#86800 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Jun 9, 2008 7:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] egberdina Hi Tep, 2008/6/9 Tep : > > Hi Herman (and Swee), - > > Thanks to Swee for his excellent reply to your questions. > > > T: Possibly, it was an accident in each case. There must be many mad > cows roaming around those days. Since no indian ate beef and when > their cows had the "mad cow disease", there was no animal doctor to > cure them either. > I am relieved to see that you allow for accidents, that not everything must be caused by some intention somewhere. Since a living arahant still has the five aggregates as we do, s/he > also has volitional formations to do things. The difference is that > an arahant's cetana and kamma are free from akusala because there are > no lobha, dosa and moha remaining. > > The Buddha taught and helped numerous humans and devas to attain > Nibbana. The great arahant Moggala and Sariputta helped monks to > succeed in living the Holy life under Buddha's Dhamma. Their metta & > karuna acts were done to make a big difference in other beings. That > shows me that they did not value nothing. Can you please explain the meaning of satisfaction (in the context of craving) in the following from MN137? (my capitals) "There is the case where the Teacher — out of sympathy, seeking their well-being — teaches the Dhamma to his disciples: 'This is for your well-being, this is for your happiness.' His disciples do not listen or lend ear or apply their minds to gnosis. Turning aside, they stray from the Teacher's message. In this case the Tathagata is not SATISFIED nor is he sensitive to SATISFACTION, yet he remains untroubled, mindful, & alert. This is the first frame of reference that a noble one cultivates, cultivating which he is a teacher fit to instruct a group. "Furthermore, there is the case where the Teacher — out of sympathy, seeking their well-being — teaches the Dhamma to his disciples: 'This is for your well-being, this is for your happiness.' Some of his disciples do not listen or lend ear or apply their minds to gnosis. Turning aside, they stray from the Teacher's message. But some of his disciples listen, lend ear, & apply their minds to gnosis. They do not turn aside or stray from the Teacher's message. In this case the Tathagata is not satisfied nor is he sensitive to satisfaction; at the same time he is not dissatisfied nor is he sensitive to dissatisfaction. Free from both satisfaction & dissatisfaction, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert. This is the second frame of reference... "Furthermore, there is the case where the Teacher — out of sympathy, seeking their well-being — teaches the Dhamma to his disciples: 'This is for your well-being, this is for your happiness.' His disciples listen, lend ear, & apply their minds to gnosis. They do not turn aside or stray from the Teacher's message. In this case the Tathagata is SATISFIED and is sensitive to SATISFACTION, yet he remains untroubled, mindful, & alert. This is the third frame of reference that a noble one cultivates, cultivating which he is a teacher fit to instruct a group." Thanks in advance Herman #86801 From: Sukinder Date: Mon Jun 9, 2008 8:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching sukinderpal Hi Herman, ============= Herman: Like you, I am not interested in arguing for the sake of arguing. Suk: I am glad to hear this. As you noted recently, even after years of reading each other on the list, we still can’t be sure what meaning the other person has in mind with regard to a particular concept used. There are other barriers to communication. Recently however, I’ve also been considering the fact of us being here discussing the Dhamma, which is to learn / go through the process of correcting one’s views. Of course ignorance and craving arising at almost every turn, so much so that rather than to ‘learn’ I end up arguing or otherwise indulging in theorizing /philosophy /thought proliferations. This is the reason why I appreciate Nina for example, who acting as a “wise friend”, brings us back down to what is relevant, namely the understanding of the present moment. This I think is the only real ‘good’ communicated when it comes to the Dhamma. On the other hand, if what one says leads to thinking about concepts with no direct application to one’s life, this can be quite a waste of time. You can now see why I made the remark about not being interested in arguing just for the sake of it. Besides, if any answer from me to a question posed by another is to have “meaning”, best it be directly related to my present concerns else it may end up being nothing more than mere abstract thought. Anyhow, anything can be by natural decisive support condition, a condition for panna, so I guess no rules…..? ================ Herman: But I will maintain that anyone who uses the "anatta defense" to justify whatever they do or fail to do is as skilful as a stupid baby lying on it's back. And let's be clear on another thing. It's not just baby boys that are stupid :-) So what is your position, Sukin? Suk: The reason I asked whether you saw this as being where I am coming from is because I don’t see that it applies. I don’t see it even now and the reason is: First, I’ve never found myself using Anatta to justify doing or not doing anything. I understanding it at my best only in hindsight which then becomes a basis simply for not dwelling in the past and speculating about the future. Second, the comparison with the ‘stupid baby’ in the Sutta you cited, is reference to *not knowing* anything. The Buddha I think, wanted to point out the fact that “not being engaged in certain forms of evil” does not imply “a corresponding good being done”. So I don’t think that it applies to the comparison you are making. The baby is simply “ignorant”, he has no right view but neither does he have wrong view. But I may be missing your point, in which case please explain more. Metta, Sukin #86802 From: "mattroke" Date: Mon Jun 9, 2008 10:39 pm Subject: India Trip 2009 mattroke If you are planning to go to India in February 2009, then please confirm today that you will be going. Tickets have to be booked on Thai International, and that needs to be done immediately. A deposit of 20,000 baht will have to be paid as soon as possible. There are over 100 people waiting to go, so if you do not confirm today, your place will be given to someone else. Please confirm by sending an email to ivan@... #86803 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:38 am Subject: Metta, Ch 7, no 6. nilovg Dear friends, Question: In Thailand there is the belief that one should pay respect to guardian spirits and brahmas. Do they really exist and can they assist us? Khun Sujin: First of all we should consider whether there is birth in other planes of existence, such as the deva planes, and whether there are beings in other planes such as guardian spirits and brahmas. There is birth in planes other than the human plane, depending on the appropriate conditions. Birth as a deva is the result of kusala kamma and this kind of birth is higher than birth as a human being. Birth in a brahma plane is the result of jhåna. If samatha has been developed to the degree of jhåna and the jhånacitta does not decline but arises shortly before the dying-consciousness, it produces rebirth-consciousness in a brahma plane. Thus beings who are brahmas really exist. Some people believe that there are sacred shrines or other objects they should venerate, but why do they attach importance to such things? We should remember that everybody is the owner of the deeds he has performed himself. Kamma conditions people to have different pleasant or unpleasant experiences in life. We see, hear, smell, taste and experience through body- sense different objects, some pleasant, some unpleasant. Seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and the experience of tangible object are cittas which are results of kamma, vipåkacittas. If there were no kammas which have been performed and which are capable of producing vipåka, all those different experiences could not arise. As to the question about the assistance to people given by guardian spirits and brahmas, each person is “heir” to his own deeds; that means: pleasant and unpleasant experiences through the senses are produced accordingly by the kamma he performed. Someone told me about an event which happened. When he was driving his car with a little boy sitting beside him, his car slipped off the road. However, the driver of a jeep who was immediately behind him stopped and could help him to get the car back on the road again, because he had the right equipment with him. The driver of the car who had this experience understood that if there had been conditions for akusala kamma to produce akusala vipåka (unpleasant result), he would not have received help so soon and in that case he would have had to wait much longer to get his car back on the road. We may receive help from another person, be he human or non-human, but this also depends on kamma. If there are conditions for akusala kamma to produce result, neither human being nor non- human being can help us. From the example given above we see that accumulated kusala kamma is like a close friend who is near and who can give protection and assistance, who can solve problems in different situations. ****** Nina. #86804 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 3:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/6/8 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman, > > > I suppose it is a personal choice, but I would never say I had > nibbana, or parinibbana (etc) as my goal. I also prefer not to call > myself a Buddhist. The idea of a conventionally real entity pursuing > an ultimately real goal is nonsensical (IMHO). > For what it is worth, I relate to this very well. > <. . .> > KH: > > We should be happy to understand that lobha is a conditioned > paramattha dhamma. >> > > > H: > I would sincerely like to read your understanding of > how "shoulding" can be free of wanting. > --------------------------- > > You will remember that Howard had written: "What, for a worldling, do > you think the "goal of being a better person" is? It is desire. And > we should be darn happy about such a desire. It is the key to unlock > the first of many doors leading to release." > > And I replied "We should be happy to understand that lobha is a > conditioned paramattha dhamma" > > So, which way do you see it Herman? Will desire and the idea > of 'doing something' (in order to obtain release) lead to release? I think that desire and the idea of doing something can be strong indicators of a realisation of dukkha, which is a fundamental change to the way a being approaches life. I will readily agree with you that indicators don't do anything, they don't lead anywhere. But they indicate that there is a process in train, so to speak. And in the case of the experience of desire for release, it is a sure sign. MN137 "And what are the six kinds of renunciation distress? The distress coming from the longing that arises in one who is filled with longing for the unexcelled liberations when — experiencing the inconstancy of those very forms, their change, fading, & cessation — he sees with right discernment as it actually is that all forms, past or present, are inconstant, stressful, subject to change and he is filled with this longing: 'O when will I enter & remain in the dimension that the noble ones now enter & remain in?' This is called renunciation distress. (Similarly with sounds, smells, tastes, tactile sensations, & ideas.) > Or should we be happy to understand that there are - right now - > really only paramattha dhammas (and there is no 'being' that can be > released or not released)? If you are referring to the equanimity that lies beyond desire for release, all good and well. But I can't imagine that anyone in a position of equanimity would "knock" (denigrate) the desire for release. > ----------- > H: > I hope earnestly for you that "things" resolve themselves, sooner > rather than later. > ----------- > > Thanks, Herman. In my case it is nothing serious. It is certainly not > worthy of being called 'the black dog.' It's more a matter of self > indulgence in someone who has too much spare time. 'The fat cat?' :-) > Cool :-) Cheers Herman #86805 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/6/9 sarah abbott : > Hi Herman, (Scott & all), > > .... > H:>Thanks for pursuing the matter in good faith, Sarah. And of course you > realise that if you accept that listening, looking etc all rely on > self-consciousness I will be asking some more questions :-) > ... > S: Self-consciousness makes no sense to me, sounds too atta-ish for a start. Perhaps Scott can help sort it out with you as I'm close to signing off for a while and I see you too are sorting out all sorts of other skeletons:-) > ... I get the distinct impression that there's a bit of classical conditioning going on here. Pavlov's dogs salivated on hearing a ringing a bell only, because previously it had been rung to announce the serving of food. I only have to speak in everyday English, and off you go on a tangent all your own, unrelated to anything I said. If English concepts make you all aversive like, methinks the use of Pali concepts might be a good diversionary tactic to have the same conversation with you, without raising your heckles. So, if ever you have the time and the inclination, would you be kind enough to annotate the following with what in your opinion, equates to sound, hearing, listening, thinking etc, and a brief statement as to why that is your opinion. 1 Bhavanga 2 Bhavanga Calana 3 Bhavangapaccheda 4 Sotadvaravajjana 5 Sotavinnana 6 Sampaticchana 7 Santirana 8 Votthapana 9 Javana 10 Tadalambana and amend as required for manodvarika citta vithi( just rolls of your tongue, doesn't it, unlike that yucky consciousness of consciousness :-) Cheers Herman #86806 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:47 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the reply (sorry for the delay): H: "Yes, consciousness is an effect, not a cause. By the by, would I be correct if I credit you with the complete opposite view, that only consciousness is effective?" Scott: Well, I'm not sure I'm correct but I think the whole cessation thing is naama - consciousness, mental, whatever. So yeah, and I find the view that 'consciousness is an effect, not a cause' to be not as I understand the Dhamma. H: "We didn't get very far in our discussion on two little Dhammapada verses, and as I noted there, the same is happening here. You tend to overlay what is there with what is not there. It just so happens that is precisely the theme of this very sutta, which is: what is there is empty of what is not there. I would very much like to discuss this sutta with you, and I am quite happy for you to overlay this sutta with every imaginable view you care to import, as long as you are happy for me to point that out whenever you do it." Scott: Sure, no problem, Herman. Look, I'm reading here to try to get clear on the Dhamma from the point of view of the tipitaka and the ancient commentaries. I don't want to make up my own theories. I don't feel like I need to think for myself. I just want to gain an intellectual understanding of the Dhamma as it is written. I don't find the views you give (and they are views as well, Herman - if I'm the kettle, you're the pot) to represent the Dhamma as I read it. I don't mind, but the views are, as you clarify, epiphenomenalism. I don't find that the Dhamma fares too well when forced into that particular philosophical bed. At any rate, and no offense, I find little to discuss once you make the view clear. That's the way you see it. Why should I debate it? How would you like to discuss this? The views are incompatible and that's that. I don't wish to beat a dead horse. I don't seek to convert you to any given view. I just don't see the view you present to have much resemblance to the view of the Dhamma I wind up with. For example: Me: "I'm rather curious, not that you need to indulge my curiosity with an explanation, as to how the epiphenomenalist view understands the whole process of attaining the Path. This is clearly shown to be a mental process." H: "Well, how about we start with the conditions for the Path experience to take place, as described in this sutta? Is the setting of this sutta relevant, do you think? Do you agree that the setting for the experience is a complete absence of people and their society? And is that absence mental in nature?" Scott: I'd rather not meander, Herman. Why don't we start with this clarification instead? Does the view you represent hold that the Path experience exists at all? In this case, I imagine that the view you uphold argues that there is no such thing as Cessation - that the Path (that is a deeply altering experience of Nibbaana) does not exist and is a fiction. Sincerely, Scott. #86807 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 5:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/6/10 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > > H: "Well, how about we start with the conditions for the Path > experience to take place, as described in this sutta? Is the setting > of this sutta relevant, do you think? Do you agree that the setting > for the experience is a complete absence of people and their society? > And is that absence mental in nature?" > > Scott: I'd rather not meander, Herman. Why don't we start with this > clarification instead? Does the view you represent hold that the Path > experience exists at all? > > In this case, I imagine that the view you uphold argues that there is > no such thing as Cessation - that the Path (that is a deeply altering > experience of Nibbaana) does not exist and is a fiction. > I just caught this post as I sent one of. I'll answer it straight away. To whom it may concern I, the undersigned, do solemnly declare :-) Cessation / Nibbana is very real. It does really happen. It is fact. Cheers Herman PS I also declare that those that think that Cessation / Nibbana is an experience are going to have to wait for ever, but that is perhaps their intention. #86808 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 5:21 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Regarding: H: "Cessation / Nibbana is very real. It does really happen. It is fact." Scott: How does the view define cessation? How does the view define Nibbaana? How does the view suggest that cessation happens? How does the view suggest that Nibbaana is a fact? Sincerely, Scott. #86809 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 5:36 am Subject: Re: Can Worldlings Directly Know the Faculties? Just wanna know ... dhammanusarin Dear Nina (and all), - I think you answered my questions by avoiding them : > Tep: > How do you know by yourself that there is more detachment from > the "all"? > How do you know that you have rightly developed satipatthaana? > > In short how do you know that you are on the right road ? ------ N: As I indicated before, it is not a good idea to speak about personal achievements or non-achievements. Rather we should speak about cause and result, the right cause leading to the right result. The right road is correct understanding that any clinging to result is counteractive. Dhammas arise because of conditions, and thus also sati arises by conditions. It is not connected with a person doing this or that, measuring the amount of sati or the lack of it. It all depends on the moment and the next moment is not known. Cittas arise and fall away, arise and fall away, performing their own functions and nobody can interfere. But understanding can be developed, and this stage by stage. T: I respectfully disagree. We should not only talk about the dhamma theory because just talking about theory does not show that you know that the theory works. The practical aspects are at least equally important. But how do practitioners evaluate their attainment if they do not know how to measure results? I think they measure results by examining whether lobha, dosa, and moha have been reduced. The Buddha talked about his experience and achivements often. "Ananda, in the meantime, I practiced it much to see the dangers of thinking. I practiced much to see the benefits of not thinking. Then my mind readily pursued, became delighted, got established and was released seeing not thinking as appeasement. ânanda, then overcoming thoughts and discursive thoughts and with joy and pleasantness born of concentration I abode in the second higher state of the mind. When abiding in that state of mind, discursive thoughts behaving oppressed me. ânanda, just as to pleasantness unpleasantness is an oppression, the behaviour of discursive thoughts was an oppression to me." [Anguttara Nikaya 004. Mahavaggo, Tapussasutta.] T: In the suttas we learn that venerables Sariputta, Moggallana, Anurudha, Ananda etc. discussed their attainment with fellow monks all the time. The Buddha-to-be Siddhattha Gotama even compared his teacher's (Alara Kalama) achievement to his own achievement in MN 36, Maha-Saccaka Sutta: "I thought: 'Not only does Alara Kalama have conviction, persistence, mindfulness, concentration, & discernment. I, too, have conviction, persistence, mindfulness, concentration, & discernment. What if I were to endeavor to realize for myself the Dhamma that Alara Kalama declares he has entered & dwells in, having realized it for himself through direct knowledge.' So it was not long before I quickly entered & dwelled in that Dhamma, having realized it for myself through direct knowledge. I went to him and said, 'Friend Kalama, is this the extent to which you have entered & dwell in this Dhamma, having realized it for yourself through direct knowledge?' "'Yes, my friend...' "'This, friend, is the extent to which I, too, have entered & dwell in this Dhamma, having realized it for myself through direct knowledge.' [endquote] .......................... So, Nina, there is nothing wrong in talking (not boasting) about one's own achievement when it is truthful and when the occasion is appropriate. Those who are afraid to discuss it may not have anything to say. Tep === #86810 From: "connie" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 6:05 am Subject: Perfections Corner (179) nichiconn Dear Friends, ch.5 continues: The Commentary explains further that energy does not let go of the desire-to-do, chanda (which is necessary to accomplish something), that it does not give up the task, and does not give in to discouragement with regard to the performing of kusala. It uses a simile of an ox which carries a burden and does not let go of it: "Just as if they were to say, 'Get a beast of burden, an ox, to draw a burden from a marshy place not beyond the bullock's strength,' and the bullock, pressing the ground with its knees, were to carry the burden and would not allow it to drop on the ground, so energy lifts up and seizes the burden in the matter of doing moral acts. Hence it is said to be 'support of burden'." As we read in the Commentary, the teachers of old advised the monks to examine themselves three times daily. If one cannot do this, then one should do this twice or even only once a day, but it is wrong not to examine oneself at all. When we reflect on the "Anumaana Sutta" and its Commentary, we see that people had different degrees of pa~n~naa. Someone who has many defilements is a person who is "difficult to speak to"; he does not see his own defilements, he only sees those of someone else. We should find out which defilements we have ourselves. If someone never reflected on this or spoke about this with someone else, he should first of all listen to the Dhamma and reflect on what he heard so that he sees the danger of akusala. Then right effort can arise and be a condition for him to examine himself and consider his own akusala before going to sleep. This can be applied by a person who is "difficult to speak to" and who has many defilements. If someone has already some understanding of the development of satipa.t.thaana, he can be aware of the reality which appears. Whatever kind of akusala arises, sati can be aware immediately of its characteristic. When pa~n~naa understands the way to know and study the characteristics of realities, it is of a higher level. .. to be continued, connie #86811 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 6:24 am Subject: Sariputta's Journey towards Arahatship truth_aerator Hello all, can anyone lists suttas the deal with Ven. Sariputtas path to Arahatship? (Especially what he has learned). From what I've understand the suttas are MN74 & MN111 + Vinaya story of Assaji. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.074.than.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.111.than.html Upatissa's question http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/vin/mv/mv.01.23.01- 10.than.html#saristream ==================== However there is weird contradiction. From the Comy I have heard that Ven. Sariputta was a non-Buddhist until he was 40 and have met Assaji. But in this sutta it appears to say that Ven. Sariputta was a novice monk with psychic powers since 7???? -------------------- When I was seven & newly gone forth, having conquered with my power the great powerful serpent, I was fetching water for my preceptor from the great lake, Anotatta,1 when the Teacher saw me & said: "Look, Sariputta, at that one..." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/thag/thag.06.10.than.html ============ Maybe it was another monk who shared the same name? Any comments, additions? Best wishes, Alex #86812 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 6:41 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) truth_aerator Dear Scott, Herman and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: Dear Herman, > Scott: Look, I'm reading here to try to get clear on the Dhamma from the point of view of the tipitaka and the ancient commentaries. I don't want to make up my own theories. I don't feel like I need to think for myself. I just want to gain an intellectual understanding of the Dhamma as it is written. >>>> Oh My! I am totally speechless here... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scott: Does the view you represent hold that the Path experience exists at all? In this case, I imagine that the view you uphold argues that there is no such thing as Cessation - that the Path (that is a deeply altering experience of Nibbaana) does not exist and is a fiction. >>>>>>>>>>> Cessation can never be felt, unless there is a consciousness outside of 6 sense doors (which cease) or unless one comes out of the cessation and reflects, reviews and cognizes what has happened. Furthermore the Nirodha-Samuccaya (3rd NT, Cesssation) is conditioned, while Nibbana is unconditioned. Best wishes, Alex #86813 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 8:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction dhammanusarin Hi Herman, - >Herman: >Can you please explain the meaning of satisfaction (in the context of craving) in the following from MN137? Thanks in advance. > T: My pleasure. Case 1. The disciples do not listen, and so on. 'In this case the Tathagata is not satisfied nor is he sensitive to satisfaction, yet he remains untroubled, mindful, & alert.' Case 2. Some disciples do not listen, but some other disciples do. 'In this case the Tathagata is not satisfied nor is he sensitive to satisfaction; at the same time he is not dissatisfied nor is he sensitive to dissatisfaction. Free from both satisfaction & dissatisfaction, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert.' Case 3. All of the disciples listen. 'In this case the Tathagata is satisfied and is sensitive to satisfaction, yet he remains untroubled, mindful, & alert.' The term satisfied (or pleased) and dissatisfied (or displeased) only apply to putthujanas who have expectation due to craving(tanha) and egotism(sakkaya-ditthi), not to the Blessed One who was free from tanha and ditthi. Does that make sense? Tep === #86814 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 8:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction truth_aerator Dear Tep, Herman, and All, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > > Hi Herman, - > > >Herman: > >Can you please explain the meaning of satisfaction (in the context > of craving) in the following from MN137? Thanks in advance. > > > > T: My pleasure. > > Case 1. The disciples do not listen, and so on. 'In this case the > Tathagata is not satisfied nor is he sensitive to satisfaction, yet > he remains untroubled, mindful, & alert.' > Case 2. Some disciples do not listen, but some other disciples > do. 'In this case the Tathagata is not satisfied nor is he sensitive > to satisfaction; at the same time he is not dissatisfied nor is he > sensitive to dissatisfaction. Free from both satisfaction & > dissatisfaction, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert.' > Case 3. All of the disciples listen. 'In this case the Tathagata is > satisfied and is sensitive to satisfaction, yet he remains > untroubled, mindful, & alert.' > > The term satisfied (or pleased) and dissatisfied (or displeased) only > apply to putthujanas who have expectation due to craving(tanha) and > egotism(sakkaya-ditthi), not to the Blessed One who was free from > tanha and ditthi. > > Does that make sense? > > Tep > === > Your quotes appear to say that Buddha himself can be satisfied/or not. I think that this is what Herman was questioning. Interestingly, there are suttas which hint at emotions of the Buddha. And in Nirodha Sutta (AN Book of 5s iii, 193, v, XVII, 166) Buddha has said to Ananda "Is it possible, Ananda, that you can look on with indifference at an elder monk being Vexed? Verily, Ananda, compassion grows not from (suffering) an elder monk to be vexed". Elder monk here is Sariputta being vexed by Udayin. Hmmm... Best wishes, Alex #86815 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:16 am Subject: Re: Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction dhammanusarin Dear Alex (and Herman), - It is true that the third quote appears that the Buddha was "satisfied" with the disciples who listened. But as I have commented, the words 'satisfied' and 'dissatisfied' are not applicable to the Tathagata. Apparently, the translator could not find appropriate puthujjana words to describe the mental state of the Tathagata. Now I have a question for you, Alex. What do you think the following sentence (from your sutta quote) means? Please rewrite it, if you think you can make it clear. 'Verily, Ananda, compassion grows not from (suffering) an elder monk to be vexed.' That sentence sounds strange and awkward to me. Again, it is another poor choice of word by the translator. I do not think that the Arahant Sariputta was ever annoyed by Udayin or by any being. Tep === #86816 From: Dieter Möller Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Blind and the Cripple /Lame moellerdieter Hi Jon ( Sarah and all) thanks for your comment ..;-) you wrote: ' In fact, the extract you give does not actually say that the simile is from the canon, so the search may be in vain! D: maybe .. but assumed the translation by Warren of VisM : Name and Form is correct: " To make this matter clear they give the following illustration " , can 'they' refer to something else than the Theras in a compendium about the Buddha Dhamma? Or is the simile used to explain the relation between nama and rupa taken from the pre respectively post Buddhist era? As any fitting simile , in particular contemporary ones , may be benefitial for understanding, the origin is indeed of secondary interest , but here the impression of a duality is implied where there is a complexity of 5 (3) (khandas). Missing still the point of including vinnaya in nama , I somehow suspect there is a good reason that we may not find the simile within the Pali canon ... hence my research.. with Metta Dieter #86817 From: "connie" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:31 am Subject: Re: Sariputta's Journey towards Arahatship nichiconn Dear Alex: Below, it is Sumana talking about when he (Sumana) was 7. I think the only other 7 year old to receive full ordination was Sopaka. peace, connie ==================== However there is weird contradiction. From the Comy I have heard that Ven. Sariputta was a non-Buddhist until he was 40 and have met Assaji. But in this sutta it appears to say that Ven. Sariputta was a novice monk with psychic powers since 7???? -------------------- When I was seven & newly gone forth, having conquered with my power the great powerful serpent, I was fetching water for my preceptor from the great lake, Anotatta,1 when the Teacher saw me & said: "Look, Sariputta, at that one..." