances are suppressed naturally by so doing. Sincerely, Scott. ================================== In many suttas, MN 39, for example, the Buddha taught the following: _____________________________________ "And furthermore, with the abandoning of pleasure and stress — as with the earlier disappearance of elation and distress — he enters and remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity and mindfulness, neither-pleasure nor stress. He sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness. Just as if a man were sitting covered from head to foot with a white cloth so that there would be no part of his body to which the white cloth did not extend; even so, the monk sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness. There's nothing of his entire body unpervaded by pure, bright awareness. "With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to knowledge of the recollection of past lives._5_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.039.than.html#n-5) He recollects his manifold past lives, i.e., one birth, two births, three births, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, one hundred, one thousand, one hundred thousand, many aeons of cosmic contraction, many aeons of cosmic expansion, many aeons of cosmic contraction and expansion, [recollecting], 'There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure and pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose there. There too I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure and pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose here.' Thus he recollects his manifold past lives in their modes and details. Just as if a man were to go from his home village to another village, and then from that village to yet another village, and then from that village back to his home village. The thought would occur to him, 'I went from my home village to that village over there. There I stood in such a way, sat in such a way, talked in such a way, and remained silent in such a way. From that village I went to that village over there, and there I stood in such a way, sat in such a way, talked in such a way, and remained silent in such a way. From that village I came back home.' In the same way — with his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability — the monk directs and inclines it to knowledge of the recollection of past lives. He recollects his manifold past lives... in their modes and details. "With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to knowledge of the passing away and re-appearance of beings. He sees — by means of the divine eye, purified and surpassing the human — beings passing away and re-appearing, and he discerns how they are inferior and superior, beautiful and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate in accordance with their kamma: 'These beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech, and mind, who reviled the noble ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. But these beings — who were endowed with good conduct of body, speech, and mind, who did not revile the noble ones, who held right views and undertook actions under the influence of right views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the good destinations, in the heavenly world.' Thus — by means of the divine eye, purified and surpassing the human — he sees beings passing away and re-appearing, and he discerns how they are inferior and superior, beautiful and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate in accordance with their kamma. Just as if there were a tall building in the central square [of a town], and a man with good eyesight standing on top of it were to see people entering a house, leaving it, walking along the street, and sitting in the central square. The thought would occur to him, 'These people are entering a house, leaving it, walking along the streets, and sitting in the central square.' In the same way — with his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability — the monk directs and inclines it to knowledge of the passing away and re-appearance of beings. He sees — by means of the divine eye, purified and surpassing the human — beings passing away and re-appearing, and he discerns how they are inferior and superior, beautiful and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate in accordance with their kamma... "With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability, the monk directs and inclines it to the knowledge of the ending of the mental fermentations. He discerns, as it has come to be, that 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the way leading to the cessation of stress... These are mental fermentations... This is the origination of fermentations... This is the cessation of fermentations... This is the way leading to the cessation of fermentations.' His heart, thus knowing, thus seeing, is released from the fermentation of sensuality, the fermentation of becoming, the fermentation of ignorance. With release, there is the knowledge, 'Released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There's nothing further for this world.' Just as if there were a pool of water in a mountain glen — clear, limpid, and unsullied — where a man with good eyesight standing on the bank could see shells, gravel, and pebbles, and also shoals of fish swimming about and resting, and it would occur to him, 'This pool of water is clear, limpid, and unsullied. Here are these shells, gravel, and pebbles, and also these shoals of fish swimming about and resting.' In the same way — with his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to imperturbability — the monk directs and inclines it to the knowledge of the ending of the mental fermentations. He discerns, as it has come to be, that 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the way leading to the cessation of stress... These are mental fermentations... This is the origination of fermentations... This is the cessation of fermentations... This is the way leading to the cessation of fermentations.' His heart, thus knowing, thus seeing, is released from the fermentation of sensuality, the fermentation of becoming, the fermentation of ignorance. With release, there is the knowledge, 'Released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There's nothing further for this world.' ---------------------------------------------------------- And in the Dhammapada he taught: ___________________________________ There's no jhana for one with no discernment, no discernment for one with no jhana. But one with both jhana & discernment: he's on the verge of Unbinding. ------------------------------ Don't these suffice? ============================ With metta, Howard