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/thag/thag.06.10.than.html ============ Maybe it was another monk who shared the same name? #86818 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Blind and the Cripple /Lame upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter (and Jon & Sarah) - In a message dated 6/10/2008 1:25:28 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Jon ( Sarah and all) thanks for your comment ..;-) you wrote: ' In fact, the extract you give does not actually say that the simile is from the canon, so the search may be in vain! D: maybe .. but assumed the translation by Warren of VisM : Name and Form is correct: " To make this matter clear they give the following illustration " , can 'they' refer to something else than the Theras in a compendium about the Buddha Dhamma? Or is the simile used to explain the relation between nama and rupa taken from the pre respectively post Buddhist era? As any fitting simile , in particular contemporary ones , may be benefitial for understanding, the origin is indeed of secondary interest ----------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree. :-) ------------------------------------------- , but here the impression of a duality is implied where there is a complexity of 5 (3) (khandas). --------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not following your point here, Dieter. There is, of course, a duality of function between nama & rupa, but also an interdependence between them. ------------------------------------------ Missing still the point of including vinnaya in nama , ------------------------------------------- Howard: Do you mean the excluding of vi~n~nana from nama? BTW, I suspect that not including vi~n~nana within the nama grouping may stem from versions of D.O. that present an interdependency, which is also a duality, of course, between namarupa and consciousness. For example, in the Sheaves of Reeds Sutta there is: "It is as if two sheaves of reeds were to stand leaning against one another. In the same way, from name-&-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness, from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form." (Here I take namarupa as constituting the known, i.e., the object, versus vi~n~nana, which is the knowing.) Nynatiloka's quotes three suttas: - - - - - - As it is said (M. 9; D. 15; S. XII, 2): "Feeling (vedanÄ?), perception (saññÄ? ), volition (cetanÄ?), impression (phassa), mental advertence (manasikÄ?ra): this, o brother, is called mind (nÄ?ma)." - - - - - - So, here we have attention replacing consciousness within the nama grouping. --------------------------------------------- I somehow suspect there is a good reason that we may not find the simile within the Pali canon ... hence my research.. with Metta Dieter ========================== With metta, Howard #86819 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 11:26 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' nilovg Hi Larry, Op 10-jun-2008, om 3:40 heeft LBIDD@... het volgende geschreven: > Vism.XX,21: While thus engaged in inductive insight, however, if it > does > not > succeed, he should sharpen his faculties [of faith, etc.,] in the nine > ways stated thus: 'The faculties become sharp in nine ways: (1) he > sees only the destruction of arisen formations; (2) and in that > [occupation] he makes sure of working carefully, (3) he makes sure of > working perseveringly, (4) he makes sure of working suitably, and (5) > by apprehending the sign of concentration and (6) by balancing the > enlightenment factors (7) he establishes disregard of body and life, > (8) wherein he overcomes [pain] by renunciation and (9) by not > stopping > halfway. He should avoid the seven unsuitable things in the way > stated in the Description of the Earth Kasina and cultivate the seven > suitable things, and he should comprehend the material at one time and > the immaterial at another. > > Larry: If insight fails to arise the meditator should resort to a > quiet > meditative life and continue to contemplate impermanence. ------- N: If insight fails to arise, that is, a stage of insight knowledge, vipassanaa ~naa.na. > In this context he has realized already the first stage; knowing > nama as nama and rupa as rupa. How can he further progress? By > continuing to be aware of nama and rupa as they appear one at a > time, over and over again, not stopping half way. Being aware of > any dhamma appearing now, that is, not knowing the story of nama > and rupa, but being directly aware. No other way. Also: no > expectations, and no self who is doing anything. The stage of insight that realizes impermanence can arise later on. But it is the arising and falling away of the nama or rupa that appears now. He cannot hasten this stage by continue to reflect on impermanence, that will not lead to insight. If he has developed samatha and attained jhana, then jhanacitta is a reality of his daily life and he can and should be aware of it, otherwise he will take it for self. But it is not so that he 'should' resort to a quiet life, no rule at all. He can, if it is his accumulation. -------- > L: ps: Beginning with " 'The faculties become sharp in nine ways" is a > quotation from something, but there is no note on the source. Also, in > my book there is only a beginning quotation mark, but not an ending > one. ------ N: Yes, my text is the same. Nina. #86820 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 11:34 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 268, 269, and Tiika. nilovg Hi Larry, Op 10-jun-2008, om 2:38 heeft LBIDD@... het volgende geschreven: > Can we say clinging can be a condition for any kind of kusala citta, > including insight? -------- N: Yes, by natural decisive support-condition, pakatupanissaya paccaya. with regard to this condition: akusala can condition kusala, kusala can condition akusala, etc. , it encompasses many things. This condition is not conascent, there is a period of time between the conditioning reality and the conditioned reality. But it is not right to say: I cling to result and now this will condition kusala later on. Saying this is motivated by wrong view of self who can regulate realities. Nina. #86821 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 11:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Can Worldlings Directly Know the Faculties? Just wanna know ... nilovg Dear Tep, I read your quoted texts, but this is about the Buddha. There are rules in the Vinaya, forbidding monks to talk about their attainments, but perhaps this was in particular related to telling lay people? I do not know. I find personally, that when talking about this or that person, we talk about stories and we lose precious time to develop the Path ourselves. This is my own conviction. Let us just discuss nama and rupa now. Nina. Op 10-jun-2008, om 14:36 heeft Tep het volgende geschreven: > So, Nina, there is nothing wrong in talking (not boasting) about > one's own achievement when it is truthful and when the occasion is > appropriate. Those who are afraid to discuss it may not have anything > to say. #86822 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 12:37 pm Subject: Re: Panna As Indriya jonoabb Hi Tep > T: I have also observed that one large factor which contributes to > misunderstanding of the Teachings has been caused by terminology. And > I know that you too know that I have been most careful to avoid the > tempation to use only English words to interpret and measure the > depth of the Buddha's Teachings. But some others seem to be less > concerned. Yes. Using only translations to study the texts certainly has its limitations. Sooner or later, it's necessary to know what term is being used in the Pali original. But even the, there s much to be learned about the use of different Pali terms to refer to the same dhamma, and the use of the same Pali term to refer to different dhammas. Nothing simple about it at all ;-)) > Another huge factor that contributes to differences and, at times, > arguments among the members (here and elsewhere) is the individuals' > tendency to disbelieve each other (due to suspicious mind? Conceit?), > unless they are in the same "camp" or same "gang". ;-)) I suppose that's right. But I would also say it doesn't have to be a matter of believing or disbelieving others depending on which camp they belong to. Better to just focus on discussing what the teachings say, regardless of the leanings of the other ;-)) Jon #86823 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 12:42 pm Subject: Re: Can Worldlings Directly Know the Faculties? jonoabb Hi Tep > T: The moment direct knowledge that penetrates the four noble truths > (and cuts off the three lower fetters) arises there is no longer a > worldling. Direct knowledge of the all (in full) is in the arahant. > That is my 2-cent understanding of direct knowledge, Jon. Yes, I agree that when direct knowledge penetrates the four noble truths, the worldling becomes an ariyan (sotapanna first). What we haven't discussed yet is the question of exactly what is the development of panna that leads to that point, when the worldling becomes a sotapanna; what exactly does that still-developing panna know/understand/see? > T: Thank you very much for answering the four questions. Now let me > give my answers too. ... > >Jon: How did I go ? (please don't be too tough in grading my > replies ;-)) > > T: You did very well with respect to the 3rd and 4th questions. Our > answers to the 1st and 2nd questions differ because you are taught by > Khun Sujin and I am taught by the Suttas. Your comment here reminds me of something I read on the list recently, when the following astute observation was made: > Another huge factor that contributes to differences and, at times, > arguments among the members (here and elsewhere) is the individuals' > tendency to disbelieve each other (due to suspicious mind? Conceit?), > unless they are in the same "camp" or same "gang". ;-)) I suppose we are all both victim and offender at one time or another ;-)) Jon #86824 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 12:45 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. jonoabb Hi Herman > > My understanding of kamma is that it refers to the intention > > accompanying kusala and akusala consciousness, and that this intention > > conditions the later arising of certain types of consciousness such as > > the experiencing of objects through the sense-doors (called 'vipaka' > > consciousness); and furthermore that all such vipaka consciousness is > > conditioned by prior intention (kamma). > > > > Hope this is to the point (please let me know if not). > > > > Yes this was very clear and precise and to the point. Thanks. Glad to hear it! I'd be interested to know whether you still see an inconsistency between the teaching on kamma and the teaching on anatta (i.e., anatta as a characteristic of dhammas), if you'd care to comment further. Jon #86825 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 12:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Arahants and continued survival jonoabb Hi Herman (and Swee Boon) This thread is actually closely related to the discussion we've been having about kamma. You mention the fact that arahants manage to survive despite no longer having any attachment to continued existence (no "intention to survive"). While it may seem to be the case that a desire to live is essential to ensuring survival, the teaching of the Buddha, as I understand it, is that it is past kamma that is the main determinant of the length of a person's lifespan. Desire for continued existence doesn't really come into the picture (so this would be another example of where the teachings run contrary to conventional understanding). In the case of an arahant in particular, he understands that life lasts as long as certain conditions provide and, in the meantime, life must go on (so to speak). As Swee has said, while the arahant no longer has any particular desire to continue to live, neither does he have any particular desire not to do so. He continues to do what is necessary to maintain the body, not in order to live longer, but because (as I understand it) it is his habit to do so and because if he didn't take care of himself, there would be much painful bodily feeling ensuing (he would also know that he would become a burden on others). Jon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi Herman, > ... > > What I don't understand is how some arahants managed to survive > > for decades without the intention to survive. > > Arahants don't have the "intention" to survive. Neither do they have > the "intention" to die. Since they are already alive in the first > place, why not let the natural course of dependent origination roll > along? Do you expect them to starve themselves to death? What would > outsiders think of the ariyan doctrine if every arahant starved > themselves to death? Does it promote the cause of the Dhamma? #86826 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 11:40 am Subject: All is changing states… bhikkhu0 Friends: The false perception of permanence arises from wrong notion of apparent continuity: Buddha once said: AniccÄ?nupassanam bhÄ?vento niccasaññam pajahati... When developing the contemplation of Impermanence ( Anicca ), one gradually overcomes the false perception of permanence... One cannot easily observe the characteristic of Impermanence, since it is obscured and concealed by apparent continuity: Mind falsely conceives: This is the same as it was before... One then wrongly perceives all psycho-physical phenomena as existing permanently and not correctly as a sequence of discrete states ever arising and ceasing... The stage of Viewing: By training one can observe the solidity, fluidity, heat and motion within ones own body or externally as changing states by noting their beginning, middle and end. Example: Noting the beginning, middle and end of the breath coming in or going out! The stage of Comprehending: One then comprehends this breath, this materiality is not the same from moment to moment. Nor is any other solidity, fluidity, heat or motion, the same from moment to moment... Nor is any observing mind, thought or any mental state, the same from moment to moment... Whether internally or externally: All this is only discrete states arising and ceasing... Such cannot be lasting happiness... Such cannot be regarded as an essentially same self... Such change is therefore suffering... Such transience is therefore no-self... The stage of Gaining Insight: By observing wisely and repeatedly one thus understands, that all formations, all phenomena, all conditioned constructions inherently are permeated with the 3 characteristics of: 1: Impermanence ( Anicca ), 2: Suffering (dukkha ), and 3: Selflessness (anatta )... Insight dawns when noting & knowing the Dissolution of all phenomena (bhanga-ñÄ?na), which gives rise to noting & knowing the Danger within all existence (Ä?dinava-ñÄ?na)... By noting the impermanence of all internal form, feeling, perception, mental construction and consciousness, one can generalize and extend this observed impermanence to also be dominant in all external form, feeling, perception, mental construction and consciousness. One can furthermore infer, that all phenomena in the past was impermanent, and so also will all phenomena in the future be impermanent. This expands & matures the comprehension. The result of contemplating Impermanence is absence of distortion (vipallÄ?sa): The false perception of permanence actually comes from an -a priori- conceptual notion: "All phenomena are permanent and endures as the same from moment to moment..." This distortion of perception (sañña-vipallÄ?sa) - arised from ignorance - then by repetition then distorts thinking (citta-vipallÄ?sa), which then later solidifies into a distortion of view (ditthi-vipallÄ?sa): One then perceives, thinks, and views: Formations are all lasting! This false conviction have been reified and reinforced through numberless accounts of existence, since a indiscernible beginning, and is thus deeply ingrown and imbedded in mind. However this triple distortion of perception, thinking and viewing can be broken by repeated reasoned observation & reflection of the universal aspect of impermanence. This requires rationally directed attention (yoniso manasikÄ?ra) and clear comprehension (sati-sampajañña) and leads to knowing and regarding all formations with a pleasant imperturbable equanimity ... (sankhara-upekkhÄ?-ñÄ?na)... More on this universal impermanence, inconstancy, and inevitable Transience (Anicca): http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Impermanence_Anicca.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Contemplating_Impermanence.htm Anicca (Impermanence) According to Theravada Buddhism (Bhikkhu Ñanamoli) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/various/wheel186.html http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/a/anicca.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Transient_formations.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/The_Internal_Transience.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/The_External_Transience.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Perceiving_Transience.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Experiencing_Impermanence.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Experiencing_Universal_Transience.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Transient_formations.htm Nothing is continually the same ... All is changing states… Have a nice observant day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) http://What-Buddha-Said.net #86827 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 3:40 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching kenhowardau Hi Herman, Thanks for your reply, but it was not quite what I wanted. ------ KH: > > Or should we be happy to understand that there are - right now - really only paramattha dhammas (and there is no 'being' that can be released or not released)? > > Herman: > If you are referring to the equanimity that lies beyond desire for release, all good and well. But I can't imagine that anyone in a position of equanimity would "knock" (denigrate) the desire for release. ------ I wanted you to take the plunge, but my reference to being happy allowed you to skirt around the edges. :-) Let's try again. Do you understand there are really only dhammas? Ken H #86828 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:10 pm Subject: Re: Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction truth_aerator Dear Tep, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > > Dear Alex (and Herman), - > > It is true that the third quote appears that the Buddha > was "satisfied" with the disciples who listened. But as I have > commented, the words 'satisfied' and 'dissatisfied' are not > applicable to the Tathagata. Apparently, the translator could not > find appropriate puthujjana words to describe the mental state of the > Tathagata. > > Now I have a question for you, Alex. > > What do you think the following sentence (from your sutta quote) > means? Please rewrite it, if you think you can make it clear. > > 'Verily, Ananda, compassion grows not from (suffering) an elder monk > to be vexed.' > > That sentence sounds strange and awkward to me. Again, it is another > poor choice of word by the translator. > > I do not think that the Arahant Sariputta was ever annoyed by Udayin > or by any being. > > > Tep > === > The sentence is from a very old AN translation.Perhaps there is mistranslation. Can anyone translate from Pali into MODERN English? I think the pali version of the Sutta is: http://www.tipitaka.org/vriroman/s0403m1/s0403m1-158.html Best wishes, Alex #86829 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 12:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Herman) - In a message dated 6/10/2008 6:40:44 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Let's try again. Do you understand there are really only dhammas? =========================== Just me butting in without invitation! ;-) Ken, what do you mean by "understand" that? It is an assertion that there are really only dhammas. First of all, unless one has experienced dhammas, there is no basis for knowing this to be so, or even believing it to be so, or, for that matter, even *understanding* it to be so. Moreover, any statement to the effect that there are only certain types of things is at best believed and not known, for how is one to know that something not of any of these types will show up. My bottom line here is that you have a blind faith about something you do not believe you have experienced, you presume that to be a certainty rather than a belief, and you are putting this forward as a litmus test for some sort of approval or disapproval by you. Why not consider clinging less to beliefs and not requiring beliefs of others? The Dhamma is about relinquishment, not articles of faith. With metta, Howard #86830 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 5:59 pm Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > > Hi, Ken (and Herman) - > > In a message dated 6/10/2008 6:40:44 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > kenhowardau@... writes: > > Let's try again. Do > you understand there are really only dhammas? > > =========================== > Just me butting in without invitation! ;-) > Ken, what do you mean by "understand" that? It is an assertion that > there are really only dhammas. First of all, unless one has experienced dhammas, > there is no basis for knowing this to be so, or even believing it to be so, > or, for that matter, even *understanding* it to be so. Hi Howard, I can't argue with any of that. And yet, I wonder what you are proposing as an alternative to blind faith. I think Buddhists 'take refuge' in the Triple Gem, don't they? Doesn't that imply placing faith (confidence) in it? Isn't there an element of trust involved? On the other hand, I don't want to identify myself as someone who has taken refuge. It reminds me too much of fundamentalist religions in which people claim to be 'born again' or 'saved.' This then becomes an identifying tag when they ask others, almost accusingly, "Are you saved? Are you born again?" I don't want anything like that. But even so, I don't want to be wondering aimlessly with nothing to believe in. Just yesterday I saw a Buddhist on television trying to tell me that "everything" was an illusion created by the mind. What does that kind of misunderstanding have to offer? Nothing! And is not true, is it, that nothing really exists? At least, the Dhamma we are studying here at DSG says it isn't true. There are concepts and there are realities. Realities really exist! What is the alternative, as you see it, between following blindly and wandering aimlessly? Ken H #86831 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 6:14 pm Subject: Re: Can Worldlings Directly Know the Faculties? dhammanusarin Hi Jon, - I have my reply after your message : ------------------------- Hi Tep > T: The moment direct knowledge that penetrates the four noble truths > (and cuts off the three lower fetters) arises there is no longer a > worldling. Direct knowledge of the all (in full) is in the arahant. > That is my 2-cent understanding of direct knowledge, Jon. Yes, I agree that when direct knowledge penetrates the four noble truths, the worldling becomes an ariyan (sotapanna first). 1) What we haven't discussed yet is the question of exactly what is the development of panna that leads to that point, when the worldling becomes a sotapanna; what exactly does that still-developing panna know/understand/see? > T: Thank you very much for answering the four questions. Now let me > give my answers too. ... > >Jon: How did I go ? (please don't be too tough in grading my > replies ;-)) > > T: You did very well with respect to the 3rd and 4th questions. Our > answers to the 1st and 2nd questions differ because you are taught > by Khun Sujin and I am taught by the Suttas. 2) Your comment here reminds me of something I read on the list recently, when the following astute observation was made: > Another huge factor that contributes to differences and, at times, > arguments among the members (here and elsewhere) is the individuals' > tendency to disbelieve each other (due to suspicious mind? > Conceit?), unless they are in the same "camp" or same "gang". ;-)) 3) I suppose we are all both victim and offender at one time or another ;-)) Jon ================================= 1) The development of pa~n~na that leads to strem-entry is explained in the following Study Guide : Stream Entry Part 1: The Way to Stream-entry prepared by Thanissaro Bhikkhu http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/stream.html 2) It is a clever connection. 3) I hope you are not offended by my comment that you are taught by Khun Sujin. It is a fact, isn't it? Regards, Tep === #86832 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 6:20 pm Subject: Re: Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction dhammanusarin Dear Alex, - Thank you very much for this reply. I have a comment below. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > > > > Dear Alex (and Herman), - > > > > It is true that the third quote appears that the Buddha > > was "satisfied" with the disciples who listened. But as I have > > commented, the words 'satisfied' and 'dissatisfied' are not > > applicable to the Tathagata. Apparently, the translator could not > > find appropriate puthujjana words to describe the mental state of > the > > Tathagata. > > > > Now I have a question for you, Alex. > > > > What do you think the following sentence (from your sutta quote) > > means? Please rewrite it, if you think you can make it clear. > > > > 'Verily, Ananda, compassion grows not from (suffering) an elder > monk > > to be vexed.' > > > > That sentence sounds strange and awkward to me. Again, it is > another > > poor choice of word by the translator. > > > > I do not think that the Arahant Sariputta was ever annoyed by > Udayin > > or by any being. > > > > > > Tep > > === > > > > The sentence is from a very old AN translation.Perhaps there is > mistranslation. > > Can anyone translate from Pali into MODERN English? > > > I think the pali version of the Sutta is: > http://www.tipitaka.org/vriroman/s0403m1/s0403m1-158.html > > > Best wishes, > > Alex > =================== Your reply above shows that you understand the points I made. Thanks. Regards, Tep === #86833 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 6:42 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Can Worldlings Directly Know the Faculties? Just wanna know ... dhammanusarin Dear Nina, - Thank you for your forgiving and willingness to clarify things for me. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Tep, > I read your quoted texts, but this is about the Buddha. There are > rules in the Vinaya, forbidding monks to talk about their > attainments, but perhaps this was in particular related to telling > lay people? I do not know. > I find personally, that when talking about this or that person, we > talk about stories and we lose precious time to develop the Path > ourselves. This is my own conviction. > Let us just discuss nama and rupa now. > Nina. > ======================= Yes, there is a rule in the Vinaya that forbids monks to talk about their attainments (abhi~n~na) to laypeople; the Vinaya also forbid monks from showing off their powers(like flying into the space above, disappearing in the thin air, etc. It reminded me of Moses parting the sea water in the movie "Ten Commandments" !). But among fellow monks, it would be allright. I can give you a few suttas to prove this point if you insist. It is a good conviction too. Of course, it is your personal right and preference to choose what you want to do with the time of your life. I respect that decision. Yes, let us discuss nama & rupa from now on ! No more distractions. Tep === #86834 From: "connie" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 6:51 pm Subject: poster nichiconn WANTED JOY ENLIGHTENMENT FACTOR REWARD OFFERED peace, connie #86835 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 6:55 pm Subject: Re: Panna As Indriya dhammanusarin Dear Jon, - Thank you for this friendly conversation on a light subject. ---------------------------- > T: I have also observed that one large factor which contributes to > misunderstanding of the Teachings has been caused by terminology. And I know that you too know that I have been most careful to avoid the tempation to use only English words to interpret and measure the > depth of the Buddha's Teachings. But some others seem to be less > concerned. Jon: Yes. Using only translations to study the texts certainly has its limitations. Sooner or later, it's necessary to know what term is being used in the Pali original. But even the, there s much to be learned about the use of different Pali terms to refer to the same dhamma, and the use of the same Pali term to refer to different dhammas. Nothing simple about it at all ;- )) ..................... T: Precisely! If you also read the Thai translation, then the complexity multiplies (although you'll have a clearer picture when you succeed). ...................... > Another huge factor that contributes to differences and, at times, > arguments among the members (here and elsewhere) is the individuals' > tendency to disbelieve each other (due to suspicious mind? > Conceit?), unless they are in the same "camp" or same "gang". ;-)) Jon: I suppose that's right. But I would also say it doesn't have to be a matter of believing or disbelieving others depending on which camp they belong to. Better to just focus on discussing what the teachings say, regardless of the leanings of the other ;-)) T: If they can do exactly like you said, I believe the benefits of the Dhamma discussion will be maximized. Tep === #86836 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 6/10/2008 8:59:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, I can't argue with any of that. And yet, I wonder what you are proposing as an alternative to blind faith. I think Buddhists 'take refuge' in the Triple Gem, don't they? Doesn't that imply placing faith (confidence) in it? Isn't there an element of trust involved? ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, there is trust & confidence. This provides firm belief but not knowing. Religionists the world over claim they know, but they really only believe. The Buddha taught NOT to claim knowing when there is only believing. This is one of my points. Another point is that you, if I'm not mistaken, do not believe you actually experience dhammas. Yet you make claims about them as if you did experience them. (I, it happens, DO believe that you and I and all other folks, and animals too, do indeed experience dhammas. When we feel warmth, see, hear, etc we are, exactly, experiencing dhammas.) I also, just as you, do believe that they are all there is. I simply can't say that I *know* that - for I do not, and logically it is an untenable position to hold. ---------------------------------------------------- On the other hand, I don't want to identify myself as someone who has taken refuge. It reminds me too much of fundamentalist religions in which people claim to be 'born again' or 'saved.' This then becomes an identifying tag when they ask others, almost accusingly, "Are you saved? Are you born again?" ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: That's interesting, Ken - seriously. Ironically, I *have* taken heartfelt refuge in the triple gem, I do feel the associated devotion, and I am confident that I have not made a mistake in having taken refuge. My "personal" experiences have made me feel very confident. Yet I do not yet *know*, and I readily admit that I don't know. ------------------------------------------------------ I don't want anything like that. But even so, I don't want to be wondering aimlessly with nothing to believe in. Just yesterday I saw a Buddhist on television trying to tell me that "everything" was an illusion created by the mind. What does that kind of misunderstanding have to offer? Nothing! ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, without further detailed explanation of what that means, it of course just sounds like some hodge-podge of Buddhism-light and new-age spirituality. ------------------------------------------------------ And is not true, is it, that nothing really exists? ------------------------------------------------ Howard: I consider it untrue. It is simplistic nihilism at best, it seems to me. It is clear to me that it is not the middle way. ------------------------------------------------ At least, the Dhamma we are studying here at DSG says it isn't true. There are concepts and there are realities. Realities really exist! ------------------------------------------------- Howard: What isn't just imagined is real - so long as we don't read too much into the word 'real'. ------------------------------------------------ What is the alternative, as you see it, between following blindly and wandering aimlessly? ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I would say it is a matter of ehipassiko. (But let's not open up that can of worms that is the "practice" issue! ;-) ========================= With metta, Howard P. S. I really appreciate the wonderful accepting and warm tone of your post, Ken! I truly appreciate it!!! #86837 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 8:18 pm Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching philofillet Hi James and all Thanks for your encouraging words > Secondly, I want to point something out to > you. Those people who you identify as being "cold", they are not > really cold at all. Actually, they are very warm and loving > people. That is why being pissed off at them doesn't seem to last > very long. ;-)) Ph: Just to point out that I didn't say the people were cold, but the Dhamma they choose to offer newcomers to beginnners is cold. Now, if they were to offer "cold" Dhamma to newcomers willingly, that would make them cold. But they sincerely believe they are offering something helpful to newcomers. I would hazard a guess that this is because lobha has warmed up the "cold shower" very nicely. There is pleasure and comfort in reflecting on deep Dhamma that makes it warm. Alas, for newcomers whose lobha hasn't gotten in on the deep Dhamma in this way, there is no comfort, no consolation, no encouragement, only a lot of hard terms that have no meaning to them, and hard ideas that are too far distant from their daily reality, which inevitably is all about conceptual objects, people and stories and various situations. But the people offering the deep Dhamma to people who are not able to respond to it sometimes make the mistake of saying "well, it's all about conditions whether one responds to the Dhamma, we can just do our best" and they take "doing our best" to mean teaching deep Dhamma. No, doing one's best is modifying the way one teaches Dhamma to help people of different needs. The people (hardcore students of AS) are not cold or unloving people, they are just in denial a bit about how much pleasure they get out of deep Dhamma, how they warm it up for themselves with lobha but how it remains an unpalatable cold mess of Pali for people who do not have the capacity to respond to it. I can give a personal example. About 4 years ago, as you may recall, I got into a huge mess of bad behaviour when I went back to Canada one summer, really serious transgressions that brought on a lot of suffering to myself, Naomi and I would guess other people involved. So on the train from Montreal to Toronto, coming off the drugs, hungover, despondent, I clung to Abhidhamma in Daily Life like it was a bible, and was comforted by reflecting on "it's just all dhammas" and so on. I was able to warm up the deep Dhamma in that way for comfort. Now, a more suitable response to what happened, more in line with the Buddha's gradual training would have inolved a lot of samvega and a lot of reflection on hurting or not hurting people. I'm sure there was some of that as well, but the comforting reflection on deep, deep Dhamma into which I have no real insight was more comforting. Same thing when I heard my mother had Azheimer's. It was reflection on deep Dhamma that was comforting. So a kind of comfort zone was being created by reflecting with lobha about "all dhammas" and there was also pleasant, comforting reflection on having panna that could see into that sort of thing. Lobha was warming up the deep Dhamma to provide comfort. I know students of AS have denied and will deny that this sort of thing goes on, and that's fine. They are good people, loving people, everyone is, depending on to what degree various defilements block that capacity. So I truly do not intend to suggest that the moderators or anyone else are "cold people." I will just post this sort of thing one more time to just perhaps provide another condition for reflection into what is really going on when they study paramattha dhammas and cling with pleasure into having insight into that sort of thing. And whether it blinds them to any shortcomings in the way they present this deep, deep Dhamma to people who have more desparate needs for the Dhamma, needs that are about cutting out behaviour in body, speech and mind that causes immediate and obvious harm to themselves and others, a "cutting out" that the Buddha states very clearly again and again is a prerequisite to deeper attainments. I will end with my favorite sutta: "His actions marks the fool, his actions marks the wise person, O monks. Wisdom shines forth in behaviour." (III,2) I think some of AS' students don't have enough interest in behviour because of their interest in paramattha dhammas. Dhammas don't behave, not in the way that is meant in this simple, straightforward sutta, people behave, and the Dhamma has to be appreciated at that level, fully and deeply appreciated at that conventional level, before examining the depths can do any good. I still side with the people who say that people do not exist, not in ultimate terms, but going around talking to each other in terms that suggest there is any true understanding of this rather than clinging with pleasure to the deep teaching that lay it out is ...I'll stop there. Choose your own adjective. And now out for awhile! Metta, Phil p.s I honestly believe this will be my final word on this - ha. We'll see. You and I are so nutty, James, always saying we'll leave or not say anymore about "you know who" and then hanging around. #86838 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 8:22 pm Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching philofillet Hi again > I will end with my favorite sutta: "His actions marks the fool, > his actions marks the wise person, O monks. Wisdom shines forth in > behaviour." (III,2) Should be AN III,2 metta, phil #86839 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 11:27 pm Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching philofillet Hi again Thought about the below while jogging >cutting out behaviour in body, speech and mind that causes > immediate and obvious harm to themselves and others, a "cutting out" > that the Buddha states very clearly again and again is a > prerequisite to deeper attainments. Of course it would be incorrect that there is a "prerequisiste" in the sense "first establish morality, then concentration while follow, then wisdom" in a plain and simple X leads to Y leads to Z kind of way. But there is a general dynamic (?) in this direction that is underappreciated by anyone who underappreciates the importance of "people doing activities" in prescribed, conventionally moral (in Buddhist terms) when very gross defilements are at play. Something like that. Also thought I'd add an apology on the off chance that anyone has been bothered by my posts. I suppose people are so used to them that it goes out one ear and out the other, but if not and anyone's been hurt or disappointed that a seemingly appreciative fellow has turned into an ingrate, my apologies. And the things I wrote about lobha warming up deep Dhamma to make it pleasant and comforting....that's what *I* saw into and it needn't be the case for everyone. Of course it isn't. But since I saw it so clearly at work for me, I think it's fair to post a testimonial that might be helpful for others....possibly. Metta, Phil #86840 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 11:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Can Worldlings Directly Know the Faculties? Just wanna know ... nilovg Dear Tep, Op 11-jun-2008, om 3:42 heeft Tep het volgende geschreven: > It is a good conviction too. Of course, it is your personal right and > preference to choose what you want to do with the time of your life. > I respect that decision. > > Yes, let us discuss nama & rupa from now on ! No more distractions. -------- N: Thank you for your understanding. Tep: it is your personal right and preference to choose what you want to do with the time of your life. N: Yeah, yeah, it is getting shorter and shorter. Going off tomorrow, but perhaps next week we can discuss: nama and rupa of the present moment in relation to your abh studies? As to the three pari~n~nas: See Visuddhimagga XX, 4: ~nata pari~n~naa extends from the first vipassanaa ~naa.na up to the second one (discerning conditions). Tiira.na pari~n~naa from the third stage of vipassanaa up to the first mahaa-vipassanaa `naa.na and pahaana pari~n~naa from contemplation of dissolution onwards. Thus, a gradual process, leading to enlightenment, not all at once. It makes sense to me that detachment from nama and rupa gradually increases. Nina. #86841 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 10, 2008 11:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] poster nilovg Dear Connie, Op 11-jun-2008, om 3:51 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > WANTED > JOY ENLIGHTENMENT FACTOR > REWARD OFFERED -------- N: Joy is the translation of piiti, enthusiasm or rapture. We read in the Co. to the Satipatthaanasutta: Piiti arises with somanassa in the case of kaamaavacara cittas. Kh. Sujin reminded us to develop insight with gladness and courage. No use to become downhearted and discouraged about slow progress. Progress of whom anyway? Nina. #86842 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 2:34 am Subject: Clinging to What? bhikkhu0 Friends: False perception of pleasure fools one to think: Worldly Happiness is possible: Buddha once said: DukkhÄ?nupassanam bhÄ?vento sukhasaññam pajahati... When developing the contemplation of Suffering (dukkha ) one gradually overcomes the false perception of pleasure... The Blessed Buddha once convinced a disputant by this cut-2-the-bone explanation: Friend Aggivessana, what do you think, is any material form, is any feeling, is any perception, is any mental construction, and is any consciousness, always permanent or always impermanent??? Venerable Gotama, they are all ever impermanent... If these thing are impermanent, are they then pleasurable or painful? Venerable Gotama, then they are all painful... Aggivessana, what do you think, When one searches for what is suffering, clings to what is suffering, resorts to what is suffering, holds on to what is suffering and regards what is suffering as: "This is mine, this I am, this is my self..." can one then ever understand suffering or be freed from all suffering??? How could one ever Master Gotama, no never Master Gotama... Source: MN I [232] More on this universal, inevitable & absolute Misery (Dukkha): http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/The_1st_Noble_Truth_on_Suffering.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/The_3_Universal_Characteristics.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/The_3_kinds_of_Suffering.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Craving_is_Catastrophic.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Stopping_Physical_Pain.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Ceasing_of_Suffering.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Origin_of_Suffering.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Ending_Physical_Pain.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Ending_Pain_Itself.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/The_3_Ultimate_Facts.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/What_is_Suffering.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/The_Charcoal_Pit.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Source_of_What.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Craving_is_Pain.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Samsaric_Dread.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Endless_Round.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/300_Spears.htm No Worldly Thing can ever bring Lasting Happiness ... Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) http://What-Buddha-Said.net #86843 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 2:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN2 egberdina Hi Antony and Sarah and Jon, 2008/6/9 Antony Woods : > Sarah, Howard and Group, > > Sorry, the context was this thread after the Pakistan Earthquake: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/51579 > Sorry to drag you into this, Antony, I know you are only the messenger. I read your post, and your link to a previous post, and I was reminded of the following events. When I met Jon and Sarah in the Botanical Gardens in Sydney, Sarah misplaced her sunglasses, and we all went looking for them. While Sarah was ahead of us, Jon and I agreed that this was craving in action, but neither of us had the hide to tell her :-) I don't doubt for a moment that Sarah said what you remembered her to say about the siren only being sound. Statements like this are common at dsg. Such selective non-association, typified by glibly denying the reality of human suffering (as announced by an emergency service vehicle), but then being caught up in a quest to find some trifling bit of personal property the next moment, is not something to emulate, Antony. Cheers Herman #86844 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 2:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] poster egberdina Hi connie, 2008/6/11 connie : > WANTED > JOY ENLIGHTENMENT FACTOR > REWARD OFFERED > Put your books aside and put yourself in a situation where discursive thought is not required. Your joy will be reward not only for me. Cheers Herman #86845 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 2:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Metta, Ch 7, no 5. egberdina Hi Nina, 2008/6/10 Nina van Gorkom : > Dear friends, > Devas have > great wealth, they have precious stones such as diamonds and > sapphires, they > have valuable jewellery, they have more riches than any king in the > world. > This is due to their great merit which caused them to be born as > devas. As a > human being one cannot offer them anything, one can only extend merit to > them when one does good deeds. I obviously cannot take you seriously when you say that you only want to talk about namas and rupas and the present moment. Enjoy your walk :-) Cheers Herman #86846 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Metta, Ch 7, no 5. nilovg Hi Herman, you misunderstood. I mean, when having discussions on the list, let us help each other to have more understanding of nama and rupa. When speaking about persons who understand or do not understand this or that it is not helpful. The answer would be: so what? Nina. Op 11-jun-2008, om 11:55 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > I obviously cannot take you seriously when you say that you only want > to talk about namas and rupas and the present moment. Enjoy your walk #86847 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 4:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parama.t.thaka Sutta: Not Advocating A Free-For-All egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/6/10 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Sorry, I didn't quite finish the following: > > Me: "Again, just curious, but do you think that the above sutta > suggests that the Buddha did not teach about things in a certain way? > Do you suggest that the sutta advocates that one Do you offer the > sutta in support of the notion that the Dhamma is not only as was > taught but is only as someone conjectures it to be?" > > Scott: The unfinished question is: > > Do you suggest that the sutta advocates that one also avoid Right View? > The sutta says what is says. I offered it to Alex as an antidote to some of his epistemological questions. And now I would like to relate it to some things you have said and asked recently. " I just want to gain an intellectual understanding of the Dhamma as it is written." "How does the view define cessation? How does the view define Nibbaana? How does the view suggest that cessation happens? How does the view suggest that Nibbaana is a fact?" What I read into your comments and questions is a quest for knowledge. What I read in the sutta we are discussing is, amongst other things, that the pursuit of knowledge is a dead end as far as the cessation of suffering is concerned. Right view isn't that complicated, Scott. All conditioned phenomena are anicca, anatta, dukkha. Would you like it to be more than that? Cheers Herman #86848 From: "connie" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 6:01 am Subject: Perfections Corner (180) nichiconn Dear Friends, the fifth chapter in The Perfections Leading to Enlightenment continues: After we have studied the Anumaana Sutta, how often in a day do we examine ourselves? For someone who habitually develops satipa.t.thaana, sati-sampaja~n~na can immediately be aware when akusala citta arises, and he does not need to wait until it is time to examine himself. This is the beginning of the development of satipa.t.thaana, even if one does not know yet realities as naama and ruupa which are non-self. It is already a degree of sati-sampaja~n~na when the characteristic of akusala dhamma is known as it naturally appears. As we read in the "Anumaana Sutta": "If, your reverences, while the monk is reflecting, he knows thus: 'I am of evil desires, in the thrall of evil desires,' then, your reverences, that monk should strive to get rid of those evil, unskilled states. But if, your reverences, that monk, while reflecting, knows thus: 'I am not of evil desires, not in the thrall of evil desires', then he should abide with rapture and delight, training himself diligently day and night in skilled states." -to be continued, connie #86849 From: "connie" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 7:35 am Subject: re: poster nichiconn Dear Herman, "Put your books aside and put yourself in a situation where discursive thought is not required. Your joy will be reward not only for me." :) Ah, yes - books = fine material! gotcha, thanks - connie #86851 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 8:25 am Subject: Mara, certainty, externality, views etc truth_aerator External world, What do we know, & Mara Hi Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > I can't argue with any of that. And yet, I wonder what you are > proposing as an alternative to blind faith. > > I think Buddhists 'take refuge' in the Triple Gem, don't they? > Doesn't that imply placing faith (confidence) in it? Isn't there an > element of trust involved? >>>> There is a difference between blind trust and not. Otherwise, how would you distinguish between different traditions, heck, different Nikaya/Abh Buddhist traditions! Just because one (out of 18-20) early Buddhist tradition has survived (due to being lucky to move to an island) it doesn't by itself make it 100% accurate. >>>> I don't want anything like that. But even so, I don't want to be wondering aimlessly with nothing to believe in. Just yesterday I saw a Buddhist on television trying to tell me that "everything" was an illusion created by the mind. What does that kind of misunderstanding have to offer? Nothing! >>> Don't you and some others here believe that "there is no chairs, people, trees, Ken, Scott, etc?" So the above situation isn't that far away. Just change illusion to delusion (or delusionary conceptualization) and ur there. Let us imagine that Mara (the evil demonic scientist playing God), has created brains in a laboratory. The brains are connected to highly complex devices that send certain electromagnetical signals to stimulate the outside world for the brains. The brains in delusion and under the control of the Mara truly percieve external world and all the things in it, without there being that world. Any perception of externality or even internal world is a delusionary product. There is no way that "a person" under such demonic influence could hallucinate anything such as "I have hands, these hands are real, there are trees and planets, there are humans and animals, etc" . All, or some, of the thoughts including, "There is Mara the Evil Scientist playing God deluding me, or there isn't" could be the messages sent by this outside source so they themselves do not disprove the existence of such deluding force. Leaving Mara the Evil scientist aside, it could be possible that the world is a mass hallucination of some worms with incredible imagination abilities who happened to crawl into a sea of seratonin. Leave that aside, it could be possible that the external world (including your hands and body) could be due to some Quantum Wave collapse on a mass scale from formless Quantum Clouds, or more popularly known, the Observer effect (reality exists only when it is observed). There are plenty of ideas on how the external world and you yourself could be a delusion, we have religions, technological and other explanations of that. Furthermore. It is ultimately cannot be absolutly proven that external world exist. Not only does absolute certainty require absolute proof, but emperically external world cannot be proven. You can't jump out of yourself and out of your perceptions to check! You see ONLY from your organ of sight and all that is included in the process of seeing. You cannot try to see something without eyes or the process of sight. Thus you can never be emperically and absolutely sure that the process of seeing: a) Doesn't delude you into falsely seeing/believing in external world. B) Doesn't delude you about HOW the external world really is (if it is at all). The same can be said about other sense organs AND the mind. Like deep ocean fish that always lives in the water and knows only the water, same with us. We percieve "the world" only through the senses and the mind without any possible proof existence, if any, outside of it. This isn't such a far fetched idea considering that we often hallucinate objects which do not really exist. In the dreams we can see other objects and interact with them. There is nothing during the dream that makes it feel like all of it is inside the head. The "subject" doesn't dream of grabbing objects inside of imaginary head. The dream does feel like 3D reality with independent objects and beings (whose minds can't be read) in spatial and temporal environment, where one object can obstruct the view of another and in dark places the shadows hide the features of objects there. The spatial & temporal features that we take to prove "objective, public, shared" reality also exists during the dream. In the dreams it is also possible to ask the question: "Is this real, am I dreaming?". It is also possible to hallucinate sounds which sound as real, if not more real, than "real" sounds. So all the hearing COULD be a hallucination... It is possible to smell non-existent smells... And so on. Imagine that a smart turtle after crawling on the sand, divided deep under water and met its friend a fish. Fish - "Where have you been swimming today?" Turtle - "Oh, I was crawling on land today" Fish - " You mean you were swimming somewhere?" Turtle - "No. I was crawling." Fish - "You mean swimming?" Turtle - "No. I was crawling on dry land." And the argument went forever and ever. The fish who lived all its life under the water, couldn't possibly imagine any other sort of existence. For it crawling on dry land was totally unimaginable and beyond its capacity to even imagine.... Maybe something is similiar to us. Maybe out water are the senses and the mind, which for us became a second nature which we do not question as it seems that it is the only thing possible. But is it? In any case there is seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, thinking - REGARDLESS of whether it is all Mara's signals into the brain (making us hallucinate reality as if it was real) or not. I hope you understand the importance of MN#1 Mulapariyaya sutta > > And is not true, is it, that nothing really exists? At least, the > Dhamma we are studying here at DSG says it isn't true. There are > concepts and there are realities. Realities really exist! > Other than sounding Xtian, Ken, I have no words. I am so jealous of you! >> What is the alternative, as you see it, between following blindly and wandering aimlessly? Ken H >>> Suttamaya panna + CITTA MAYAPANNA + BHAVANAMAYA PANNA! Best wishes, Alex #86852 From: "pannabahulo" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 9:21 am Subject: Ajan Sujin - is she dangerous and destroying the Buddha Sangha? pannabahulo Dear Friends, I did say I would not write anymore on this site. But several things have happened recently which have confirmed what I already know through my own inner wisdom. Thus I say that what I have seen Ajan Sujin teaching - and what her most devoted students constantly repeat is an extremely limited view of the Theravada school;a view to which they are extremely attached. Topics that are discussed are almost entirely presented,and dealt with,through a very distorted and narrowly focussed lens.To here repeatedly that there is no point in reading the Sutta's 'unless one has a thorough understanding of non-self' means that only arahants should have access to such material. Perhaps someone should have warned Ajan Sujin when she was a toddler that, "That there is no point in teaching you the alphabet until you are able to read 'The Brothers Karamazov.' What gets discussed almost all of the time is a pseudo academic study of certain text,words and general academia.Self grandizement and a further 'reaffirmation of 'self', seeming to be the real motives behind a lot of the more obsessive academia. What gets completely forgotten is that the Lord Buddha left us the Dhamma-Vinaya as our teacher when he was gone.This means reading about,reflecting on and relating the texts to our present life.The Vinaya is the Dhamma practice. But there is so much talk about viriya,Sati,wisdom and so on; but the actual practice of dana, sila, sacca is all but ignored.Whilst thousands of people were dying in Burma,China and in the very streets adjoining the Foundation - does anybody ever think about actually doing something to help? But my most important and most damaging criticism of Ajan Sujin and here immediate 'devotees' is that her ideas are extremely dangerous and are further reducing the life of the Buddha Sasana. For one thing she reinterprets almost everything that is discussed into something that is irrelevant to DSG members.For example,in one of the last groups I attended, Ajan Sujin said that although 3 kinds of Viveka were listed, only seclusion from deilements was really meant. For more than a year now,since joining Ajan Sujin's groups,I have felt that the monk's life is of little value; that I had stopped meditation practice because of her - and others - constant reinforcement/ brainwashing that meditation is a rite and ritual unless one has complete 'Right view' and completely understands present moment realities.In other words,only if one is an arahant should one meditate. Ajan Sujin always puts the horse before the cart.Before anyone is able to read the sutta's meaningfully, practice Satpatthana effectively, and remain in seclusion meaningfully - one must already be well on the way to full enlightenment. These evaluations are entirely negative. Listening to this sort of stuff for well over one year led me into some terrible depressions and a continual state of hopelessness and inactivity. Fortunately I have full confidence in the Buddha.One statement of his on this issue of seclusion is the following: "Whoso is addicted to society and worldly bustle, he will not partake of the happiness of renunciation,detachment,peace and enlightenment" (A vii 86) Common sense alone should be enough for Ajan Sujin - and her devotees - to simply understand that the Buddha didn't spend 45 years teaching arahants what they already knew. And then there is all the anti - meditation lobby, again actively promoted by Ajan Sujin and some more vocal devotees. As I said to one DSG member recently, if one went through the entire Vinaya and studied every sutta, and then highlighted the places where the Lord Buddha teaches, or discusses,meditation - there wouldn't be much left of the texts that are un-highlighted. Even the very existence of the Abhidhamma (Which, incidentally, I do not consider to be the Buddha's own teachings),are intimately bound up with the practice of meditation. I one of 'The Harvard Mind Science Symposiums' - MindsScience. An East - West dialogue'David Goleman writes: "There is a panoply of inner sciences in Tibetan Buddhism.I would like to focus on one of the most elementary.It is a model of the mind shared with other branches of Buddhism - Theravada has a very similar model. It is called Abhidharma.The basic unit of analysis in the Abhidharma model is a single moment of mind in the succession of such moments in the stream of awareness.In this model, each such moment is seen to be characterised by different, if you will,'flavors', called mental factors. Each mental factor has unique properties that determine our subjective experience from moment to moment........There are innumerable properties of mind, and how you cut the pie is rather arbitrary. Abhidharma selects fifty or so mental factors as being crucial, roughly half of which are considered unhealthy, or unwholesome, most of the others considered healthy or wholesome. The rule of thumb for mental health is very very straightforward. Those states that are unhealthy, or unwholesome, are those that are not conducive to calm, to tranquility, to equilibrium, to meditation,to the attainment of enlightenment. That is a basic rule in this psychological system".(p52) This week I was very lucky to spend an evening,night and morning with a Venerable monk who is a real friend of mind.He gave up being an abbot of a Wat in favour of being alone in a far part of the jungle.He has so many disciples that he also wants them to rely on themselves.He very clearly has very high attainments; and all of his meditation practice he has worked out for himself (Incuding how to best use the 'Satipatthana Sutta'. That was a very inspiring occasion for me. But I want to finish with some very sad cases which are closely bound up with Ajan Sujin and her teachings. There is a Thai monk who now teaches Western meditators.He is a great follower of Ajan Sujin.His vinaya is extremely loose.Handling money is OK; watching movies; eating whenever one feels like it, and so on.he claims that the Vinaya is a set of conditions that no longer apply to modern times.I asked him if he had a lot of very tiny black insects that fly into his kuti at night: they bite and are very itchy for at least a week. He told me that he switches on his bedside lamp and then puts a bowl of oil underneath.He said that, so long as you do it with 'non-self' then there was no blame.It's all just conditions. To further increase his self pride he pointed out that I couldn't do because I wasn't skilled enough. (I am just so happy that I am too 'stupid' not to be able to develop his high level of 'wisdom'. Unfortunately he is given meditation students. One male meditator asked if he could borrow one of my books.I said you had better ask your teacher as meditators are not allowed to read during courses.But within an hour his teacher had given him a bundle of books to read. The result was that he spent about six weeks reading, spending much of the day walking all the way into town and back and using the Internet Cafe.But no meditation. This was a yogi with a lot of problems.Just before he left to return to his country he told me that, when he gets to Germany,he will again smoke marijuana. My experience, and the experience of countless meditators is that after completing a meditation course one feels very clean both mentally and physically.No one wants to leave and then undo alltheir hard work.But Ajan Sujin's views prevented the teacher from honouring the student's request to sit a retreat.I felt very, very sad. A good friend of mine came to meditate. As he works with computers all day he just wanted to get away from then to meditate, The first week went OK. During the second week the same monk wanted his computer fixed.The yogi thought he would do it as 'Tham boon'. But the job lasted several days and his mediation momentum drpped. i know my friend was very disturbed by this.But the meditation teacher explained it all away as 'conditions'. You will remember my friend David. He is now back in the US.Before they left I offered his daughter some very easy going copies dedicated to the life and teachings of the Buddha.She declined. She said that all she had heard about since she arrived in Thailand was about accumulations and conditions. She was sick of it and didn't want to ever see another Dhamma book. Ajan Sujin's pessimistic understanding of the Dhamma is,in my personal opinion, very destructive.And her practice is not practice proper. What she experiences can be clearly seen whilst one is abiding in those yanas. Then comes the point that James made a couple of weeks ago.Why make the effort to be a monk or a nun? It is a very difficult life. Why don't we all move to big cities; make big bucks,and throw ourselves headlong into sexual relationships, the best food, wine, fancy clothes, hi -tech, cars and all that you can grasp? Well,the Buddha explained this issue perfectly. Finally, I have some wonderful news for you all. I have no intention, or wish,to attend anymore DSGs. However, I feel very close to some of you.I will be in Bangkok this weekend. You have my number. With metta, blessings and every best wish, Pannabahulo Bhikkhu #86853 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 9:24 am Subject: [dsg] Standpoints - A little crisis I am having truth_aerator Hi Herman and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: The sutta says what is says. I offered it to Alex as an antidote to some of his epistemological questions. And now I would like to relate it to some things you have said and asked recently. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a little crisis going on. In some verses Buddha has said that he has no view points, no ditthi-s, etc. ---------- A monk whose mind is thus released does not take sides with anyone, does not dispute with anyone. He words things by means of what is said in the world but without grasping at it." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.074.than.html ============================================================ these are the world's designations, the world's expressions, the world's ways of speaking, the world's descriptions, with which the Tathagata expresses himself but without grasping to them http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.09.0.than.html#t-10 ============================================================= Monks, there are these three linguistic conventions or usages of words or terms which are distinct, have been distinct in the past, are distinct at present and will be distinct in the future and which are not ignored by the recluses and brahmans who are wise. Which three? Whatever form (ruupa) there has been, which has ceased to be, which is past and has changed is called, reckoned or termed "has been" (ahosi); it is not reckoned as "it exists" (atthi) nor as "it will be" (bhavissati).[The same is said about the other 4 khandas]. Whatever form is not arisen, not come to be, is called, reckoned or termed is "it will be" (bhavissati) and is not reckoned as "it exists" or as "it has been." ...Whatever form has become and has manifested itself is called, reckoned or termed as "it exists" (atthi) and is not reckoned as "it has been" or as "it will be." - SN ======== Questions: Aren't definative teachings regarding: multiple life Kamma, 31 planes of existences and Final Nibbana, are sort of a standopoint? Furthermore it is of important note that Buddhist Cosmology seems to be almost and exact replica of Hindu cosmologies of that time. The reason I say "almost" is that in Buddhist Cosmologies, the God's powers and understanding are diminished. In some suttas such as DN11, there is a satire on God. Now if one wanted to make a satire out of something, then you have to reproduce the object of satire pretty accurately right? Some Cosmological things look very satirical, maybe even allegorical and so on. Lets take the deluded God Brahma. He was the first to be reborn into 1st Jhanic plane of Rupa Loka, not due to Merit, but on the contrary, to the lack of it. His Good Kamma from higher planes has expired before other's and due to this worser Kamma he was downgraded. Then in his delusion he has thought to create other beings in the empty realm that he has inhabited. So when others, due to perhaps better Kamma, expired from higher worlds and were downgraded to, they were reborn as his servants. So on with Humans. Then some human has a question "where does earth,water, fire, air, cease without remainder" and THROUGH MEDITATION goes to heavenly plane for answers. The Devas there are ignorant and they say, "Go to our superiors". The same happens in the higher and higher planes, until the Great Brahma appears. After a while, the reluctant God Brahma, whispers a secret "I don't know! Ask the Buddha, but don't tell anyone!" (Don't reveal that I am ignorant, endowed with lesser Kamma and merely pretending to be omniscient) . If this ain't a satire, then I don't know what is. Strait faced, no humour, literalists may not understand what sort of a Joke on Brahmanical Cosmology this is... Coming back to the speech issue: ----------------------- these are the world's designations, the world's expressions, the world's ways of speaking, the world's descriptions, with which the Tathagata expresses himself but without grasping to them http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.09.0.than.html#t-10 ================================================================== Similiar with Mara. Mara could be simply an allegory of a hurting knee or back, or all the sensual thoughts distracting one in meditation. After all, Mara could be derived from Marana (death) or from Mara-Khanda (craving toward khandas). .... I can't seem to get my mind around final cessation of ALL consciousness of an Arahant going into Pari Nibbana. Some form of conscious unestablished consciousness, outside of 5 aggregates as Buddha has said - sure. Or I can picture Arahant becoming a some sort of egoless Bodhisattva coming back (but not personally, since no ego is there) forever?? Ok maybe 31 planes exist or not. Unfortunately I am NOT a clairvoyant, I do NOT have first two tevijjas (or a 3rd one for that matter). Some Arahats apparently didn't have 2 tevijjas either (susima sutta). Even if I did, I could always doubt the vision as "It isn't mine existences, or this is just hallucination, memories can lie you know"... The suttas were compiled and later written down by ancient Indians who were brought up in that culture and they may not have known that Buddha was making a big satire on the cultural beliefs of his times. I remember reading somewhere that Buddha gave like 82K or 84K suttas, out of which only a 10-20K or so where actually written down in the Pali Canon we have today. Most of them are exact repeats -1 word difference, of Buddha's 45 year ministry. Even if Buddha gave 1 different sutta 9 month out of 12 (considering the 3 month rains retreat) then we could have as much as 30x9x45 = 12,150 different suttas at least. The dry suttas divorced from Hindu cultural mileau, his bodily/facial expressions, sense of humour, etc could have been easily mis interpreted by dry humourless, scholars later on. For crying out loud, he never ever denied Atman. At best he reaffirmed it in Anattalakkhana sutta! Atman isn't found in 5 aggregates as some Upanishads and Hindu literature will attest. At best, he could have been denying heretical views of Atman. It is beyond sankhara/asankhara/dhamma. The blowing out of a fire in that culture, did NOT mean anihhilation that we consider today. It meant anything but that. Of course one who wasn't brought in that culture wouldn't get the blatanly clear hint of some sort of unlimited potential(?) existence. Maybe an uncollapsed wave function, or something like that, in Quantum Mechanics, where an electron isn't found anywhere, but is in a sense everywhere. I could go on and on.... To be continued... Perhaps... Best wishes, Alex #86854 From: Dieter Möller Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 10:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Blind and the Cripple /Lame moellerdieter Hi Howard (Jon, Sarah ..), you wrote: (D: As any fitting simile , in particular contemporary ones , may be benefitial for understanding, the origin is indeed of secondary interest ----------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree. :-) D: though, ´I may add , to follow the orgin is sometimes quite interesting,a nice example the simile for delusion : the mirage in the desert called Fata Morgana (D: but here the impression of a duality is implied where there is a complexity of 5 (3) (khandas). --------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not following your point here, Dieter. There is, of course, a duality of function between nama & rupa, but also an interdependence between them. ------------------------------------------ D: a triple of function as 'Missing still the point of including vinnaya in nama' ------------------------------------------- Howard: Do you mean the excluding of vi~n~nana from nama? D: the point, why vinnaya is said to be part of nama. Let me try to explain what in have in mind: In view of the 1.N.T. suffering is explained in brief by attachment to the five khandas. The 5 khandas present the living being and these are in the center of a conditioned process (D.O.) , which describes the attachment within the whole mass of suffering. In the standard version of D.O. , ..vinnaya conditions nama/ rupa.. nama being a grouping of feeling, perception and mental objects. So there is an interaction between the three (5! ) , not only two ( which enables the blind and the cripple to communicate). In my view a shortcoming of the simile , which may lead to misunderstandings (hence no canonical source ..) ( which by the way seems to me happen as well when parallels are taken in respect to the left and right hemisphere of the brain, e.g. Dr. Taylor's video http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/229 and Sister Ayya Khemas's speech http://www.vipassana.com/meditation/khema/hereandnow/spiritual_faculties.php ). Howard: BTW, I suspect that not including vi~n~nana within the nama grouping may stem from versions of D.O. that present an interdependency, which is also a duality, of course, between namarupa and consciousness. For example, in the Sheaves of Reeds Sutta there is: "It is as if two sheaves of reeds were to stand leaning against one another. In the same way, from name-&-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness, from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form." (Here I take namarupa as constituting the known, i.e., the object, versus vi~n~nana, which is the knowing.) D: not a duality : : from name and form (the 2 sheaves) 'as a requisite condition comes consciousnessare ' Howard: Nynatiloka's quotes three suttas: - - - - - - As it is said (M. 9; D. 15; S. XII, 2): "Feeling (vedanÄ?), perception (saññÄ? ), volition (cetanÄ?), impression (phassa), mental advertence (manasikÄ?ra): this, o brother, is called mind (nÄ?ma)." - - - - - - So, here we have attention replacing consciousness within the nama grouping. --------------------------------------------- D: thanks for quoting ,, I will look into it with Metta Dieter #86855 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 7:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Blind and the Cripple /Lame upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 6/11/2008 1:01:06 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Howard: I'm not following your point here, Dieter. There is, of course, a duality of function between nama & rupa, but also an interdependence between them. ------------------------------------------ D: a triple of function as 'Missing still the point of including vinnaya in nama' ------------------------------------------- Howard: Do you mean the excluding of vi~n~nana from nama? D: the point, why vinnaya is said to be part of nama. Let me try to explain what in have in mind: In view of the 1.N.T. suffering is explained in brief by attachment to the five khandas. The 5 khandas present the living being and these are in the center of a conditioned process (D.O.) , which describes the attachment within the whole mass of suffering. In the standard version of D.O. , ..vinnaya conditions nama/ rupa.. nama being a grouping of feeling, perception and mental objects. So there is an interaction between the three (5! ) , not only two ( which enables the blind and the cripple to communicate). In my view a shortcoming of the simile , which may lead to misunderstandings (hence no canonical source ..) ============================ More than one sutta dealing with D. O. puts forward the mutual conditioning of vi~n~nana and namarupa. I can think of two ways to understand this. One traditional approach is to take namarupa as indicating the empirical person, a unity of mental and physical phenomena constituting what David Kalupahana has called "the sentient body", and the idea being that death consciousness leads to a new namarupa (sentiient being), in which then arises further consciousness. Another approach, which is my preferred understanding, is that vi~n~nana is the operation of knowing, and 'namarupa' is the aggregate of objects grasped by that knowing (i.e., the collection of all possible object-contents of consciousness), with each depending on the other. With metta, Howard #86856 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parama.t.thaka Sutta: Not Advocating A Free-For-All sarahprocter... Hi Herman, Alex, Scott & all, I like the subject heading. Just in case it's of any interest/assistance in the thread, pls see: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/77094 Metta, Sarah ===== #86857 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 12:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parama.t.thaka Sutta: Not Advocating A Free-For-All sarahprocter... Hi All, --- On Thu, 12/6/08, sarah abbott wrote: Just in case it's of any interest/assistance in the thread, pls see: http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/dhammastud ygroup/message/ 77094 ... S: And/Or: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/43266 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/13114 Metta, Sarah ====== #86858 From: Dieter Möller Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 12:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Blind and the Cripple /Lame moellerdieter Hi Howard, you wrote: More than one sutta dealing with D. O. puts forward the mutual conditioning of vi~n~nana and namarupa... D: do we disagree in that this mutual conditioning involves 5 Khandas, in reduced form 3 (i.e. vinnaya - nama (involving 3 ) - rupa ) ? with Metta Dieter #86859 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 12:31 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Blind and the Cripple /Lame jonoabb Hi Dieter > D: maybe .. but assumed the translation by Warren of VisM : Name and Form is correct: > " To make this matter clear they give the following illustration " , can 'they' refer to something else than the Theras in a compendium about the Buddha Dhamma? J: On second thoughts, I agree that it quite possibly refers to something from the canon (however, not all the canonical references have been successfully traced). > Missing still the point of including vinnaya in nama , I somehow suspect there is a good reason that we may not find the simile within the Pali canon ... hence my research.. J: If you are referring to nama as part of the expression "namarupa" in the Dependent Origination, then I believe it's simply a matter of a particular usage rather saying that vinnana is not included in nama. As I mentioned in a recent post, sometimes a given Pali term (in this case, "nama"), has different meaning in different contexts. So I wouldn't see a necessary connection between the 2 sections of the text of the Vism. Jon #86860 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 12:34 pm Subject: Re: Can Worldlings Directly Know the Faculties? jonoabb Hi Tep > 1) The development of pa~n~na that leads to strem-entry is explained > in the following Study Guide : > > Stream Entry > Part 1: The Way to Stream-entry > prepared by Thanissaro Bhikkhu > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/stream.html > > 2) It is a clever connection. > > 3) I hope you are not offended by my comment that you are taught by > Khun Sujin. It is a fact, isn't it? Regarding (2), it was a fairly obvious connection! Regarding (3), yes, it's a fact; and no, I wasn't offended. Regarding (1), will get back to you separately when I've had a chance to look at the link (am using a shared dial-up connection at the moment). Jon #86861 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 12:36 pm Subject: Re: Panna As Indriya jonoabb Hi Tep > Jon: I suppose that's right. But I would also say it doesn't have to > be a matter of believing or disbelieving others depending on which > camp they belong to. Better to just focus on discussing what the > teachings say, regardless of the leanings of the other ;-)) > > T: If they can do exactly like you said, I believe the benefits of > the Dhamma discussion will be maximized. Thanks for this. It's always good to find we have come to the end of a thread on a note of agreement ;-)) Jon #86862 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 12:40 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN2 jonoabb Hi Herman Thanks for inviting me to comment. You have raised the sunglasses incident before, so perhaps it carries some significance for you ;-)) You mention "selective non-association" in connection with the comment about sound of a siren being only sound (I've not heard that expression before, but I think I know what you mean). Let me assure you that there is absolutely no aspect of "non-association" involved in the idea of dhammas being seen as only dhammas. To my understanding, the enlightened being may still be reminded of human suffering on hearing an ambulance siren, even though he no longer takes the sound of the siren as being anything other than just sound. This is because understanding dhammas as dhammas does not "interfere" with the conceptualisation of sense-door impressions into a world of people and things. To put that another way, the understanding of dhammas as dhammas does not involve the conventional world being deconstructed into unrelated little pieces. On my reading of the texts, it is a matter of things being seen more clearly as they truly are, that is to say, with less ignorance and wrong view (but otherwise with the normal associations being made between conventional objects). Hoping this clarifies. Jon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Antony and Sarah and Jon, ... > When I met Jon and Sarah in the Botanical Gardens in Sydney, Sarah > misplaced her sunglasses, and we all went looking for them. While > Sarah was ahead of us, Jon and I agreed that this was craving in > action, but neither of us had the hide to tell her :-) > > I don't doubt for a moment that Sarah said what you remembered her to > say about the siren only being sound. Statements like this are common > at dsg. Such selective non-association, typified by glibly denying the > reality of human suffering (as announced by an emergency service > vehicle), but then being caught up in a quest to find some trifling > bit of personal property the next moment, is not something to emulate, > Antony. > > Cheers > > > Herman #86863 From: "szmicio" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 12:46 pm Subject: Citta and Cetasika. szmicio Dear friend, What is a difference between citta and vinniana? Citta is experiencing an object,and there can be just one citta at the moment. But what is cetasika? With each citta there is a cetasika. But what is a difference between cetasika and citta? How cetasika can be known? Can be more than one cetasika at the moment? So if there is a hearing or seeing there is a cetasika too? bye Lukas #86864 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 9:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Blind and the Cripple /Lame upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 6/11/2008 3:16:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard, you wrote: More than one sutta dealing with D. O. puts forward the mutual conditioning of vi~n~nana and namarupa... D: do we disagree in that this mutual conditioning involves 5 Khandas, in reduced form 3 (i.e. vinnaya - nama (involving 3 ) - rupa ) ? ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Dieter, I'm just being "dense," I suppose. I don't understand you. In D. O., I understand namarupa to subsume all the khandhas, and I take the mutual conditioning pointed to between vi~n~nana and namarupa as a two-way relationship along the lines I described in my last post. ------------------------------------------------- with Metta Dieter ================================== With metta, Howard #86865 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:10 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Blind and the Cripple /Lame truth_aerator Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Dieter - > > In a message dated 6/11/2008 3:16:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > moellerdieter@... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > you wrote: > > More than one sutta dealing with D. O. puts forward the mutual conditioning > of vi~n~nana and namarupa... > > D: do we disagree in that this mutual conditioning involves 5 Khandas, in > reduced form 3 (i.e. vinnaya - nama (involving 3 ) - rupa ) ? > ---------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Dieter, I'm just being "dense," I suppose. I don't understand you. In D. > O., I understand namarupa to subsume all the khandhas, and I take the mutual > conditioning pointed to between vi~n~nana and namarupa as a two- way > relationship along the lines I described in my last post. > ------------------------------------------------- > Nama excludes Vinnana ( a 5th Khanda). Thus vinanna+namarupa = 5 Khandas Best wishes, Alex #86866 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 2:33 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Can Worldlings Directly Know the Faculties? Just wanna know ... dhammanusarin Dear Nina,(Scott, Alex)- >N: As to the three pari~n~nas: See Visuddhimagga XX, 4: ~nata pari~n~naa extends from the first vipassanaa ~naa.na up to the second one(discerning conditions). Tiira.na pari~n~naa from the third stage of vipassanaa up to the first mahaa-vipassanaa `naa.na and pahaana pari~n~naa from contemplation of dissolution onwards. Thus, a gradual process, leading to enlightenment, not all at once. It makes sense to me that detachment from nama and rupa gradually increases. T: I remember that you suggested earlier that I discussed nama and rupa at the Beginner's Abhidhamma corner. The above three stages of vipassna are interesting and can be discussed further there. But if these three pari~n~nas were Ven. Buddhaghosa's extension, then we will not find his idea in the iptakas. So let me ask : have you read about these ~nata pari~n~naa, tiira.na pari~n~naa, and pahaana pari~n~naa in the Suttanta- pitaka and/or the Abhidhamma Pitaka? It is a common sense that tells us that detachment from nama and rupa gradually increases. The Buddha in several occasions used the rainflow simile (i.e. rain water flows down from top of a mountain to creeks, rivers and ocean, in that order, step by step) to describe the final fulfillment of higher dhammas when lower dhammas are fully cultivated. For example, see AN 10.61. Scott and I discussed this sutta in several discussions. Tep === #86867 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 2:43 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Can Worldlings Directly Know the Faculties? Just wanna know ... dhammanusarin Dear Nina, - Pardon my typo : 'iptakas' in the sentence below should be changed to Tipitakas. "But if these three pari~n~nas were Ven. Buddhaghosa's extension, then we will not find his idea in the iptakas." Thanks. Tep === #86868 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 2:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/6/10 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Regarding: > > H: "Cessation / Nibbana is very real. It does really happen. It is fact." > > Scott: How does the view define cessation? How does the view define > Nibbaana? How does the view suggest that cessation happens? How does > the view suggest that Nibbaana is a fact? > Reading the whole sutta may address your other questions, but in relation to the factuality of Nibbana, I offer the following: From AN9:34. (My CAPS) "Furthermore, there is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of nothingness, enters & remains in the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. If, as he remains there, he is beset with attention to perceptions dealing with the dimension of nothingness, that is an affliction for him. Now, the Blessed One has said that whatever is an affliction is stress. So by this LINE OF REASONING it may be known how pleasant Unbinding is. "Furthermore, there is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, enters & remains in the cessation of perception & feeling. And, having seen [that] with discernment, his mental fermentations are completely ended. So by this LINE OF REASONING it may be known how Unbinding is pleasant is. Cheers Herman #86869 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:03 pm Subject: Re: Panna As Indriya dhammanusarin Dear Jon, - I read your two posts. We wrapped up one thread : > > It's always good to find we have come to the end of a thread on a note > of agreement ;-)) > > Jon > The other thread will also be smoothly ending after only two more posts. Yes, it is good to end anything smoothly (with no future kamma). :-)) Tep === P.S. I wish that my latest conversation with Sarah had ended smoothly too. #86870 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 5:55 pm Subject: Re: Ajan Sujin - is she dangerous and destroying the Buddha Sangha? buddhatrue Hi Ven. P., --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "pannabahulo" wrote: > > But my most important and most damaging criticism of Ajan Sujin and > here immediate 'devotees' is that her ideas are extremely dangerous > and are further reducing the life of the Buddha Sasana. > > For more than a year now,since joining Ajan Sujin's groups,I have felt > that the monk's life is of little value; that I had stopped meditation > practice because of her - and others - constant reinforcement/ > brainwashing that meditation is a rite and ritual unless one has > complete 'Right view' and completely understands present moment > realities.In other words,only if one is an arahant should one meditate. > > These evaluations are entirely negative. Listening to this sort of > stuff for well over one year led me into some terrible depressions and > a continual state of hopelessness and inactivity. > > Fortunately I have full confidence in the Buddha.One statement of his > on this issue of seclusion is the following: > "Whoso is addicted to society and worldly bustle, he will not partake > of the happiness of renunciation,detachment,peace and enlightenment" > (A vii 86) I am very happy that you have come around. The monk's life is the greatest that one can achieve. You are blessed and very fortunate to be able to live the life of a monk and fully follow the Buddha's teachings. And I am also glad that you now see how dangerous KS is to the Dhamma. I have been trying to say that for years in this group but it never seems to go over very well; I am usually seen (by those I wish to convince) as either hysterical or having sour grapes. No, when you say "dangerous", you are not exaggerating. It is really dangerous- for all the reasons you mention. The Dhamma isn't easy to follow; and the practitioner has to depend on himself/herself; but the rewards are truly great. Good luck with your continued practice. May you achieve calm, peace, and enlightenment! Metta, James #86871 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 6:11 pm Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching buddhatrue Hi Phil, Thank you for your reply post. I want to comment on just one thing: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > I can give a personal example. About 4 years ago, as you may > recall, I got into a huge mess of bad behaviour when I went back to > Canada one summer, really serious transgressions that brought on a > lot of suffering to myself, Naomi and I would guess other people > involved. So on the train from Montreal to Toronto, coming off the > drugs, hungover, despondent, I clung to Abhidhamma in Daily Life > like it was a bible, and was comforted by reflecting on "it's just > all dhammas" and so on. I was able to warm up the deep Dhamma in > that way for comfort. Now, a more suitable response to what > happened, more in line with the Buddha's gradual training would have > inolved a lot of samvega and a lot of reflection on hurting or not > hurting people. I'm sure there was some of that as well, but the > comforting reflection on deep, deep Dhamma into which I have no real > insight was more comforting. I like here your line about clinging to the book 'Abhidhamma in Daily Life' for comfort. We all like to cling to something outside of ourselves for comfort in times of trouble. We can cling to a book, teacher, family, romantic relationships, food, drugs, etc. Even the Dhamma becomes an object of clinging. Unfortunately, from what I see, KS doesn't try to stop that clinging to her, she encourages it. She puts that clinging under the category of "good friends" which the Buddha taught about. But good friends in the Dhamma don't encourage clinging, they discourage it. Good friends tell you to find the answers and comfort within yourself, not by listening to them. The Buddha taught that we are each responsible for your own happiness. You cannot depend on anyone else to make you happy. Meditation is crucial for getting to the point of depending on yourself. No one can meditate for you. It is just you, yourself, facing your inner demons (Mara) and overcoming them. It is a personal struggle and a solitary struggle and no one can do it for you. Phil, you found that you had such a profound transgression because you were weak. You had depended so much on outside influences rather than yourself. But, you turned away from DSG and listening to KS, and reading about namas/rupas/conditions/present moment, etc., and faced your inner demons on your own. Now, you are stronger, you are happier, you are more calm. These are all things you gave yourself. Good luck with your continued practice! Metta, James #86872 From: "colette" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 4:13 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Blind and the Cripple /Lame ksheri3 Hi Alex, Howard, and Dieter, The subject line caught my eye mentioning the Blind, Crippiled and Lame, all disabilities subjected upon individuals, which raises the obvious question I've been proposing all along, that blindness is not an all inclusive definition of "lack of sight"; people can see without using the eyes, people can hear without using the ears, people can walk without using the legs, etc. It is proposed that namarupa and vinnana, although equalling the 5 khandas, come into contact with some consciousness or other thus shouldn't the attention and the amount of caring that the group seems to be obsessed with be put into that single moment of contact, that tangent, and then left by the shoreline as if it were a boat used to cross the river? It seems that you people cannot get passes the fact that tangents are more in line with the Buddhas teachings and with Transience than this clinging and obsessing. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > > Hi Howard, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@ wrote: > > > > Hi, Dieter - > > > > In a message dated 6/11/2008 3:16:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > > moellerdieter@ writes: > > > > Hi Howard, > > > > you wrote: > > > > More than one sutta dealing with D. O. puts forward the mutual > conditioning > > of vi~n~nana and namarupa... > > > > D: do we disagree in that this mutual conditioning involves 5 > Khandas, in > > reduced form 3 (i.e. vinnaya - nama (involving 3 ) - rupa ) ? #86873 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 8:19 pm Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) scottduncan2 Dear Herman, This sutta was tranlated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu: H: "From AN9:34. (My CAPS) "Furthermore, there is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of nothingness, enters & remains in the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. If, as he remains there, he is beset with attention to perceptions dealing with the dimension of nothingness, that is an affliction for him. Now, the Blessed One has said that whatever is an affliction is stress. So by this LINE OF REASONING (pariyaayena veditabba.m) it may be known how pleasant Unbinding is. "Furthermore, there is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, enters & remains in the cessation of perception & feeling. And, having seen [that] with discernment, his mental fermentations are completely ended. So by this LINE OF REASONING (pariyaayena veditabba.m) it may be known how Unbinding is pleasant is." Scott: In highlighting Thanissaro Bhikkhu's editorialisation, there is tacit agreement with it. His basis for his choice to use 'line of reasoning' for the Paa.li is unknown: "...pariyaayena veditabba.m..." Consider the PTS PED, where two clear choices are in evidence: "Pariya [either short form of pariyaaya, or ger. of pari+ii substantivised (for the regular form paricca)...encompassing, fathoming, comprehending (as ger.); penetration, understanding (as n.). Only in phrase ceto -- pariya -- ~naa.na knowledge encompassing heart or mind (cp. phrase cetasaa ceto paricca)...See also pariyatta1 pariyatti, pariyaaya 3, and cpds. of ceto." "Pariyatta1 (nt.) [abstr. fr. pariya (pari+i) but confused with pariyatta2 & pariyatti fr. pari+aap] learning, understanding, comprehension, only in phrase indriyaparo pariyatta ( -- ~naa.na) (knowledge of) what goes on in the intentions of others..." "Pariyatta2 (adj.)...(a) capable of, mastered, kept in mind, learned by heart..." "Paricca (indecl.) [ger. of pari+i, cp...P. pariyeti] lit. 'going round,' i. e. having encircled, grasped, understood; grasping, finding out, perceiving; freq. in phrase cetasaa ceto paricca (pajaanaati) grasping fully with one's mind..." "Vidita [pp. of vindati] known, found (out)..." "Vindati [vid, both in meaning 'to know' & 'to find'" Scott: We would have to ask him why he chose the second form of 'pariyatta' over the first. To me, the sutta is referring to a knowing that is a function of pa~n~naa. This is only a tentative statement, subject to correction or confirmation by Paa.li scholars. At any rate, this is all moot to me. The Epiphenomenalist view is essentially incompatible with the Dhamma. Why? Because it holds that naama is a) a side-effect of of physical states (ruupa) and, b) that naama can only be effect, not cause. With this view, it is inconceivable that any sutta is cited in to support the Epiphenomenalist view, since, even in the above, the suttas are replete with the suggestion that naama is not only primary, but a clear cause as well. Sincerely, Scott. #86874 From: Sukinder Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 8:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching sukinderpal Hi James, I was going to write to Herman in response to his post to Antony and Sarah, but I saw that Jon has already responded, so I decided not to. Instead I’m taking the time to respond to you on one point in this post to Phil. ================ James: Unfortunately, from what I see, KS doesn't try to stop that clinging to her, she encourages it. She puts that clinging under the category of "good friends" which the Buddha taught about. But good friends in the Dhamma don't encourage clinging, they discourage it. Good friends tell you to find the answers and comfort within yourself, not by listening to them. Sukin: Given that reference is made here to A. Sujin so often, I understand why someone will see this as sign of ‘attachment’, especially when the reader keeps failing to understand the views proposed. I mean how else could they interpret it? Besides isn’t ‘wrong view’ accompanied by and also further encouraging of attachment?!! Whether A. Sujin teaches wrong view or not, this I won’t try to convince you. But with regard to what you say here, I’d like to however try to set the record straight. When I first met A. Sujin my impression was that I have never felt more comfortable being in the presence of anyone. Later I took this as being due to her outstanding Metta and hence not being judgmental. But of course I did have some attachment and accumulated more, so much so that on one occasion I felt somewhat overlooked when she instead paid more attention to a ‘newcomer’ during one Saturday discussion. Very quickly however, I took this as being expression of metta on her part, as against something else which may otherwise encourage attachment. I appreciated there and then not only the value of metta, but also the fact of A. Sujin by her behavior, encourages “detachment”. Since then I have seen, not only in deed, but in all that she talks, the value placed in the fact of detachment. Also on a few occasions in terms of social relationship, she would say to the effect that “one should be independent enough not to allow the other person’s akusala hinder one from having kusala”. And my general impression has long been that A. Sujin’s students are the most “independent” of people. So James, what I’m saying is that we all have lots of accumulated ‘clinging’, and as you say, the attachment can be towards anything. However, it is wrong to say that A. Sujin encourages of her audience, “clinging to her”. The very fact that she points to there being just this one moment of consciousness at a time; this allows for appreciating “independence / detachment” like no other concept can, don’t you think? In fact the “good friend” you refer to above, she has often pointed that as being reference to *one’s own panna*. On other occasions she has also said to the effect that, “instead of seeking a ‘good friend’ in others, why not instead “be” one yourself?” Hope this has changed your impression. Metta, Sukin #86875 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 8:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction egberdina Hi Tep, 2008/6/11 Tep : > Hi Herman, - > > Case 1. The disciples do not listen, and so on. 'In this case the > Tathagata is not satisfied nor is he sensitive to satisfaction, yet > he remains untroubled, mindful, & alert.' > Case 2. Some disciples do not listen, but some other disciples > do. 'In this case the Tathagata is not satisfied nor is he sensitive > to satisfaction; at the same time he is not dissatisfied nor is he > sensitive to dissatisfaction. Free from both satisfaction & > dissatisfaction, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert.' > Case 3. All of the disciples listen. 'In this case the Tathagata is > satisfied and is sensitive to satisfaction, yet he remains > untroubled, mindful, & alert.' > > The term satisfied (or pleased) and dissatisfied (or displeased) only > apply to putthujanas who have expectation due to craving(tanha) and > egotism(sakkaya-ditthi), not to the Blessed One who was free from > tanha and ditthi. > > Does that make sense? I do not understand how you arrive at your conclusion, based on the sutta. It seems to me to be unambigously saying that the it is the Tathagata who is satisfied or not satisfied. And the same occurs in the following sutta then, Ud 4:5? How do you explain it? 5. Thus have I heard. On a certain occasion the Blessed One dwelt at Kosambi in the Ghosita monastery. Now at that time the Blessed One was living surrounded by a crowd of monks and nuns, of male and female lay disciples, of kings and their ministers, as well as by heretical sects and their pupils, and he suffered annoyance and discomfort. And this thought occurred to him: "Surrounded by a crowd of monks and nuns, of male and female votaries, of kings and their ministers, as well as by heretical sects and their pupils, I suffer annoyance and discomfort. What if I were to live alone, remote from the crowd?" And the Blessed One robing himself in the forenoon and taking his alms-bowl and tunic, entered Kosambi for alms. Having perambulated Kosambi for alms, he returned from p. 57his rounds and after finishing his meal, he himself put in order his sleeping place, and taking his alms-bowl and tunic, and without informing his servitor or giving notice to the Brethren, he departed, alone, without a companion, in the direction of Palileyyaka and wandering from place to place he reached Palileyyaka and took up his abode there. And the Blessed One sojourned in the dense grove Rakkhilâ, in the vicinity of Palileyyaka, at the foot of the Bhadda Sâl tree. Now a certain noble elephant lived there, who was much inconvenienced by a crowd of male and female elephants, young elephants and elephant calves. He had to feed on blades of grass with their tips broken off, and they ate the young branches which he himself had broken down. He had also to drink water that had been polluted and when he plunged (into the water) to cross over, the female elephants rubbed their bodies against him. In consequence of this crowd he was annoyed and lived ill at ease. And this thought occurred to the noble elephant; "Surrounded by a crowd of male elephants and she elephants, young elephants and elephant calves, I have to feed on blades of grass with their tips broken off and they eat the young branches I myself have broken down. I have also to drink water that has been polluted and when I plunge (into the water) to cross over, the female elephants rub their bodies against me. In consequence of this crowd I am annoyed and live ill at ease. What if I were to live alone, remote from the crowd?" And the noble elephant leaving the herd went to the deep groves of Rakkhita, in the vicinity of Palileyyaka, to the foot of the Bhadda Sâl tree, where the Blessed One was. And when he arrived there, he removed the grass from the spot which the Blessed One occupied, and brought with his trunk drinking water for the Blessed One. And as the Blessed One was rejoicing in the calm of solitude and isolation, this thought arose; "Formerly, I lived a life of annoyance and discomfort surrounded by monks and nuns etc. [as above. Transl.]. Now no longer surrounded by monks and nuns etc. [as above. Transl.]. I live in comfort and at ease." And in the mind of the noble elephant this thought arose: "Formerly, I lived a life of annoyance and discomfort surrounded by male elephants and she elephants etc. [as above. Transl.]. Now no longer surrounded I live in comfort and at ease." And the Blessed One, with reference to his own solitude, and perceiving what was passing in the mind of that noble elephant, breathed forth this solemn utterance:-- "The heart of the noble elephant (with tusks like plough-poles) Is at one with the heart of the Noble One For each delights in (the solitude of) the forest." Cheers Herman #86876 From: "gazita2002" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 9:34 pm Subject: Re: Ajan Sujin - is she dangerous and destroying the Buddha Sangha? gazita2002 hello Ven.Pannabahulo and James. Have read these with a certain amt of distress, not so much for what is being said about A.Sujin but more for what you may be doing to yourselves. Its fine to disagree about someones style of teaching but I believe its another ball game to be virtually condeming that person. Are either of you aware of what damage you may be doing to yourselves? IMHO, its far better to accept that you disagree and well - leave it at that. I guess by writing this I may be doing exactly what I'm advising against, but I dont feel any malice in this, just wnated to bring to your attention that its dangerous ground you are walking on. I notice you both sign off with 'metta' but I dont see much metta in your posts. Patience, courage and good cheer, azita. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Ven. P., > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "pannabahulo" > wrote: > > > > > But my most important and most damaging criticism of Ajan Sujin and > > here immediate 'devotees' is that her ideas are extremely dangerous > > and are further reducing the life of the Buddha Sasana. > > > > > For more than a year now,since joining Ajan Sujin's groups,I have > felt > > that the monk's life is of little value; that I had stopped > meditation > > practice because of her - and others - constant reinforcement/ > > brainwashing that meditation is a rite and ritual unless one has > > complete 'Right view' and completely understands present moment > > realities.In other words,only if one is an arahant should one > meditate. > > > > These evaluations are entirely negative. Listening to this sort of > > stuff for well over one year led me into some terrible depressions > and > > a continual state of hopelessness and inactivity. > > > > Fortunately I have full confidence in the Buddha.One statement of > his > > on this issue of seclusion is the following: > > "Whoso is addicted to society and worldly bustle, he will not > partake > > of the happiness of renunciation,detachment,peace and > enlightenment" > > (A vii 86) > > I am very happy that you have come around. The monk's life is the > greatest that one can achieve. You are blessed and very fortunate > to be able to live the life of a monk and fully follow the Buddha's > teachings. > > And I am also glad that you now see how dangerous KS is to the > Dhamma. I have been trying to say that for years in this group but > it never seems to go over very well; I am usually seen (by those I > wish to convince) as either hysterical or having sour grapes. No, > when you say "dangerous", you are not exaggerating. It is really > dangerous- for all the reasons you mention. > > The Dhamma isn't easy to follow; and the practitioner has to depend > on himself/herself; but the rewards are truly great. Good luck with > your continued practice. May you achieve calm, peace, and > enlightenment! > > Metta, > James > #86877 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 9:55 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching kenhowardau Hi Howard, ---------- H: >Yes, there is trust & inevitably confidence. This provides firm belief but not knowing. Religionists the world over claim they know, but they really only believe. The Buddha taught NOT to claim knowing when there is only believing. This is one of my points. ------------ I am trying to remember any claims of that kind that I may have made. I did make a reference to looking under a streetlamp for lost car- keys even when the keys were known to have been dropped elsewhere. I think I said I found ritual vipassana meditation just as futile as looking under that streetlamp. Was that a claim to knowing? I suppose it was, and I can see how it wouldn't be of any use in a Dhamma discussion. We should try to discuss the teaching impersonally and dispassionately - without bragging about 'knowing' or 'having strong convictions.' -------------------- H: > Another point is that you, if I'm not mistaken, do not believe you actually experience dhammas. Yet you make claims about them as if you did experience them. --------------------- I think I see what you mean, but just to clarify: I have always said that cittas and cetasikas experience dhammas all the time. They are experiencing dhammas now (and for as long as they are conditioned to do so there can be no stopping them). ------------------------------ H: > (I, it happens, DO believe that you and I and all other folks, and animals too, do indeed experience dhammas. When we feel warmth, see, hear, etc we are, exactly, experiencing dhammas.) I also, just as you, do believe that they are all there is. I simply can't say that I *know* that - for I do not, and logically it is an untenable position to hold. ------------------------------- If I look out my window I can see my neighbour working in his garden. I know it is him. OK, it could be an impostor, but what are the odds? Surely we can use the word 'know' occasionally. :-) I think you will agree there must be, for example, a reality that can be called visible object. (No need to say now what the properties of such a reality might be.) When there is the reality known as 'visible object' and the realities known as 'eye' and 'eye consciousness' and the reality known as 'contact (between those three)' then there is a moment of seeing. Isn't there? There must be! How could there be any intellectual doubt? Would I be wrong in feeling just as certain about that as I that my neighbour is in his garden? ----------------------------------------- <. . .> H: > <. . .> I *have* taken heartfelt refuge in the triple gem, I do feel the associated devotion, and I am confident that I have not made a mistake in having taken refuge. My "personal" experiences have made me feel very confident. Yet I do not yet *know*, and I readily admit that I don't know. ----------------------------------------- I will admit that the hard line I take on this sort of thing is possibly a bit extreme. But, to my mind only panna and saddha (and other kusala namas) are capable of taking refuge. And even then only momentarily! :-) ------------ H: > P. S. I really appreciate the wonderful accepting and warm tone of your post, Ken! ------------ Thank you. Even though I feel quite satisfied with my behaviour on DSG I should accept that my tone has not always been acceptable to everyone. The same could be said about just about all of us, couldn't it? And I feel sure it is mostly an 'eye of the beholder' kind of thing. For example, sometimes I will be outraged by a DSG member's appalling, ill-mannered, totally unacceptable post, only to see someone else compliment that same person on his wonderful words of wisdom. :-) Ken H PS: Speaking of inflammatory posts; I must say something about Ven. Pannabahulo's latest effort. He said something to the effect that A Sujin encouraged monks to break the vinaya. That is just too much! Nothing could be more preposterous! Words fail me! I might just say that no one could be more encouraging of monks to keep to their rules of training than A Sujin is. I have always heard that and I have seen examples of it with my own eyes. (More details available if anyone wants them.) KH #86878 From: "szmicio" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 10:01 pm Subject: Re: Ajan Sujin - is she dangerous and destroying the Buddha Sangha? szmicio Dear Bhante and friends I have so many confidence to her teaching. Each word of her is so valuable. She doesnt speak about what is not important but only what is important. A few days ago I made decision that I will be collecting all Nina translations with her. That is true Dhamma and maybe such compilation can help someone in the future. dear Bhante , where can I find Viniana Pitaka in English? bye Lukas > Dear Friends, > > I did say I would not write anymore on this site. But several things > have happened recently which have confirmed what I already know > through my own inner wisdom. > > Thus I say that what I have seen Ajan Sujin teaching - and what her > most devoted students constantly repeat is an extremely limited view > of the Theravada school;a view to which they are extremely attached. > > Topics that are discussed are almost entirely presented,and dealt > with,through a very distorted and narrowly focussed lens.To here > repeatedly that there is no point in reading the Sutta's 'unless one > has a thorough understanding of non-self' means that only arahants > should have access to such material. > Perhaps someone should have warned Ajan Sujin when she was a toddler > that, "That there is no point in teaching you the alphabet until you > are able to read 'The Brothers Karamazov.' > > What gets discussed almost all of the time is a pseudo academic study > of certain text,words and general academia.Self grandizement and a > further 'reaffirmation of 'self', seeming to be the real motives > behind a lot of the more obsessive academia. > > What gets completely forgotten is that the Lord Buddha left us the > Dhamma-Vinaya as our teacher when he was gone.This means reading > about,reflecting on and relating the texts to our present life.The > Vinaya is the Dhamma practice. > > But there is so much talk about viriya,Sati,wisdom and so on; but the > actual practice of dana, sila, sacca is all but ignored.Whilst > thousands of people were dying in Burma,China and in the very streets > adjoining the Foundation - does anybody ever think about actually > doing something to help? > > But my most important and most damaging criticism of Ajan Sujin and > here immediate 'devotees' is that her ideas are extremely dangerous > and are further reducing the life of the Buddha Sasana. > > For one thing she reinterprets almost everything that is discussed > into something that is irrelevant to DSG members.For example,in one of > the last groups I attended, Ajan Sujin said that although 3 kinds of > Viveka were listed, only seclusion from deilements was really meant. > > For more than a year now,since joining Ajan Sujin's groups,I have felt > that the monk's life is of little value; that I had stopped meditation > practice because of her - and others - constant reinforcement/ > brainwashing that meditation is a rite and ritual unless one has > complete 'Right view' and completely understands present moment > realities.In other words,only if one is an arahant should one meditate. > > Ajan Sujin always puts the horse before the cart.Before anyone is able > to read the sutta's meaningfully, practice Satpatthana effectively, > and remain in seclusion meaningfully - one must already be well on the > way to full enlightenment. > > These evaluations are entirely negative. Listening to this sort of > stuff for well over one year led me into some terrible depressions and > a continual state of hopelessness and inactivity. > > Fortunately I have full confidence in the Buddha.One statement of his > on this issue of seclusion is the following: > "Whoso is addicted to society and worldly bustle, he will not partake > of the happiness of renunciation,detachment,peace and enlightenment" > (A vii 86) > > Common sense alone should be enough for Ajan Sujin - and her devotees > - to simply understand that the Buddha didn't spend 45 years teaching > arahants what they already knew. > > And then there is all the anti - meditation lobby, again actively > promoted by Ajan Sujin and some more vocal devotees. As I said to one > DSG member recently, if one went through the entire Vinaya and studied > every sutta, and then highlighted the places where the Lord Buddha > teaches, or discusses,meditation - there wouldn't be much left of the > texts that are un-highlighted. > > Even the very existence of the Abhidhamma (Which, incidentally, I do > not consider to be the Buddha's own teachings),are intimately bound up > with the practice of meditation. I one of 'The Harvard Mind Science > Symposiums' - MindsScience. An East - West dialogue'David Goleman writes: > > "There is a panoply of inner sciences in Tibetan Buddhism.I would like > to focus on one of the most elementary.It is a model of the mind > shared with other branches of Buddhism - Theravada has a very similar > model. It is called Abhidharma.The basic unit of analysis in the > Abhidharma model is a single moment of mind in the succession of such > moments in the stream of awareness.In this model, each such moment is > seen to be characterised by different, if you will,'flavors', called > mental factors. Each mental factor has unique properties that > determine our subjective experience from moment to moment........There > are innumerable properties of mind, and how you cut the pie is rather > arbitrary. Abhidharma selects fifty or so mental factors as being > crucial, roughly half of which are considered unhealthy, or > unwholesome, most of the others considered healthy or wholesome. > The rule of thumb for mental health is very very straightforward. > Those states that are unhealthy, or unwholesome, are those that are > not conducive to calm, to tranquility, to equilibrium, to > meditation,to the attainment of enlightenment. That is a basic rule in > this psychological system".(p52) > > This week I was very lucky to spend an evening,night and morning with > a Venerable monk who is a real friend of mind.He gave up being an > abbot of a Wat in favour of being alone in a far part of the jungle.He > has so many disciples that he also wants them to rely on themselves.He > very clearly has very high attainments; and all of his meditation > practice he has worked out for himself (Incuding how to best use the > 'Satipatthana Sutta'. > > That was a very inspiring occasion for me. But I want to finish with > some very sad cases which are closely bound up with Ajan Sujin and her > teachings. > > There is a Thai monk who now teaches Western meditators.He is a great > follower of Ajan Sujin.His vinaya is extremely loose.Handling money is > OK; watching movies; eating whenever one feels like it, and so on.he > claims that the Vinaya is a set of conditions that no longer apply to > modern times.I asked him if he had a lot of very tiny black insects > that fly into his kuti at night: they bite and are very itchy for at > least a week. He told me that he switches on his bedside lamp and then > puts a bowl of oil underneath.He said that, so long as you do it with > 'non-self' then there was no blame.It's all just conditions. To > further increase his self pride he pointed out that I couldn't do > because I wasn't skilled enough. (I am just so happy that I am too > 'stupid' not to be able to develop his > high level of 'wisdom'. > > Unfortunately he is given meditation students. One male meditator > asked if he could borrow one of my books.I said you had better ask > your teacher as meditators are not allowed to read during courses.But > within an hour his teacher had given him a bundle of books to read. > The result was that he spent about six weeks reading, spending much of > the day walking all the way into town and back and using the Internet > Cafe.But no meditation. > This was a yogi with a lot of problems.Just before he left to return > to his country he told me that, when he gets to Germany,he will again > smoke marijuana. > > My experience, and the experience of countless meditators is that > after completing a meditation course one feels very clean both > mentally and physically.No one wants to leave and then undo alltheir > hard work.But Ajan Sujin's views prevented the teacher from honouring > the student's request to sit a retreat.I felt very, very sad. > > A good friend of mine came to meditate. As he works with computers all > day he just wanted to get away from then to meditate, > The first week went OK. During the second week the same monk wanted > his computer fixed.The yogi thought he would do it as 'Tham boon'. But > the job lasted several days and his mediation momentum drpped. i know > my friend was very disturbed by this.But the meditation teacher > explained it all away as 'conditions'. > > You will remember my friend David. He is now back in the US.Before > they left I offered his daughter some very easy going copies dedicated > to the life and teachings of the Buddha.She declined. She said that > all she had heard about since she arrived in Thailand was about > accumulations and conditions. She was sick of it and didn't want to > ever see another Dhamma book. > > Ajan Sujin's pessimistic understanding of the Dhamma is,in my personal > opinion, very destructive.And her practice is not practice proper. > What she experiences can be clearly seen whilst one is abiding in > those yanas. > > Then comes the point that James made a couple of weeks ago.Why make > the effort to be a monk or a nun? It is a very difficult life. > Why don't we all move to big cities; make big bucks,and throw > ourselves headlong into sexual relationships, the best food, wine, > fancy clothes, hi -tech, cars and all that you can grasp? > Well,the Buddha explained this issue perfectly. > > Finally, I have some wonderful news for you all. I have no intention, > or wish,to attend anymore DSGs. > However, I feel very close to some of you.I will be in Bangkok this > weekend. You have my number. > With metta, blessings and every best wish, > > Pannabahulo Bhikkhu > #86879 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 10:03 pm Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations: Epiphenomenalist Explanation Requested scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Consider AN IX, 14 Samiddhi: "...'What, Samiddhi, is the conditioning basis of the purposive thoughts that arise in a person?' - 'Name-and-form, venerable sir.'* 'From what does their variety derive?' - 'From the elements.' 'What is their origin?' - 'Contact.' 'On what do they converge?' - 'Feeling' 'What is their head?' - 'Concentration.' 'What is their master?' - 'Mindfulness.' 'What is their climax?' - 'Wisdom.' 'What is their essence?' - 'Liberation.' 'Where do they merge?' - 'In the Deathless'"** 9. 1. 2. 4 Samiddhi sutta.m 'Kimaaramma.naa samiddhi, purisassa sa"nkappavitakkaa uppajjantiiti? Naamaruupaaramma.naa bhanteti. Te pana samiddhi, kva naanatta.m gacchantiiti? Dhaatusu bhanteti. Te pana samiddhi, ki.m samudayaati? Phassasamudayaa bhanteti. Te pana samiddhi, ki.m samosara.naati? Vedanaa samosara.naa bhanteti. Te pana samiddhi, ki.m pamukhaati? Samaadhipamukhaa bhanteti. Te pana samiddhi, ki.m aadhipateyyaati? Sataadhipateyyaa bhanteti. Te pana samiddhi, kimuttarà ti? Pa~n~nuttaraa bhanteti. Te pana samiddhi, ki.m saaraati? Vimuttisaaraa bhanteti. Te pana samiddhi ki.m ogadhaati? Amatogadhaa bhanteti. Kimaaramma.naa samiddhi, purisassa sa"nkappavitakkaa uppajjantiiti? Iti pu~n~nho samaano naamaruupaaramma.naa bhanteti vadesi. Te pana samiddhi, kva naanatta.m gacchantiiti iti pu~n~nho samaano dhaatusu bhanteti vadesi. *Note 10: "Here aarama.na does not have its familiar meaning of 'object', but its original literal meaning of 'hold' or 'support'. AA glosses it as condition (paccaya). 'Name-and-form' (naama-ruupa) is explained by AA as the four mental aggregates (='name') and the four material elements with their material derivatives (='form'); these are the conditions for the arising of purposive thoughts." **Note 11: "An explanation derived from AA is as follows: The elements (dhaatu) are the six sense objects, forms, sounds, etc. 'Contact' is the contact associated with such thoughts. They converge on feeling (vedanaa-samosara.naa) because feeling, the affective value of an experience (as pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral), holds the various aspects of a conscious moment together. Concentration is the 'head' (samaadhi-pamukhaa) in the sense of playing the key role in bringing the mind to its highest intensity. Mindfulness is said to be the 'master' (sataadhipateyyaa) to emphasize its dominant role in mastery of the mind. Wisdom is 'the climax' (pa~n~nuttaraa) because it is wisdom that issues in the attainment of the supramundane path. Liberation is the 'essence' or core (vimutti-saaraa), the goal in which the path culminates; according to AA, the essence or core is the fruition stage of emancipation (phala-vimutti). All these thoughts are said to 'merge in the Deathless' (amatogadha) because the 'merge with' Nibbaana by taking it as object (in the path and fruit) and because they are established upon it." Scott: If you wish, Herman, might you provide the epiphenomenalist revision of the above? It is clear to me that naama cannot possibly be seen as epiphenomenal, given the sequence shown. Again, the thesis I set forward is that Epiphenomenalism is incompatible with the Dhamma. Are you able to show how it might be compatible? Sincerely, Scott. #86880 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 10:54 pm Subject: Re: Ajan Sujin - is she dangerous and destroying the Buddha Sangha? buddhatrue Hi Azita, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > > hello Ven.Pannabahulo and James. > > Have read these with a certain amt of distress, not so much for what > is being said about A.Sujin but more for what you may be doing to > yourselves. > Its fine to disagree about someones style of teaching but I believe > its another ball game to be virtually condeming that person. Are > either of you aware of what damage you may be doing to yourselves? James: I hope that you are not wishing either one of us harm. You should only wish the best for both of us; no matter what we say. > IMHO, its far better to accept that you disagree and well - leave it > at that. > I guess by writing this I may be doing exactly what I'm advising > against, but I dont feel any malice in this, just wnated to bring to > your attention that its dangerous ground you are walking on. James: This sounds like some sort of threat. That sounds like malice to me. > I notice you both sign off with 'metta' but I dont see much metta > in your posts. James: Believe it or not, I posted with metta. I have metta for Ven. P and for the "followers" of KS. I really don't like to discuss KS anymore in this group (it goes nowhere), but I wanted to give support to my friends, Ven. P and Phil (both reformed). But, I won't be saying anything more about this. Obviously, the environment, regardless of all of the claims to the contrary, is hostile to those who disagree with KS. > > Patience, courage and good cheer, > azita. Metta, James #86881 From: "Antony Woods" Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:26 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN2 antony272b2 Hi Herman, Jon, Sarah, Regarding emergency sirens (which in recent weeks have happily helped me remember my dana to the Rural Fire Service which was in order to practice as if my head is on fire) I have some more thoughts to share: When there is a tragedy, usually on the TV but even if it is hearing the siren when outdoors, people often think that they are being compassionate by watching it, when often the most compassionate thing you can do is to turn off the TV or note the siren as hearing so as to return to the work at hand. Great topic! With metta / Antony. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Antony and Sarah and Jon, > > 2008/6/9 Antony Woods : > > Sarah, Howard and Group, > > > > Sorry, the context was this thread after the Pakistan Earthquake: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/51579 > > > > Sorry to drag you into this, Antony, I know you are only the messenger. > > I read your post, and your link to a previous post, and I was reminded > of the following events. > > When I met Jon and Sarah in the Botanical Gardens in Sydney, Sarah > misplaced her sunglasses, and we all went looking for them. While > Sarah was ahead of us, Jon and I agreed that this was craving in > action, but neither of us had the hide to tell her :-) > > I don't doubt for a moment that Sarah said what you remembered her to > say about the siren only being sound. Statements like this are common > at dsg. Such selective non-association, typified by glibly denying the > reality of human suffering (as announced by an emergency service > vehicle), but then being caught up in a quest to find some trifling > bit of personal property the next moment, is not something to emulate, > Antony. > > Cheers > > > Herman > Antony (2005): When I met Sarah and Jon in Sydney city we heard a siren of an > emergency vehicle. I think Sarah said it was just hearing. I thought > there was more to it than that. There were various possible > explanations for the siren e.g. a false alarm. Or Sarah do you mean > that //remembering// the siren //right now// is reality and the > beings involved in causing the siren have moved on in the 10 weeks > since and I am still carrying the siren! #86882 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Citta and Cetasika. nilovg Dear Lukas, I appreciate your interest in Khun Sujin's works. The Vinaya in English is translated in a series by the Pali Text Society and available there. You could ask for their catalogue. Op 11-jun-2008, om 21:46 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > What is a difference between citta and vinniana? ------- N: The same. But in different contexts vi~n~naa.na is used, such as in the classification of the khandhas, or eye-consciousness, cakkhu vi~n~naa.na. ------- > > L: Citta is experiencing an object,and there can be just one citta > at the > moment. But what is cetasika? With each citta there is a cetasika. But > what is a difference between cetasika and citta? ------- N: Each citta is accompanied by several cetasikas which assist citta in cognizing an object. The minimum amount is seven, and this is in the case of seeing, hearing, etc. Citta is the chief in knowing an object, and the accompanying cetasikas have each their own function, such as feeling, remembrance (sa~n~naa), concentration on the object. Akusala citta is accompanied by more than seven cetasikas, such as attachment, aversion, ignorance or conceit, etc. Kusala citta is accompanied by many cetasikas, such as confidence in kusala, sati, calm, equanimity, etc. Kusala citta can be accompanied by pa~n~naa cetasika or without it. --------- > L: How cetasika can be known? ------- N: When it appears at the present moment. It can be attachment, or mettaa or any other cetasika. Usually we notice cetasikas and think about them. Only when satipatthaana is developed further the characteristics of cetasikas can be clearly known as non-self. Now we notice lobha and we still have an idea of "my lobha", even if we do not expressively think so. That is the difference. -------- > > L: Can be more than one cetasika at the moment? > > So if there is a hearing or seeing there is a cetasika too? ------- N: See above. Just going off now, next week I can answer more if necessary. Nina. #86883 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 12:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching nilovg Dear Ken ( and Ven. Pannabahulo), What you write is also my experience. I keep on thinking about it that the Buddha exhorted people to discuss Dhamma, not persons. It is not the person that matters, but the Dhamma, as I heard since decads ago, yes, right from the beginning. Let us understand cause and effect in our lives. Indeed, it brings harm to blame or scold persons, it does not help anybody. Yes, I learnt during all those years I lived in Thailand that we should help the monks to keep the rules of Vinaya, not giving them money, not being personally close to them, not speaking idle talk to them, etc. Nina. Op 12-jun-2008, om 6:55 heeft kenhowardau het volgende geschreven: We should try to discuss the teaching impersonally and dispassionately - without bragging about 'knowing' or 'having strong convictions.'... > Speaking of inflammatory posts; I must say something about Ven. > Pannabahulo's latest effort. He said something to the effect that A > Sujin encouraged monks to break the vinaya. That is just too much! > Nothing could be more preposterous! Words fail me! > > I might just say that no one could be more encouraging of monks to > keep to their rules of training than A Sujin is. I have always heard > that and I have seen examples of it with my own eyes. (More details > available if anyone wants them.) #86884 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 12:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Can Worldlings Directly Know the Faculties? Just wanna know ... nilovg Dear Tep, Op 11-jun-2008, om 23:33 heeft Tep het volgende geschreven: > T: I remember that you suggested earlier that I discussed nama and > rupa > at the Beginner's Abhidhamma corner. The above three stages of > vipassna > are interesting and can be discussed further there. But if these three > pari~n~nas were Ven. Buddhaghosa's extension, then we will not find > his > idea in the iptakas. So let me ask : have you read about these ~nata > pari~n~naa, tiira.na pari~n~naa, and pahaana pari~n~naa in the > Suttanta- > pitaka and/or the Abhidhamma Pitaka? ------- N: The pari~n~nas are not the stages of insight, they indicate the process of learning where one has to apply the understanding gained at the stages of insight. The stages of insight we find in the Patisambhidamagga, although the counting is somewhat different at the beginning. The pari~n~nas as such are just in the commentaries. We cannot say that this is an extension by Buddhaghosa. He just edited what he found in the oldest commentaries, rehearsed at the first council. For now I have to sign off until next week. Nina. #86885 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/6/11 jonoabb : > Hi Herman > >> > My understanding of kamma is that it refers to the intention >> > accompanying kusala and akusala consciousness, and that this intention >> > conditions the later arising of certain types of consciousness such as >> > the experiencing of objects through the sense-doors (called 'vipaka' >> > consciousness); and furthermore that all such vipaka consciousness is >> > conditioned by prior intention (kamma). >> > >> > Hope this is to the point (please let me know if not). >> > >> >> Yes this was very clear and precise and to the point. Thanks. > > Glad to hear it! I'd be interested to know whether you still see an > inconsistency between the teaching on kamma and the teaching on anatta > (i.e., anatta as a characteristic of dhammas), if you'd care to > comment further. As you have explained it, I see no inconsistency between anatta and kamma. Kamma is "only" a subset of anatta, it identifies a specific causal connection between certain experiences. This applies only at the level of experience at which it was explained, and thus is not relevant to a level where there is thinking in terms of self and other (selves), if I have understood you correctly. If I have understood you correctly, thank you for explaining. If not, feel free to explain some more :-) Cheers Herman #86886 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Arahants and continued survival egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/6/11 jonoabb : > Hi Herman (and Swee Boon) > > This thread is actually closely related to the discussion we've been > having about kamma. > > You mention the fact that arahants manage to survive despite no longer > having any attachment to continued existence (no "intention to survive"). > > While it may seem to be the case that a desire to live is essential to > ensuring survival, the teaching of the Buddha, as I understand it, is > that it is past kamma that is the main determinant of the length of a > person's lifespan. Awww, man!! This just happens to be the next post I had marked for reply, and my post of a few minutes ago in no way referenced anything you say here. But as I see it, in this post you blow away the whole explanation of annata and kamma that I agreed with. You re-introduce here the spectre of kamma that belongs to and follows a being, a notion which you were at pains to distance yourself from in the other thread. You've lost me again, Jon, I'm afraid :-) Cheers Herman #86887 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] re: poster egberdina Hi connie, 2008/6/12 connie : > > Dear Herman, > > "Put your books aside and put yourself in a situation where discursive thought is not required. > > Your joy will be reward not only for me." > > > :) Ah, yes - books = fine material! gotcha, thanks - > Just wondering, were you being sincere when you asked what you asked? I assure you my reply was in good faith. Cheers Herman #86888 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 3:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching egberdina Hi Sukin, 2008/6/10 Sukinder : > Hi Herman, > > ============= > Herman: > Like you, I am not interested in arguing for the sake of arguing. > > Suk: I am glad to hear this. > > As you noted recently, even after years of reading each other on the > list, we still can't be sure what meaning the other person has in mind > with regard to a particular concept used. There are other barriers to > communication. Recently however, I've also been considering the fact of > us being here discussing the Dhamma, which is to learn / go through the > process of correcting one's views. > > Of course ignorance and craving arising at almost every turn, so much so > that rather than to 'learn' I end up arguing or otherwise indulging in > theorizing /philosophy /thought proliferations. Yes, we have been interacting for a long time. And that fact may well explain the mutual respect that is creeping into our discussions :-) But before I get too respectful :-), allow me to question 50% of what you say here. I fully agree with you that craving arises at almost every turn. But I have no idea what reality you are referring to when you say the exact same thing about ignorance. And because you include something that is so utterly meaningless to me, I wonder whether we actually agree about the craving bit. So, could I ask you , respectfully, what you mean when you say that ignorance arises ......... > Herman: > But I will maintain that anyone who uses the "anatta defense" to > justify whatever they do or fail to do is as skilful as a stupid baby > lying on it's back. And let's be clear on another thing. It's not just > baby boys that are stupid :-) So what is your position, Sukin? > > Suk: The reason I asked whether you saw this as being where I am coming > from is because I don't see that it applies. I don't see it even now and > the reason is: > > First, I've never found myself using Anatta to justify doing or not > doing anything. I understanding it at my best only in hindsight which > then becomes a basis simply for not dwelling in the past and speculating > about the future. Second, the comparison with the 'stupid baby' in the > Sutta you cited, is reference to *not knowing* anything. If you wanted to find a being less affected than any other by proliferation, or self-view, or any other view, you cannot go past our stupid baby. And this fact makes the stupid baby most intimately familiar with the present moment, wouldn't you say? > The Buddha I > think, wanted to point out the fact that "not being engaged in certain > forms of evil" does not imply "a corresponding good being done". So I > don't think that it applies to the comparison you are making. The baby > is simply "ignorant", he has no right view but neither does he have > wrong view. The baby knows ONLY the present moment, what more do you want? Isn't this the state of knowing parramattha dhammas that dsg'ers clamour for in their twos and threes? :-) (The smiley is for the turn of phrase, not the sentiment expressed). > > But I may be missing your point, in which case please explain more. > It is going back a while now, but this got started because you conferred some benefit on those who conceived of anatta. Tell me something, Sukin, of what value is it to say that all conditioned phenomena are conditioned? Is there some knowledge or insight being conveyed? If so, what is it? Cheers Herman #86889 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 12:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Sukin) - In a message dated 6/12/2008 6:21:48 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Sukin, 2008/6/10 Sukinder : > Hi Herman, > > ============= > Herman: > Like you, I am not interested in arguing for the sake of arguing. > > Suk: I am glad to hear this. > > As you noted recently, even after years of reading each other on the > list, we still can't be sure what meaning the other person has in mind > with regard to a particular concept used. There are other barriers to > communication. Recently however, I've also been considering the fact of > us being here discussing the Dhamma, which is to learn / go through the > process of correcting one's views. > > Of course ignorance and craving arising at almost every turn, so much so > that rather than to 'learn' I end up arguing or otherwise indulging in > theorizing /philosophy /thought proliferations. Yes, we have been interacting for a long time. And that fact may well explain the mutual respect that is creeping into our discussions :-) But before I get too respectful :-), allow me to question 50% of what you say here. I fully agree with you that craving arises at almost every turn. But I have no idea what reality you are referring to when you say the exact same thing about ignorance. And because you include something that is so utterly meaningless to me, I wonder whether we actually agree about the craving bit. So, could I ask you , respectfully, what you mean when you say that ignorance arises --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Herman, are you objecting because you view ignorance not as an active condition but, as the word-syntax suggests, an absence? If so, isn't it possible that avijja is more than an absence, and that it is an active obscuring and misperceiving? ---------------------------------------------------------- ......... > Herman: > But I will maintain that anyone who uses the "anatta defense" to > justify whatever they do or fail to do is as skilful as a stupid baby > lying on it's back. And let's be clear on another thing. It's not just > baby boys that are stupid :-) So what is your position, Sukin? > > Suk: The reason I asked whether you saw this as being where I am coming > from is because I don't see that it applies. I don't see it even now and > the reason is: > > First, I've never found myself using Anatta to justify doing or not > doing anything. I understanding it at my best only in hindsight which > then becomes a basis simply for not dwelling in the past and speculating > about the future. Second, the comparison with the 'stupid baby' in the > Sutta you cited, is reference to *not knowing* anything. If you wanted to find a being less affected than any other by proliferation, or self-view, or any other view, you cannot go past our stupid baby. And this fact makes the stupid baby most intimately familiar with the present moment, wouldn't you say? > The Buddha I > think, wanted to point out the fact that "not being engaged in certain > forms of evil" does not imply "a corresponding good being done". So I > don't think that it applies to the comparison you are making. The baby > is simply "ignorant", he has no right view but neither does he have > wrong view. The baby knows ONLY the present moment, what more do you want? Isn't this the state of knowing parramattha dhammas that dsg'ers clamour for in their twos and threes? :-) (The smiley is for the turn of phrase, not the sentiment expressed). ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: An infant is, emotionally, all about "me," and that is the case very, very strongly. Sense of self is not only deeply rooted in an infant, but is actively being expressed in terms of emotional (and physical) grasping and pushing away almost all the time. In fact, just consider how an adult who is all about himself/herself is described as "childish". ------------------------------------------------------ > > But I may be missing your point, in which case please explain more. > It is going back a while now, but this got started because you conferred some benefit on those who conceived of anatta. Tell me something, Sukin, of what value is it to say that all conditioned phenomena are conditioned? Is there some knowledge or insight being conveyed? If so, what is it? Cheers Herman =========================== With metta, Howard #86890 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 5:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction dhammanusarin Hi Herman,- > > I do not understand how you arrive at your conclusion, based on the > sutta. It seems to me to be unambigously saying that the it is the > Tathagata who is satisfied or not satisfied. > > And the same occurs in the following sutta then, Ud 4:5? How do > you explain it? > T: I appreciate your quote from Ud 4:5 in which the translator used the word "annoyance" to describe the mental state of the Tathagata while he was surrounded by a crowd of laypeople and monks. In the other sutta which we discussed earlier the translator uses the words "satisfied" and "dissatisfied to decribe the feeling of the Tathagata towards his disciples. What do you understand about the Tathagata who attained Nibbana and was free from lobha, dosa and moha(greed, aversion and delusion)? Is it possible, or does it even make sense, to assume that He still felt annoyed, satisfied and dissatisfied like the ordinary human beings who have greed, aversion and delusion? Think about it, please. Tep === #86891 From: "connie" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 5:17 am Subject: Perfections Corner (181) nichiconn Dear Friends, ch. 5 continues: We should study with awareness the characteristics of realities as they naturally appear. It depends on conditions what degree of satisampaja~n~na arises, it may be of the degree of merely reflecting on the akusala that one has committed during the day, or it may be of the degree of immediate awareness of whatever reality appears. Some people who develop satipa.t.thaana may desire to see a result of their efforts. They are striving with all their energy, because they believe that in this way the result of their practice will materialize quickly. However, since they are trying very hard they become tired and they have to stop doing so. The result of the development of satipa.t.thaana cannot be made to occur soon. The development of satipa.t.thaana is awareness of the characteristics of realities as they naturally appear in daily life, and only in this way can they be understood as anattaa. If one is expecting a result of one's practice and tries to hasten its arising, it is not the development of satipa.t.thaana. A person of about eighty years old who had listened to Dhamma lectures at different places deeply considered the development of satipa.t.thaana. Although he was an elderly person, he was full of energy to listen to the Dhamma and to consider what he had heard. When he heard a radio program on the introduction to vipassanaa, he wrote down the address of the "Dhamma Study and Support Foundation" and made an effort to go to the Foundation in order to perform kusala by offering a donation. He left his house at nine in the morning and arrived at the Foundation at two in the afternoon. Here we see the viriya of an elderly person who spent such a long time to reach the Foundation, who had no time for lunch and had to exert himself in many different ways. The perfection of viriya should be developed in daily life. When we perform kusala, viriya is essential; we should go against the current of akusala, against the stream of attachment to comfort and well-being, and in this way kusala can be accomplished. For someone who develops satipa.t.thaana in daily life so that pa~n~naa knows more thoroughly the characteristics of realities, the right conditions are present that lead to the result, namely, the realization of the four noble Truths. For him, the result will naturally occur and this is not difficult. However, the conditions leading to such a result are difficult to develop: one should gradually consider and study with awareness the characteristics of naama and ruupa, as they appear through the sense-doors and the mind-door. This is a very gradual process, and viriya, energy, is necessary to be aware again and again, to be aware very often, since this is the only way for pa~n~naa to be able to penetrate the arising and falling away of naama and ruupa. At this very moment realities are arising and falling away, but if we do not study with awareness and begin to understand the characteristics of naama dhammas and ruupa dhammas, it will not be possible to realize their arising and falling away. The cause which can bring such a result has to be developed time and again, life after life. .. to be continued, connie #86892 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 5:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/6/11 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman, > > Thanks for your reply, but it was not quite what I wanted. > Always happy to be a spanner in the works, you know me :-) > ------ > KH: > > Or should we be happy to understand that there are - right > now - really only paramattha dhammas (and there is no 'being' that > can be released or not released)? >> > > > Herman: > If you are referring to the equanimity that lies beyond > desire for release, all good and well. But I can't imagine that > anyone in a position of equanimity would "knock" (denigrate) the > desire for release. > ------ > > I wanted you to take the plunge, but my reference to being happy > allowed you to skirt around the edges. :-) Let's try again. Do > you understand there are really only dhammas? No, KenH, I don't. If everything is only dhammas, then we are truly lost. For we only know things in opposition to what they are not. For example, a rupa is known because it is not a nama, and vice versa. But if you suggest that there is nothing other than dhammas, that says only that everything has the same, identical characterictics. I wouldn't call such an assertion understanding :-) Please clarify if you are inclined. Cheers Herman #86893 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 5:36 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Can Worldlings Directly Know the Faculties? Just wanna know ... dhammanusarin Dear Nina, - Please pardon me for insisting that the idea of three pari~n~nas was originated by Ven. Buddhaghosa. > ------- > N: The pari~n~nas are not the stages of insight, they indicate the > process of learning where one has to apply the understanding gained at the stages of insight. The stages of insight we find in the Patisambhidamagga, although the counting is somewhat different at the beginning. The pari~n~nas as such are just in the commentaries. We cannot say that this is an extension by Buddhaghosa. He just edited what he found in the oldest commentaries, rehearsed at the first council. > For now I have to sign off until next week. > Nina. > > T: Instead of getting involved with the origin of the three pari~n~nas idea and the stages of insight in the Patism, which will unavoidably lead to a new series of discussion/argument and time-consuming research (all of which is simply to prove who's right and who's wrong), I just want to briefly say that it doesn't appear to me that the venerable only edited some oldest commentaries. To me that idea of 3 pari~n~nas is strongly adopted and expounded by him. Besides quoting a few passages from the Patism, he did not refer to the "old commentaries" like you said. But, again, such an academic research that goes back a few thousand years does not interest me. It is better to talk about nama & rupa, satipatthana, and Stream Entry. May you have a peaceful rest till next week. Tep === #86894 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 6:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN2 egberdina Hi Jon and Antony, 2008/6/12 jonoabb : > Hi Herman > > Thanks for inviting me to comment. You have raised the sunglasses > incident before, so perhaps it carries some significance for you ;-)) > No, not especially. As I said, I read Antony's link to a previous post, and it triggered some memories. After reading Antony's post, I can now also tell you what I ate and drank that day, but neither that or the sunglasses-gate incident carry any significance for me. > You mention "selective non-association" in connection with the comment > about sound of a siren being only sound (I've not heard that > expression before, but I think I know what you mean). > > Let me assure you that there is absolutely no aspect of > "non-association" involved in the idea of dhammas being seen as only > dhammas. > > To my understanding, the enlightened being may still be reminded of > human suffering on hearing an ambulance siren, even though he no > longer takes the sound of the siren as being anything other than just > sound. This is because understanding dhammas as dhammas does not > "interfere" with the conceptualisation of sense-door impressions into > a world of people and things. > > To put that another way, the understanding of dhammas as dhammas does > not involve the conventional world being deconstructed into unrelated > little pieces. > > On my reading of the texts, it is a matter of things being seen more > clearly as they truly are, that is to say, with less ignorance and > wrong view (but otherwise with the normal associations being made > between conventional objects). > > Hoping this clarifies.\ It does, to some extent. But I do not "buy" the hearing of "only sound" being followed by an announcement to an other self that this was the case. Communication is based on self-view, in the context of other selves. A person in a social context announcing that a signal was not a signal, is a sign of bad faith, not insight. I know and accept it is possible for red to be only red, green to be only green, and a sound to be only sound. But Jon, in a social context, red means stop, green means go, a siren means get out of the way. Neither Sarah or KS have any business disassociating in public. The Buddha said quite a lot about seeking out the base of trees and empty huts. He said nothing about abhidhamma in daily life. I think it is quite dangerous for anyone to suggest that He did. Cheers Herman #86895 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 7:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN2 sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- On Wed, 11/6/08, Herman Hofman wrote: From: Herman Hofman H:>When I met Jon and Sarah in the Botanical Gardens in Sydney, Sarah misplaced her sunglasses, and we all went looking for them. ... S: Are you suggested that if we misplace our sunglasses (or any other item) that rather than retracing our footsteps and retrieving them, that we should abandon them (in the name of giving up clinging) and go out and a)buy another pair or b)manage without? As I recall, someone had kindly handed them in to the cafe where we'd sat. .... H:>While Sarah was ahead of us, Jon and I agreed that this was craving in action, but neither of us had the hide to tell her :-) ... S: That sounds like you, but not Jon :-) Of course there's attachment (or craving) 'in action' all day, every day. It's very, very common. Better to understand it when it arrises for ourselves now, rather than be so concerned about any attachment anyone else had a few years ago!! ... H:> I don't doubt for a moment that Sarah said what you remembered her to say about the siren only being sound. Statements like this are common at dsg. ... S: Whatever the conventional situation - whether in the Botanic Gardens, listening to the ambulance siren or sitting at the computer now, there are realities to be known. None of this means not looking for sunglasses, not listening to sirens, not having ideas about computers. What it means is being aware of the ordinary, daily realities at the present moment, whether they be seeing, visible object, attachment, hearing, sound or any other dhamma. Appreciating that there is just one world at a time, in the example Antony gave, just the world of hearing, is the way to understand the Buddha's teachings. We think the long story about the imagined accident and the victim being taken away and so on is real, but at such times, there are just moments of hearing, thinking and lots more thinking. .... H:> Such selective non-association, typified by glibly denying the reality of human suffering (as announced by an emergency service vehicle), but then being caught up in a quest to find some trifling bit of personal property the next moment, is not something to emulate, ..... S: The only way to ever understand the real truth of Suffering or Dukkha is by understanding the present reality. No other way. Metta, Sarah ====== #86896 From: "pannabahulo" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 7:17 am Subject: Nina and others - Nothing could be more preposterous pannabahulo Dear Nina, when you speak of 'inflammatory letters' nothing I have said could possibly equal libelous contents of your latest posting. You write: > Speaking of inflammatory posts; I must say something about Ven. > Pannabahulo's latest effort. He said something to the effect that A > Sujin encouraged monks to break the vinaya. That is just too much! > Nothing could be more preposterous! Words fail me! > > I might just say that no one could be more encouraging of monks to > keep to their rules of training than A Sujin is. I have always heard > that and I have seen examples of it with my own eyes. (More details > available if anyone wants them.) >This is absolutely untrue and shows that you were reading my post in >an extremely emotional way.(e.g. reffering to my letter as ('Ven. > Pannabahulo's latest effort').We see that Ajan Sujin is being raised to the level of a kind of deity by her devotees; any criticism of her views at all is equated with blasphemy. And this is the most common reason that many Dhamma practitioners stay well clear of this website; knowing it to be completely biased,single minded and riddled with bitching and in-fighting.(A wonderful tribute to the Lord Buddha's Dhamma???). This is a very good example of the great attachment many of Ajan Sujin's students have towards their teacher.It is that attachment which prevents them from even reading a letter with some degree of equanimity.What I did say was this: "There is a Thai monk who now teaches Western meditators. He is a great follower of Ajan Sujin. His vinaya is extremely loose.Handling money is OK; watching movies; eating whenever one feels like it, and so on.He claims that the Vinaya is a set of conditions that no longer apply to modern times.I asked him if he had a lot of very tiny black insects that fly into his kuti at night: they bite and are very itchy for at least a week. He told me that he switches on his bedside lamp and then puts a bowl of oil underneath.He said that, so long as you do it with 'non-self' then there was no blame.It's all just conditions. To further increase his self pride he pointed out that I couldn't do so because I wasn't skilled enough. (I am just so happy that I am too 'stupid' not to be able to develop his high level of 'wisdom'). Now Nina and others,where do you read that I wrote that Ajan Sujin 'encouraged monks to break their vinaya'?? I am merely pointing out that a certain monk uses such Paramatha talk such as "It's all/only conditions" to justify his behaviour. I raised the same issue - several months ago - when my friend David was staying in our temple.He would take leave and not return for whatever number of days.We only have a few kutis for men; so I was asked to find out when he would return in case the kuti was needed by someone else.But his reply would always be,"It depends on conditions." Since I have already raised questions with regard to this use of language in the regular discussions,how come I am suddenly jumped upon,incorrectly quoted, libeled and accused of writing 'inflammatory posts'? I just drew attention to the fact that using terms like "It all depends on conditions" can be a very good cop-out for absolving one from any kind of responsibility or obligation. Time and time again I have been warned - mostly off-line - that Ajan Sujin's devotees are closed to any form of critical comment.Usually such reactions are due to very deep insecurities in their viewpoints. Whatever; there is something in all of this that smells very strongly of a 'sect'.And 'sects' have little to do with the Lord Buddha's Dhamma which necessarily is concerned with natural laws which are applicable to all. That Ajan Sujin, Sarah and some others are strongly opposed to meditation cannot be doubted. But to all non 'Sujinites' meditation is inseparable from, and a very important part of,the many forms of practice of the Lord Buddha's Dhamma. And the remarks in my letter were the reaction to: (a)The months and months of quitting meditation because Ajan Sujin and co considered it a complete waste of time; nothing more than a rite and ritual. Now I really do regret all those wasted months. (b) Yogis travel right the way around the world to attend meditation courses. If - and it's very unlikely - they meet up with a 'Sujinite' non-meditator - who has been given the job of guiding meditators - then it is highly improbable that the yogi will get any meditation instructions. Sadly, this happened very recently. I have skimmed through some of the letters written in reply to mine.I saw quite a few bitchy and accusatory replies. The discussion of viewpoints and the disagreement with Ajan Sujin is clearly not tolerated here.This is a "Devotees Only" club. Off-line I am receiving some tremendous support from some incredible people. Thank you;your points are very valuable ones and your best wishes very precious to me. And so I prefer to concentrate on what is positive,is in keeping withe the Lord Buddha's teachings and provides examples of more objective evaluations and appraisals. The Lord Buddha taught us to question ALL our teacher; including the Lord Buddha himself.But one may never dare to question KS? For those who are my good friends in DSG, please keep in touch. And to you all, May you be well, happy and peaceful. Pannabahulo #86897 From: "connie" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 7:34 am Subject: re: poster nichiconn Dear Herman, "Just wondering, were you being sincere when you asked what you asked? I assure you my reply was in good faith." I'm not exactly sure what I might have been asking, but do, preferring "zest" sometimes idly wonder about "joy" as the translation of "piiti". But there you go, it's just discursive thinking - no real aim to it. I suppose any enlightenment factor is, so to speak, already it's own reward, but in the end, what is 'offered' is "peace". Be assured that overall, I am fairly "happy in my walk". best wishes, connie #86898 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 7:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching sarahprocter... Hi Phil & all, --- On Wed, 11/6/08, Phil wrote: P:> I can give a personal example. About 4 years ago, as you may recall, I got into a huge mess of bad behaviour when I went back to Canada one summer, really serious transgressions that brought on a lot of suffering to myself, Naomi and I would guess other people involved. So on the train from Montreal to Toronto, coming off the drugs, hungover, despondent, I clung to Abhidhamma in Daily Life like it was a bible, and was comforted by reflecting on "it's just all dhammas" and so on. ... S: As Nina and others have suggested, you completely misunderstand what any of us are saying if you think for a moment that anyone is suggesting that your transgressions (as summarised here) were not very serious akusala kamma patha. The Buddha taught us to see the danger in the slightest fault and we learn about ordinary lobha (as now while we write or in the sunglasses episode Herman referred to) and extra-ordinary lobha (as in your example). Why do such transgressions occur in the case of someone like you, with a keen interest in Dhamma? Simply the accumulations for akusala are so strong and the understanding, hiri and ottappa (moral shame and rectitude) are not developed enough to see the danger in accumulating such tendencies from moment to moment. The sotapanna (or the one well on the way to becoming a sotapanna) will not perform such transgressions because of the keen understanding of akusala arising at the present moment. .... P:>I was able to warm up the deep Dhamma in that way for comfort. Now, a more suitable response to what happened, more in line with the Buddha's gradual training would have inolved a lot of samvega and a lot of reflection on hurting or not hurting people. I'm sure there was some of that as well, but the comforting reflection on deep, deep Dhamma into which I have no real insight was more comforting. .... S: The point is, as I mentioned in another post, the feeling upset and sorry is totally useless. Wisely reflecting on the importance of metta and consideration and not hurting other people is very important. So too is the understanding of the very dhammas arising then and there. This is the way we learn to understand our tendencies, so that the harm in akusala is known. ... P: >Same thing when I heard my mother had Azheimer's. It was reflection on deep Dhamma that was comforting. So a kind of comfort zone was being created by reflecting with lobha about "all dhammas" and there was also pleasant, comforting reflection on having panna that could see into that sort of thing. Lobha was warming up the deep Dhamma to provide comfort. .... S: Different moments - lobha, wise attention, more lobha. That's how it always is. It's good that you can appreciate the lobha. It's always like this - whether looking for sun-glasses or sitting in a Dhamma discussion at the Foundation. Bound to be lots of lobha and only we can know for ourselves at any moment what the reality is. This is why we're all alone. We cannot share this moment of seeing or lobha with anyone. Only panna can know. We always think we live with other people, but actually we live alone with our own thinking and lobha. At the end of life, as KS always reminds us, we depart from everything we think belongs to us. .... P:>I know students of AS have denied and will deny that this sort of thing goes on, and that's fine. ... S: I haven't heard any of us denying that there is lots of lobha going on all the time - even whilst studying or listening to dhamma. This is the lobha that has to be known when it arises, but we can only know it for ourselves, not waste time speculating about the others' accumulations. Anyway, I appreciate your reminders about the 'cheating' lobha that so often is unknown. ... P:>I will just post this sort of thing one more time to just perhaps provide another condition for reflection into what is really going on when they study paramattha dhammas and cling with pleasure into having insight into that sort of thing. ... S: Again, I appreciate any of your kind reminders. Let us all find out for ourselves:-) ... P:> And whether it blinds them to any shortcomings in the way they present this deep, deep Dhamma to people who have more desparate needs for the Dhamma, needs that are about cutting out behaviour in body, speech and mind that causes immediate and obvious harm to themselves and others, a "cutting out" that the Buddha states very clearly again and again is a prerequisite to deeper attainments. ... S: It almost sounds as though you think we condone akusala behaviour as you have described! The Buddha taught us to see the harm in the smallest akusala, but we also have to accept that people do behave the way they do by conditions and accumulations. Everyone has their own way. Can I say anything that will prevent you from repeating such a transgression in future? No, all I can do is to stress the great harm of such deeds and the importance of really understanding realities now, including the lesser tendencies of such akusala. It will be up to your panna to really see the harm in such deeds or tendencies. ... P:>I will end with my favorite sutta: "His actions marks the fool, his actions marks the wise person, O monks. Wisdom shines forth in behaviour." (III,2) ... S: I like it too. Yes, there's no use in saying one thing and behaving in another. So the actions you described were those of the fool. By really appreciating what is good and right and what is bad and wrong (including the strong attachment to self and self-view), the actions begin to mark more those of the wise person. ... P:> I think some of AS' students don't have enough interest in behviour because of their interest in paramattha dhammas. ... S: I think this is the complete opposite of what some of us believe! It is the interest and understanding of paramattha dhammas which leads us to see the importance of 'good' behaviour and the harm of 'bad' behaviour. Metta, Sarah ======== #86899 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 8:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- On Tue, 10/6/08, Herman Hofman wrote: > H:>Thanks for pursuing the matter in good faith, Sarah. And of course you > realise that if you accept that listening, looking etc all rely on > self-consciousness I will be asking some more questions :-) > ... > S: Self-consciousness makes no sense to me, ... ... H:> I get the distinct impression that there's a bit of classical conditioning going on here. Pavlov's dogs salivated on hearing a ringing a bell only, because previously it had been rung to announce the serving of food. I only have to speak in everyday English, and off you go on a tangent all your own, unrelated to anything I said. ... S: Well, just explain what you mean by self-consciousness is and ask your questions. We'll go from there. I really have no idea what you're talking about and am happy to have it put down to any dim-wit or Pavolovian conditioning or anything else:-) ... H:>If English concepts make you all aversive like, methinks the use of Pali concepts might be a good diversionary tactic to have the same conversation with you, without raising your heckles. ... S: No aversion, heckles....just incomprehension and lack of time to spend trying to work it all out:-). ... H:> So, if ever you have the time and the inclination, would you be kind enough to annotate the following with what in your opinion, equates to sound, hearing, listening, thinking etc, and a brief statement as to why that is your opinion. 1 Bhavanga 2 Bhavanga Calana 3 Bhavangapaccheda 4 Sotadvaravajjana 5 Sotavinnana 6 Sampaticchana 7 Santirana 8 Votthapana 9 Javana 10 Tadalambana ... S: No inclination right now. Another time if I can see that there's some sincere question that's relevant to your daily life concerns now. ... H: >and amend as required for manodvarika citta vithi( just rolls of your tongue, doesn't it, unlike that yucky consciousness of consciousness :-) ... S: Sorry, again, I'm just not up to your high witty standard with all that pavlovian training of mine.... You need to ring another bell to have me salivating, Herman:-). Metta, Sarah ===== #86900 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 8:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Can Worldlings Directly Know the Faculties? Just wanna know ... sarahprocter... Dear Tep, I've been following your recent helpful discussions. I'm interested in your further comments and references on the pari~n~nas which I look forward to studying more carefully later. Meanwhile, as Nina's away for a few days, you might also like to take a look at the posts under 'Parinnas' saved in 'useful posts' which includes lots of commentarial detail. Metta, Sarah --- On Tue, 10/6/08, Tep wrote: T: We both know that there is only one Pari~n~na Sutta (SN 22.23) at the Access-To-Insight, and the translator is Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu. His translation of pari~n~na is 'comprehension' . On the other hand, Bhikkhu Nanamoli's translation of pari~n~na (in the Patism) is 'full understanding' . But please note that in Patism 'pari~n~na' does not include abandoning(pahana) , realizing(sacchikir iya), and developing (bhavana); they have separate functions, not "all in one" as your quote states : full understanding of the known, full understanding by scrutinization, full understanding as abandonment. <...> ========== #86901 From: "connie" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 8:17 am Subject: Re: Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction nichiconn Dear Tep, Alex, Herman, In case there might be something of use to you here: Udaana Commentary, p.5, talking about "Ko.n.da~n~na, truly, has understood": <> *47 Aaradhayi.msu vata ma.m bhikkhuu eka.m samaya.m, which Be (and CPD svaaraadheti) take as a quotation of M i 124: aaraadhayi.msu vata me bhikkhave bhikkhuu eka.m samaya.m citta.m MA ii 97 explains aaradhayi.msuu ti ga.nhi.msu puurayi.msu, which suggest that ~Naa.namoli's rendering of this as "Bhikkhus, there was an occasion when the bhikkhus satisfied my mind" (A Treasury of the Buddha's Words, ii 8) is to be preferred to that of "Monks, my monks at one time were indeed accomplished in mind" found at MLS i 161. Dispeller 1011. Satipa.t.thaana ("foundations of mindfulness"): there are three kinds of foundation of mindfulness, (1) the domain of mindfulness (satigocaro), (2) the Master's threefold surpassing of resentment and gratification as regards the entry of the disciples [on the way of practice] (tidhaa pa.tipannesu saavakesu Satthuno pa.tighaanunaya-viitivattataa), and (3) mindfulness (sati). peace, connie #86902 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 8:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) sarahprocter... Dear Scott, --- On Mon, 9/6/08, Scott Duncan wrote: From: Scott Duncan >>manopubba"ngamaa dhammaa manose.t.thaa manomayaa manasaa ce padu.t.thena >>S: "All mental phenomena have mind as their forerunner; they have mind as their chief; they are mind-made" ... >Scott: This clarifies what I had been moving towards in recent discussions. Citta is the chief and the mental factors arise conascently and cannot arise separately. ... S: Yes. Citta is the chief in experiencing the object. It is the clear knowing of the object. As you say, it's accompanied by the cetasikas, its 'attendants'. ... >Scott: I'd be interested to consider the two ruupas: kaaya-vi~n~natti and vaci-vi~n~natti in this context. These are produced by the conascent cetanaa, are they not? These are ruupa and not naama therefore, acts of the body or speech cannot be confused with kamma. What do you think? ... S: Nina already answered. Yes, kaaya and vaci-vi~n~natti refer to rupas produced by citta when there is the intention to speak or move the body to indicate a gesture or meaning. Verbal and bodily intimation only. They are not conditioned by kamma. Anything else to clarify here? (I have a hip injury which limits my hiking considerably, so have a little more time than anticipated.) Metta, Sarah ======== #86903 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 8:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction - EXAMINE PALI please truth_aerator Hi Tep, Herman and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > > Hi Herman,- > > > > > I do not understand how you arrive at your conclusion, based on the > > sutta. It seems to me to be unambigously saying that the it is the > > Tathagata who is satisfied or not satisfied. > > > > And the same occurs in the following sutta then, Ud 4:5? How do > > you explain it? > > > > T: I appreciate your quote from Ud 4:5 in which the translator used > the word "annoyance" to describe the mental state of the Tathagata > while he was surrounded by a crowd of laypeople and monks. In the > other sutta which we discussed earlier the translator uses the > words "satisfied" and "dissatisfied to decribe the feeling of the > Tathagata towards his disciples. > > What do you understand about the Tathagata who attained Nibbana and > was free from lobha, dosa and moha(greed, aversion and delusion)? Is > it possible, or does it even make sense, to assume that He still felt > annoyed, satisfied and dissatisfied like the ordinary human beings > who have greed, aversion and delusion? Think about it, please. > > Tep > === > Can someone analyze that Pali words (interpreted as satisfaction and annoyance) used in those suttas? It may be inappropriate to install ones beliefs onto the texts, whatever they may be, and it includes Alex's take as well. ================== Anatalakkhana sutta may be AFFIRMING rather than denying true Upanishadic Atman (while denying the heretical attaditthi). Heck, he also called himself a Vedagu (Skilled in Vedas). Of course of course everyone today will say, lets reinterpret the Vedas to be the Buddhist (as opposed to Hindu) texts... The more I scrutinize the suttas and the Buddha's teaching, the more unsure I get. Remember, we must be careful not to install modern ideas onto the cultural mileau of ancient India in which Buddha was teaching. He was preaching to Hindus and Brahmins, not us. Best wishes, Alex #86904 From: Dieter Möller Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 9:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Blind and the Cripple /Lame moellerdieter Hi Jon (Alex, Howard) , you wrote: J:If you are referring to nama as part of the expression "namarupa" in the Dependent Origination, then I believe it's simply a matter of a particular usage rather saying that vinnana is not included in nama. As I mentioned in a recent post, sometimes a given Pali term (in this case, "nama"), has different meaning in different contexts. D: you are right: in a different context different meanings may be found.. sometimes confusing often due to language/translation difficulties. But I believe that concerns mainly the Sutta Pitaka .. are there different definitions of nama as well in Abh and how to understand the assumed different context? Vinnaya =consciousness, nama = mind .. what is the difference between both in English language ? I assume the former excels the latter , which excludes that the latter can include the former , doesn't it? with Metta Dieter P.S. : more to say.. but sorry ...there is lobha to see soccer now (Germany vs Croatia) ;-) #86905 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 9:27 am Subject: Re: Ajan Sujin - is she dangerous and destroying the Buddha Sangha? truth_aerator Hi Gazita and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > > hello Ven.Pannabahulo and James. > Have read these with a certain amt of distress, not so much for what is being said about A.Sujin but more for what you may be doing to yourselves. Its fine to disagree about someones style of teaching but I believe its another ball game to be virtually condeming that person. Are either of you aware of what damage you may be doing to yourselves? IMHO, its far better to accept that you disagree and well - leave it at that. I guess by writing this I may be doing exactly what I'm advising against, but I dont feel any malice in this, just wnated to bring to your attention that its dangerous ground you are walking on. I notice you both sign off with 'metta' but I dont see much metta in your posts. > > Patience, courage and good cheer, > azita. > > It is one of the monk's duty to point at what is Dhamma and what isn't. If we watch Dhamma degrading and do nothing about it, how wholesome is that? How compassionate to the future generations is that? Of course, we must be careful not to overbend the stick towards hatred. The criticising of someone may be done with compassion in Mind. Remember, even Buddha has at times talked VERY strictly to deviant monks. Remember what the Buddha has said towards Sati, Arittha, and Devadatta. In Devadatta's case Buddha has said it in such a manner as "Go strait to to Hell" would sound today. Apparently he even tried or did file a lawsuit, of some sort, against Devadatta. One of the things Buddha has said to Devadatta when he requested to lead the order: "Sariputra and the others have heard the great wisdom, and they are trusted and venerated by the world. Still, I would not give them charge of the sangha. Much less, then, would I entrust it to an abject fool and lickspittle like you." "I would not give over the leadership of the Sangha even to the great bhikshus Shariputra and Maudgalyayana. Why then would I give it over to you, who are like sounding bad-tasting in the mouth that needs to be spit out?"11 http://www.geocities.com/chris_holte/Buddhism/IssuesInBuddhism/devadat ta.html#rebuke === Sometime later, Devadatta went to the Buddha and suggested that the leadership of the Order should be handed over to him in view of the Buddha's approaching old age. The Buddha scorned the suggestion, saying, "Not even to Sâriputta or Moggallâna would I hand over the Order, and would I then to thee, vile one, to be vomited like spittle?" (Vin.ii.188. This incident is referred to in the Abhayarâjakumâra Sutta, M.i.393). Devadatta showed great resentment and vowed vengeance. Thereupon, at the Buddha's suggestion, a proclamation was issued to the Sangha that in anything done by Devadatta in the name of the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha, none but Devadatta was to be recognised. http://www.aimwell.org/DPPN/devadatta.htm ===== Pretty Harsh words, eh? But sometimes compassion needs to come with the stick. Buddha has even rebuked Ven. Sariputta for mistake made. None of this of course had any trace of malice, it was more at compassion for others, like us. Same today. IMHO. Best wishes, Alex #86906 From: "pannabahulo" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:04 am Subject: Where have all the smiles gone? They have turned into knives pannabahulo One final word, I was tremendously impressed by the warm smiles and friendliness of all when I attended discussions at The Foundation in Bangkok. But now I have had time to evaluate Ajan Sujin's interpretation of the Buddha Dhamma; and have seen up close the effect that her deterministic interpretation on non-self has had on many others. Thus,in the true spirit of the Buddha's emphasis on the need for us to question both the teaching and the teachers themselves - the smiles disappear and out come the knives. So,I can only wonder what real benefit any of you - who are so hostile in your letters of response - have really gained from all your years with Ajan Sujin and the DSG. Perhaps you too should find yourself a good meditation teacher: After all, we have nothing to lose but our kilesa. Pannabahulo #86907 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:15 am Subject: Re: Ajan Sujin - is she dangerous and destroying the Buddha Sangha? truth_aerator Hi szmicio, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "szmicio" wrote: > > Dear Bhante and friends > > I have so many confidence to her teaching. Each word of her is so > valuable. She doesnt speak about what is not important but only what > is important. A few days ago I made decision that I will be collecting > all Nina translations with her. That is true Dhamma and maybe such > compilation can help someone in the future. > > dear Bhante , where can I find Viniana Pitaka in English? > bye > Lukas > Buddhist Monastic Code http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/bmc1/bmc1.intro.ht ml Maybe this is what you are looking for? Anyhow, Buddha is the guide. Not this or that teacher! This was a decision made at the 2nd Buddhist council. Best wishes, Alex #86908 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:38 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Can Worldlings Directly Know the Faculties? Just wanna know ... dhammanusarin Dear Sarah (Nina, Jon, etc.), - I am glad to know that you are interested in discussing with me the very important Pali word -- pari~n~na. It is becoming clearer (to me) that when the Arahant Sariputta's explanation of this important word and the Buddha's definition in Pari~n~na Sutta are both well understood, then the several questions we used to asked about pa~n~na & pa~n~nindriya in puthujjanas and 'sekha' ('noble learner', a disciple in higher training, any ariyan below arahant) can also be clearly answered. Lately I think I have gained a deeper knowledge of pari~n~na through a more careful reviewing of the Patism and, as a consequence, have detected some valuable meanings that do not exist in Ven Buddhaghosa's Vism. But that knowledge remains to be tested. :-)) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > I've been following your recent helpful discussions. I'm interested in your further comments and references on the pari~n~nas which I look forward to studying more carefully later. > > Meanwhile, as Nina's away for a few days, you might also like to take a look at the posts under 'Parinnas' saved in 'useful posts' which includes lots of commentarial detail. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ............ T: Yes, I am interested in researching the Useful Posts too. Thanks. Regards, Tep ............... #86909 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations: Epiphenomenalist Explanation Requested truth_aerator Hi Soctt, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Herman, > > Consider AN IX, 14 Samiddhi: > > "...'What, Samiddhi, is the conditioning basis of the purposive > thoughts that arise in a person?' - 'Name-and-form, venerable sir.'* > 'From what does their variety derive?' - 'From the elements.' > 'What is their origin?' - 'Contact.' > 'On what do they converge?' - 'Feeling' > 'What is their head?' - 'Concentration.' > 'What is their master?' - 'Mindfulness.' > 'What is their climax?' - 'Wisdom.' > 'What is their essence?' - 'Liberation.' > 'Where do they merge?' - 'In the Deathless'"** > > Scott: If you wish, Herman, might you provide the epiphenomenalist > revision of the above? > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > Few thoughts: Is that list about the ultimate ORIGIN of purposive thought? Obviously not, since the Deathless isn't the "ground of all being" from which they come from. Is that list about conditioning basis starting from Nibbana ->...-> NamaRupa-> purposive thoughts ? No. Few cents, Alex #86910 From: "Raymond Hendrickson" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 12:04 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Ajan Sujin - is she dangerous and destroying the Buddha Sangha? bitakarma This is a post that makes me very sad. For most of us who post on message boards, an occasional jump into harsh speech and gossip is sort of par for the course. But it is very distressing to see a Buddhist Monk, representing the Sangha we take refuge in, using such harsh speech and gossip in a message posted on an open message board. We should all be mindful of what we post, and frankly I think those here on DSG, by and large, do a great job of showing respect to even those with him they disagree. But monks who post need to remember that they have a special place and with their great opportunity comes added responsibility and awareness of their actions and speech. Ray > [Original Message] > From: pannabahulo > To: > Date: 6/11/2008 8:21:53 AM > Subject: [dsg] Ajan Sujin - is she dangerous and destroying the Buddha Sangha? > > Dear Friends, > > I did say I would not write anymore on this site. But several things > have happened recently which have confirmed what I already know > through my own inner wisdom. > #86911 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:13 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching truth_aerator Hi Phil, Sarah and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Phil & all, > > --- On Wed, 11/6/08, Phil wrote: > P:> I can give a personal example. About 4 years ago, as you may > recall, I got into a huge mess of bad behaviour when I went back to > Canada one summer, really serious transgressions that brought on a > lot of suffering to myself, Naomi and I would guess other people > involved. So on the train from Montreal to Toronto, coming off the > drugs, hungover, despondent, I clung to Abhidhamma in Daily Life > like it was a bible, and was comforted by reflecting on "it's just > all dhammas" and so on. > ... > S: As Nina and others have suggested, you completely misunderstand what any of us are saying if you think for a moment that anyone is suggesting that your transgressions (as summarised here) were not very serious akusala kamma patha. The Buddha taught us to see the danger in the slightest fault and we learn about ordinary lobha (as now while we write or in the sunglasses episode Herman referred to) and extra-ordinary lobha (as in your example). >>>>>> What did Phil do? Drugs? Well, Sarakani failed in training (disrobed) and was given to drink. Eventually he became a sotapanna. Some people became Arahants even though they comitted suicide (Citta, Vakkhali) due to being unable to tolerate the pain. What is important is to recover and move on! Don't give up! > The sotapanna (or the one well on the way to becoming a sotapanna) will not perform such transgressions because of the keen understanding of akusala arising at the present moment. > .... Sarakani? > > S: The point is, as I mentioned in another post, the feeling upset and sorry is totally useless. >>> Asking for forgiveness is important and making a determination not to do it again may require factors such as: feeling upset and sorry. Phil don't give up! Best wishes, Alex #86912 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ajan Sujin - is she dangerous and destroying the Buddha Sangha? truth_aerator Hi Ray, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Raymond Hendrickson" wrote: But it is very distressing to see a Buddhist Monk, representing the Sangha we take refuge in, using such harsh speech and gossip in a message posted on an open message board. >>>> One of the monk's duty is to teach the Dhamma and point out what is contrary to the Dhamma. Best wishes, Alex #86913 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:21 am Subject: Re: Ajan Sujin - is she dangerous and destroying the Buddha Sangha? szmicio dear Alex, thank you very much I think this link is correct: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/bmc1/bmc1.intro.html > Anyhow, Buddha is the guide. Not this or that teacher! This was a > decision made at the 2nd Buddhist council. I like this story very much: "Once The Buddha giving Dhamma to some people. And when he finished He asked His friend Sariputta: "Do you belive me?" Sariputta just smiled and said: "No, I dont belive you, but I will examine it" This story is not from Tipitaka, I think so. I have heard it a few years ago from my friend. So it's second hand story :> bye, Lukas #86914 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:42 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN2 jonoabb Hi Antony --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Antony Woods" wrote: > > Hi Herman, Jon, Sarah, > > Regarding emergency sirens (which in recent weeks have happily helped > me remember my dana to the Rural Fire Service which was in order to > practice as if my head is on fire) I have some more thoughts to share: > > When there is a tragedy, usually on the TV but even if it is hearing > the siren when outdoors, people often think that they are being > compassionate by watching it, when often the most compassionate thing > you can do is to turn off the TV or note the siren as hearing so as to > return to the work at hand. > > Great topic! > > With metta / Antony. Thanks for coming in here. I agree, great topic ;-)). Nice to see you on the list again. Jon #86915 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:45 am Subject: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. jonoabb Hi Herman > As you have explained it, I see no inconsistency between anatta and > kamma. Kamma is "only" a subset of anatta, it identifies a specific > causal connection between certain experiences. This applies only at > the level of experience at which it was explained, and thus is not > relevant to a level where there is thinking in terms of self and other > (selves), if I have understood you correctly. > > If I have understood you correctly, thank you for explaining. If not, > feel free to explain some more :-) I'm not sure whether we are on the same page or not. Let me add something to what I said in my earlier post that may help answer that. I said: My understanding of kamma is that it refers to the intention accompanying kusala and akusala consciousness, and that this intention conditions the later arising of certain types of consciousness such as the experiencing of objects through the sense-doors (called 'vipaka' consciousness); and furthermore that all such vipaka consciousness is conditioned by prior intention (kamma). What I would add, in case it was not clear, is that the vipaka consciousness conditioned by the kamma intention arises in the same stream of consciousness as the intention. Don't know if this makes any difference to your understanding of what I said earlier. Jon #86916 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Arahants and continued survival jonoabb Hi Herman > Awww, man!! This just happens to be the next post I had marked for > reply, and my post of a few minutes ago in no way referenced anything > you say here. But as I see it, in this post you blow away the whole > explanation of annata and kamma that I agreed with. > > You re-introduce here the spectre of kamma that belongs to and follows > a being, a notion which you were at pains to distance yourself from in > the other thread. You've lost me again, Jon, I'm afraid :-) Sorry for blowing a hole in our newly found agreement ;-)) I'm not aware of trying to distance myself from the idea that, in conventional language, a person is heir to his deeds. That is exactly how it appears in the suttas. If I remember correctly, in an earlier post you made a generalisation about no outside influence (if I've got that right), and I commented that this was an extrapolation and not part of the kamma/vipaka doctrine itself. But I do understand the kamma/vipaka relationship as applying only within a single stream of consciousness. Hope that's clear now. Looks like it's back to square one for us in this thread ;-)). Jon #86917 From: "Raymond Hendrickson" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 1:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ajan Sujin - is she dangerous and destroying the Buddha Sangha? bitakarma > > > One of the monk's duty is to teach the Dhamma and point out what is > contrary to the Dhamma. > > > Best wishes, > > Alex > Hi Alex, yes I agree the Buddha often gives that formula for engaging in debates with others. That a monk and should point out what is in agreement with the Dhamma and what is not. I think that is a great guideline for debate Ray #86918 From: "Antony Woods" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 1:37 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN29 antony272b2 Hi Herman, Jon, Sarah, I've never understood this teaching by Mahasi Sayadaw: "It is necessary for a yogi to behave like a deaf person also. Ordinarily, as soon as a person hears a sound, he turns around and looks in the direction from which the sound came, or he turns towards the person who spoke to him and makes a reply. He does not behave in a sedate manner. A deaf person, on the other hand, behaves in a composed manner. He does not take heed of any sound or talk because he never hears them. Similarly, a yogi should conduct himself in like manner without taking heed of any unimportant talk, nor should he deliberately listen to any talk or speech. If he happens to hear any sound or speech, he should at once make a note as "hearing, hearing," and then return to the usual practice of noting "rising, falling." He should proceed with his contemplation intently, so much so as to be mistaken for a deaf person." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mahasi/wheel370.html From: Satipatthana Vipassana By Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw For Free Distribution, as a gift of Dhamma, from Access to Insight and the Buddhist Publication Society http://www.bps.lk --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Jon and Antony, > > 2008/6/12 jonoabb : > > Hi Herman > > > > Thanks for inviting me to comment. You have raised the sunglasses > > incident before, so perhaps it carries some significance for you ;-)) > > > > No, not especially. As I said, I read Antony's link to a previous > post, and it triggered some memories. After reading Antony's post, I > can now also tell you what I ate and drank that day, but neither that > or the sunglasses-gate incident carry any significance for me. > > > You mention "selective non-association" in connection with the comment > > about sound of a siren being only sound (I've not heard that > > expression before, but I think I know what you mean). > > > > Let me assure you that there is absolutely no aspect of > > "non-association" involved in the idea of dhammas being seen as only > > dhammas. > > > > To my understanding, the enlightened being may still be reminded of > > human suffering on hearing an ambulance siren, even though he no > > longer takes the sound of the siren as being anything other than just > > sound. This is because understanding dhammas as dhammas does not > > "interfere" with the conceptualisation of sense-door impressions into > > a world of people and things. > > > > To put that another way, the understanding of dhammas as dhammas does > > not involve the conventional world being deconstructed into unrelated > > little pieces. > > > > On my reading of the texts, it is a matter of things being seen more > > clearly as they truly are, that is to say, with less ignorance and > > wrong view (but otherwise with the normal associations being made > > between conventional objects). > > > > Hoping this clarifies.\ > > It does, to some extent. But I do not "buy" the hearing of "only > sound" being followed by an announcement to an other self that this > was the case. Communication is based on self-view, in the context of > other selves. A person in a social context announcing that a signal > was not a signal, is a sign of bad faith, not insight. > > I know and accept it is possible for red to be only red, green to be > only green, and a sound to be only sound. But Jon, in a social > context, red means stop, green means go, a siren means get out of the > way. Neither Sarah or KS have any business disassociating in public. > The Buddha said quite a lot about seeking out the base of trees and > empty huts. He said nothing about abhidhamma in daily life. I think it > is quite dangerous for anyone to suggest that He did. > > Cheers > > > Herman > #86919 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 1:39 pm Subject: Stopping akusala buddhatrue Hi Sarah (and Phil, Ven. P), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Why do such transgressions occur in the case of someone like you, with a keen interest in Dhamma? Simply the accumulations for akusala are so strong and the understanding, hiri and ottappa (moral shame and rectitude) are not developed enough to see the danger in accumulating such tendencies from moment to moment. The sotapanna (or the one well on the way to becoming a sotapanna) will not perform such transgressions because of the keen understanding of akusala arising at the present moment. James: These are just empty words. Who asked for an explanation about why it happened? Why are you so sure that you know the reasons for why it happened? What difference does this make if you do know why it happened? Sarah, this is a significant problem with your approach to the Dhamma, it is just descriptive and not proscriptive. The reasons why this happened are not nearly as important as what to do to make sure it doesn't happen again. What will stop this from happening again is developing Right View. And I mean the Buddha's version of Right View, not your "descriptive" version of Right View. Right View is knowing that negative actions have negative consequences. The Buddha taught so strongly and so often about the states of woe so that people would be afraid of committing transgressions and therefore wouldn't be reborn there. No one wants to suffer so, knowing that, they don't do evil deeds. The Buddha didn't go into long descriptions of mental states during moments of transgressions. Who cares?! This relates to what Ven. P wrote recently about monks with the wrong attitude toward the Vinaya. A descriptive, dhammas only, approach to the Dhamma doesn't work because it removes the human element. It all becomes a world of ideas rather than a world of real consequences. Though KS doesn't encourage monks to break the Vinaya, her emphasis on "accumulations" "conditions" and "panna" creates the mind set where breaking the Vinaya is no big deal anymore..."It's all conditions". > .... > .... > S: The point is, as I mentioned in another post, the feeling upset and sorry is totally useless. James: Here I couldn't disagree with you more! The Buddha taught that when one commits a transgression they should feel shameful and sorry for it. They should also apologize, with real feeling, to those they have hurt. This is specifically detailed in the Vinaya. Sariputta, an arahant, even apologized to a fellow monk for causing that monk distress- even though Sariputta didn't intend the harm. Moral shame and dread are just what they say: Moral SHAME and DREAD. Of course, you don't have to wallow in shame and dread for a long time after the transgression, especially if you learned your lesson. But, if you feel the potential for the same transgression is there in your mind, then don't put shame and dread away just yet (apologies for my lack of Abhidhamma specifics ;-). Wisely reflecting on the importance of metta and consideration and not hurting other people is very important. So too is the understanding of the very dhammas arising then and there. This is the way we learn to understand our tendencies, so that the harm in akusala is known. James: Again, these are just empty words. Thinking and thinking and thinking about akusala isn't going to do anything to stop it. It doesn't matter how much you understand akusala- that could just make you a very smart killer. > ... > S: It almost sounds as though you think we condone akusala behaviour as you have described! The Buddha taught us to see the harm in the smallest akusala, but we also have to accept that people do behave the way they do by conditions and accumulations. James: NO, there is no "but" here! We must see the harm in the smallest akusala, period. When you start talking about "conditions" and "accumulations" you are condoning any type of akusala behavior. Conditions and accumulations are not an excuse for akusala behavior. They don't matter; don't bring them up. Everyone has their own way. Can I say anything that will prevent you from repeating such a transgression in future? No, James: Well, you could remind him that such transgressions could result in being reborn as a suffering animal or in a hell realm where he will suffer for thousands of eons*. That could prevent him more than saying "It all depends on conditions". all I can do is to stress the great harm of such deeds and the importance of really understanding realities now, including the lesser tendencies of such akusala. It will be up to your panna to really see the harm in such deeds or tendencies. James: It will not be panna which stops akusala behavior in the unenlightened. The unenlightened don't have any panna to any significant degree. It will be moral shame and dread which stops akusala behavior. Metta, James * And to minimize the negative kamma vipaka of the past transgression, metta meditation can neutralize, wash out, the negative effects (as the Buddha taught). #86920 From: "Antony Woods" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:02 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN29 antony272b2 Hi Herman, Jon, Sarah, Sarah's comment during the siren "It's just hearing" was with a sense of humor rather than being deadly serious, which makes a big difference to the meaning doesn't it? With metta / Antony. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Jon and Antony, > > 2008/6/12 jonoabb : > > Hi Herman > > > > Thanks for inviting me to comment. You have raised the sunglasses > > incident before, so perhaps it carries some significance for you ;-)) > > > > No, not especially. As I said, I read Antony's link to a previous > post, and it triggered some memories. After reading Antony's post, I > can now also tell you what I ate and drank that day, but neither that > or the sunglasses-gate incident carry any significance for me. > > > You mention "selective non-association" in connection with the comment > > about sound of a siren being only sound (I've not heard that > > expression before, but I think I know what you mean). > > > > Let me assure you that there is absolutely no aspect of > > "non-association" involved in the idea of dhammas being seen as only > > dhammas. > > #86921 From: "Antony Woods" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:17 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN29 antony272b2 Hi Jon, Herman, Sarah, In another post I wrote: "Sarah's comment during the siren "It's just hearing" was with a sense of humor rather than being deadly serious, which makes a big difference to the meaning doesn't it?" It might be helpful to take the alternative to the absurd: "Oh No there's a siren! Quick let's radiate some compassion!" with metta / Antony. #86922 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:27 pm Subject: Re: Nina and others - Nothing could be more preposterous kenhowardau Dear Ven. Pannabhulo, If you had read Nina's post a little more carefully you would have seen that she was quoting me. It was I who referred to your "latest effort" and who called it "inflamatory." So all of your rebukes should have been addressed to me. I realise, however, that I am just a small fish in this pond, and you probably aren't interested in anything I might have to say. Before sending that other post, I did consider the possibility that it was libellously misrepresenting you. Therefore, I went back to your original message and reread it. You had written: "There is a Thai monk who now teaches Western meditators. He is a great follower of Ajan Sujin. His vinaya is extremely loose.Handling money is OK; watching movies; eating whenever one feels like it, and so on. He claims that the Vinaya is a set of conditions that no longer apply to modern times." (end quote) It seemed obvious to me that you were saying the monk had acquired his opinions from A Sujin. I considered the possibility that I was misreading you, but on close examination, I was still sure that was indeed what you were asserting. Now you say I was wrong and you were not saying that at all. Therefore, I take it all back. Please accept my apologies. Before closing, I would like to assure you that your criticisms of A Sujin are very welcome at DSG. I notice you wrote the following, but I want to set the record straight: Ven. P: > Time and time again I have been warned - mostly off-line - that Ajan Sujin's devotees are closed to any form of critical comment. Usually such reactions are due to very deep insecurities in their viewpoints. Whatever; there is something in all of this that smells very strongly of a 'sect'. And 'sects' have little to do with the Lord Buddha's Dhamma which necessarily is concerned with natural laws which are applicable to all." (end quote) I can say without reservation that all genuine questions and allegations about A Sujin and about DSG are dealt with fully and unemotionally on the list. The problem the detractors have, if I may say so, is that all allegations have been seen, on examination, to be without substance. And so that leaves the detractors without a leg to stand on. That has always been DSG's best form of defence. If you have any doubts about DSG's (or K Sujin's) propriety, please voice them. You will be guaranteed of a fair hearing and a decorous unemotional response. Ken H #86923 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 6:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction - EXAMINE PALI please dhammanusarin Dear Alex (and Herman, ..) - Thank you very much for the fair suggestions/comments. > > Alex: > Can someone analyze that Pali words (interpreted as satisfaction and annoyance) used in those suttas? > > > It may be inappropriate to install ones beliefs onto the texts, > whatever they may be, and it includes Alex's take as well. > > > > ================== > Anatalakkhana sutta may be AFFIRMING rather than denying true > Upanishadic Atman (while denying the heretical attaditthi). > Heck, he also called himself a Vedagu (Skilled in Vedas). Of course > of course everyone today will say, lets reinterpret the Vedas to be > the Buddhist (as opposed to Hindu) texts... > > > Alex: > The more I scrutinize the suttas and the Buddha's teaching, the more unsure I get. Remember, we must be careful not to install modern > ideas onto the cultural mileau of ancient India in which Buddha was > teaching. He was preaching to Hindus and Brahmins, not us. > > ............. T: It is always good to have a chance to examine the original meanings in the Pali text (although I still do not understand it fully). BTW, I think I have become less unsure about the Buddha's Teachings and the Tathagata than before, after having reviewed the suttas with deeper contemplation several times so far. However, the thinking like that might easily be tainted by delusion. Delusion can make one feel very wise, sometimes. ;-)) Tep === #86924 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 7:20 pm Subject: Re: Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction dhammanusarin Dear Connie (Alex and Herman), - I understand "Konda~n~na truly has understood" means he has attained yathabhuta~nana at that moment. On such occasion the kindest Teacher must have a sense of accomplishment associated with mudita, rather than being satisfied ("the bhikkhus satisfied my mind"). What in your opinion is a Pali word that better describes the Teacher's mental state? If you don't mind, please let me ask a few more questions out of curiosity. What does the "domain of mindfulness" represent? Does "surpassing of resentment and gratification" mean overcoming abhijjhá-domanassa ? Thanks. Tep === #86925 From: "gazita2002" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 7:27 pm Subject: Re: Ajan Sujin - is she dangerous and destroying the Buddha Sangha? gazita2002 Hello James, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Azita, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" > wrote: > > > > hello Ven.Pannabahulo and James. > > > > Have read these with a certain amt of distress, not so much for > what > > is being said about A.Sujin but more for what you may be doing to > > yourselves. > > Its fine to disagree about someones style of teaching but I > believe > > its another ball game to be virtually condeming that person. Are > > either of you aware of what damage you may be doing to yourselves? > > James: I hope that you are not wishing either one of us harm. You > should only wish the best for both of us; no matter what we say. Azita: you are a funny defensive one James. The main reason I wrote was to remind you that the 4th precept mentions harsh speech as part of kamma by way of speech. i guess i've known you long enuff to know your style of writing and should be used to it by now; I cringe when I read some of the comments people on this group make towards each other. But thats life eh? Ven P wrote to me offlist so I have replied to him, in a gentle manner :-) May all beings be happy, azita #86926 From: "gazita2002" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 7:33 pm Subject: Re: Ajan Sujin - is she dangerous and destroying the Buddha Sangha? gazita2002 Hello Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > > Hi Gazita and all, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" > wrote: > > > > hello Ven.Pannabahulo and James. > > > Have read these with a certain amt of distress, not so much for what > is being said about A.Sujin but more for what you may be doing to > yourselves. Its fine to disagree about someones style of teaching but > I believe its another ball game to be virtually condeming that > person. Are either of you aware of what damage you may be doing to > yourselves? IMHO, its far better to accept that you disagree and > well - leave it at that. I guess by writing this I may be doing > exactly what I'm advising against, but I dont feel any malice in > this, just wnated to bring to your attention that its dangerous > ground you are walking on. I notice you both sign off with 'metta' > but I dont see much metta in your posts. > > > > Patience, courage and good cheer, > > azita. > > > > > > > It is one of the monk's duty to point at what is Dhamma and what > isn't. Azita: Ven P wrote me off list and I have replied to him mentioning jst that, among other things. My main concern was not that he was pointing out something that he disagreed with, but the harsh way in which it was done. Enuff from me on this point. May all beings be happy, azita #86927 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 9:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Standpoints - A little crisis I am having egberdina Hi Alex, 2008/6/12 Alex : > Hi Herman and all, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" > wrote: > The sutta says what is says. I offered it to Alex as an antidote to > some of his epistemological questions. And now I would like to relate > it to some things you have said and asked recently. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > I have a little crisis going on. In some verses Buddha has said that > he has no view points, no ditthi-s, etc. If you have set yourself a goal of reconciling every view found within the canon and ancillary texts, in order to come up with a definitive "what the Buddha taught" then you have set yourself an impossible task, I believe. Because, let's face it, the canon and commentaries are a thicket of views. And this is quite understandable, given the origins of Buddhism. You often point out, quite correctly, the Vedic and Brahmanical roots of Buddhism, and it is therefore of little wonder that traces of many different belief systems are to be found in the texts. What is also obvious in the study of the texts is that they have a differential history, they were not all written at once. There is a traceable evolution of thought in the texts. Ideas and notions in the later works are not present in the earlier texts. This is to be expected in a living tradition. But back to my opening line. It is, of course, not necessary to come up with a rock-solid, unassailable understanding of Buddhism. Not that there is anything wrong with having an academic interest in a certain subject, and becoming knowledgeable on it. But acquiring knowledge about Buddhism is to use it for a purpose it wasn't intended. It would be like collecting marbles, but never playing with them, or hoarding money, and never spending any. The Buddha taught what he taught in order to end suffering. If a text you are studying has no bearing on that purpose, I'd say put it away. If a view you are considering has no bearing on the cessation of suffering, I'd say attend to something else. If a practice you are engaging in does not lead to joy, cease doing what you are doing. And if you are free from suffering, no need to do anything :-) Cheers Herman #86928 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 9:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations: Epiphenomenalist Explanation Requested egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/6/12 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > > *Note 10: "Here aarama.na does not have its familiar meaning of > 'object', but its original literal meaning of 'hold' or 'support'. AA > glosses it as condition (paccaya). 'Name-and-form' (naama-ruupa) is > explained by AA as the four mental aggregates (='name') and the four > material elements with their material derivatives (='form'); these are > the conditions for the arising of purposive thoughts." > > **Note 11: "An explanation derived from AA is as follows: The > elements (dhaatu) are the six sense objects, forms, sounds, etc. > 'Contact' is the contact associated with such thoughts. They converge > on feeling (vedanaa-samosara.naa) because feeling, the affective value > of an experience (as pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral), holds the > various aspects of a conscious moment together. Concentration is the > 'head' (samaadhi-pamukhaa) in the sense of playing the key role in > bringing the mind to its highest intensity. Mindfulness is said to be > the 'master' (sataadhipateyyaa) to emphasize its dominant role in > mastery of the mind. Wisdom is 'the climax' (pa~n~nuttaraa) because > it is wisdom that issues in the attainment of the supramundane path. > Liberation is the 'essence' or core (vimutti-saaraa), the goal in > which the path culminates; according to AA, the essence or core is the > fruition stage of emancipation (phala-vimutti). All these thoughts > are said to 'merge in the Deathless' (amatogadha) because the 'merge > with' Nibbaana by taking it as object (in the path and fruit) and > because they are established upon it." > Before I go any further, the notes above, where are they from? Cheers Herman #86929 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 9:15 pm Subject: Re: Ajan Sujin - is she dangerous and destroying the Buddha Sangha? buddhatrue Hi Azita, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > Azita: you are a funny defensive one James. The main reason I wrote > was to remind you that the 4th precept mentions harsh speech as part > of kamma by way of speech. James: Well, there wasn't anything in what I wrote or in what Ven. P wrote that could be considered harsh speech. Are you made of delicate glass such that any strong/forceful word or tone will make you break into a thousand pieces? Charges of "harsh speech" and "negative kamma vipaka" are used too often by members in a passive-agressive manner to attack and put others on the defensive. Azita, you are not a Buddha so you are not qualified to state what is harsh speech or what will cause negative kamma vipaka. Some people are just too sensitive for their own good. Metta, James #86930 From: "pannabahulo" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 9:40 pm Subject: response to hate mail etc pannabahulo To one and all, I would like to point out that I have always shown, and acknowledged, my respect for Ajan Sujin. However,I have seen the effects on others who adhere to the strict and narrow viewpoint that one must have a true understanding of non-self before approaching the study and practice of the Lord Buddha's Dhamma and that this necessarily involves the understanding that everything is conditioned. I do not have any dispute with this whatsoever.But to begin from this point of view does cause some very serious misunderstandings.And it is quite obvious to me that so many people are being introduced to these ideas without even having a basic grasp of the Four Noble Truths and The Noble eightfold Path. It is worthwhile for you to all re-read the 'Anattalakkhana Sutta' to see the way that the Lord Buddha presented this unique teaching. You will note that it was done by reasoning and logical argument. The extreme way that this subject is dealt with on DSG and at the Foundation discussions has led to some very serious misunderstandings. Further,it has resulted in many lazy monks and lay-people no longer bothering with meditation practice as they can use Ajan Sujin's position to defend themselves. The Buddha never taught anyone to abandon meditation which he saw as integral to any progress on the Path. This is one reason I say that Ajan Sujin does not follow the teachings of the Lord Buddha. In the last group discussion I attended,the Ven Guttasila was trying to make the same point re: anapanasati.He was unable to pursue the matter because the meeting ended due to time restrictions. In no way was I blaming the Thai monk's lack of Vinaya on Ajan Sujin. But I was pointing out that the insistence on drawing attention to the 'conditioned 'nature of any phenomena can be - and is -used as a justification for doing whatever one likes. My friend David had a largely Hindu influenced background;what he returned to the US with was this emphasis on 'conditions' without any other understanding of the Dhamma.This absolves one from any form of responsibility (Because there is no self and all is just conditions). I raised my concerns at the Foundation but could not get my point understood. Very recently I have been extremely dismayed to see keen meditators being dissuaded from meditation and given Ajan Sujin's books to read instead.Finding the books to dry and difficult to understand,they spent their time in non Dhammic ways. As to the 'Hate mail' I have received on this site i.e. people whining about bad speech and the 4th precept - that is also not true.I SIMPLY STED THE TRUTH AS I SEE IT. The fact that so many of you react so violently to any criticism of Ajan Sujin must show you how attached to her - and to yourselves you are. Attachment to views, your own 'moral outrages,'to what you think a monk shoud say' and so on - all this should show you clearly that the Ajan Sujin way is not working for you. I wrote my first letter from the heart.I was simply telling the truth as I see it. But it now seems that the only defence that so many of you have is to say that the way I write is unsuitable. But that is my style and nobody has ever complained about it before on DSG. Much better you take heed of what I say. The rest is emotional reactions. I appologise to all if there is any point that I have made in a way that is offensive. That was never my intention. And I am sorry Howard for not seeing your letter. Following a theme on this site is extremely difficult. I just search under 'Pannabahulo' and - for some reason - your letter does not come up. Hopefully I have clarified things once and for all With all the blessings of Thr Triple Gem, Pannabahulo #86931 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/6/12 : > Hi, Herman (and Sukin) - > > > But before I get too respectful :-), allow me to question 50% of what > you say here. I fully agree with you that craving arises at almost > every turn. But I have no idea what reality you are referring to when > you say the exact same thing about ignorance. And because you include > something that is so utterly meaningless to me, I wonder whether we > actually agree about the craving bit. So, could I ask you , > respectfully, what you mean when you say that ignorance arises > --------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Herman, are you objecting because you view ignorance not as an active > condition but, as the word-syntax suggests, an absence? If so, isn't it > possible that avijja is more than an absence, and that it is an active obscuring and > misperceiving? > ---------------------------------------------------------- Yes, I read ignorance to be an absence, and therefore it doesn't make sense to say that this absence arises. How does ignorance as an active condition fit into a phenomenalist perspective, I wonder? > > The baby knows ONLY the present moment, what more do you want? Isn't > this the state of knowing parramattha dhammas that dsg'ers clamour for > in their twos and threes? :-) (The smiley is for the turn of phrase, > not the sentiment expressed). > ------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > An infant is, emotionally, all about "me," and that is the case very, > very strongly. Sense of self is not only deeply rooted in an infant, but is > actively being expressed in terms of emotional (and physical) grasping and > pushing away almost all the time. In fact, just consider how an adult who is all > about himself/herself is described as "childish". > ------------------------------------------------------ We see things differently here. I see a baby as a bundle of craving and aversion, with no means of mitigating those cravings and aversions, and lacking any psychological sense of self whatsoever. To a third party, already possessed of a sense of self, the baby may be all about "me", but this is not so for the baby, I believe. It is the craving and aversion which play a role in the psychological birth of the person, as a being with a sense of self, able to mitigate those drives as a self. It is not the sense of self which gives rise to the craving and aversion. I believe this is also reflected in the structure of DO. Cheers Herman #86932 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations: Epiphenomenalist Explanation Requested scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Regarding: H: "Before I go any further, the notes above, where are they from?" Scott: My apologies, man. Sloppy of me. Numerical Discourses of the Buddha, An Anthology of Suttas from the A"nguttara Nikaaya. Translated and edited by Nyanaponika Thera and Bhikkhu Bodhi, p. 308. Sincerely, Scott. #86933 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/6/12 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > This sutta was tranlated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu: > > H: "From AN9:34. (My CAPS) > > > Scott: In highlighting Thanissaro Bhikkhu's editorialisation, there is > tacit agreement with it. You present an interesting, but invalid, line of reasoning here. The truth of the matter is that I didn't know who the translator of the sutta was, and I didn't go shopping for the translation that suited my purposes best. His basis for his choice to use 'line of > reasoning' for the Paa.li is unknown: So you argue. > At any rate, this is all moot to me. It seems to me that it isn't all moot to you. You have expended quite some effort to arrive at a translation which is acceptable to you. Now that you have an acceptable translation, what are you going to do with it? The Epiphenomenalist view is > essentially incompatible with the Dhamma. Why? Because it holds that > naama is a) a side-effect of of physical states (ruupa) and, b) that > naama can only be effect, not cause. With this view, it is > inconceivable that any sutta is cited in to support the > Epiphenomenalist view, since, even in the above, the suttas are > replete with the suggestion that naama is not only primary, but a > clear cause as well. I'm sorry, but I just don't see what is so self-evident to you. In fact I think you see things that aren't there. Can we take DO to be a representative teaching, overarching all suttas? It is explicit that vinnana and namarupa are mutually conditioning, and it is also explicit that it is namarupa that conditions the ayatanas, etc and NOT vinnana. Can we get back on track now, and discuss the relevance of the setting to the teachings in MN121 ? Cheers Herman #86934 From: "Raymond Hendrickson" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 12:04 am Subject: RE: [dsg] response to hate mail etc bitakarma Pannabahulo writes, > > As to the 'Hate mail' I have received on this site i.e. people whining > about bad speech and the 4th precept - that is also not true.I SIMPLY > STED THE TRUTH AS I SEE IT. The fact that so many of you react so > violently to any criticism of Ajan Sujin must show you how attached to > her - and to yourselves you are. > Attachment to views, your own 'moral outrages,'to what you think a > monk shoud say' and so on - all this should show you clearly that the > Ajan Sujin way is not working for you. > In so much as any part of this comment is directed towards my post, I would like to state that I have not read and do not know the teachings of Ajan Sujin. So any attachment I have to myself is my own doing and alas I cannot blame such attachments on following the teachings of Ajan Sujin. ... Ra #86935 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN2 egberdina Hi Antony (and Sarah), 2008/6/13 Antony Woods : > Hi Herman, Jon, Sarah, > > Sarah's comment during the siren "It's just hearing" was with a sense > of humor rather than being deadly serious, which makes a big > difference to the meaning doesn't it? > As I said at the start, I was sorry to drag you into this, I understand you were only the messenger. I do not think you said anything that was bad or unskilful or out of place. Hopefully in the next few days, it will become clear that the issue is not what Sarah did or didn't do or say, but the belief systems that underlie certain oft repeated behaviours. Cheers Herman #86936 From: "R. K. Wijayaratne" Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 5:38 pm Subject: The Great Discourse on the Lion's Roar - V * rwijayaratne Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammâ Sambuddhassa! Sakyamuni Sambuddha Vihara <...> ________________________________ Taken from AccessToInsight.org1 Translated from Pali by Ñanamoli Thera & Bhikkhu Bodhi THE GREAT DISCOURSE ON THE LION'S ROAR - V Majjhima Nikâya 12 - Maha-sihanada Sutta2 The Eight AssembliesContinued from previous instalment Commentary: This instalment covers how a Samma-Sambuddha is able to approach, enter and talk with any kind of assembly/gathering of beings due to the four kinds of fearlessness/intrepidity that only a Samma-Sambuddha possesses, which were covered in the previous instalment. 29. "Sariputta, there are these eight assemblies. What are the eight? An assembly of nobles, an assembly of brahmans, an assembly of householders, an assembly of recluses, an assembly of gods of the heaven of the Four Great Kings, an assembly of gods of the heaven of the Thirty-three, an assembly of Mâra's retinue, an assembly of Brahmas.3 Possessing these four kinds of intrepidity, the Tathâgata (Buddha) approaches and enters these eight assemblies. Explanation: The Lord Buddha describes to Ven. Sâriputta the eight kinds of assemblies/gatherings of beings, viz. assemblies/gatherings of noble people, brahmans, lay-people, religious practitioners, divine beings of the heaven of the Four Great Kings, divine beings of the heaven of the Thirty-three, followers of Mâra, Brahmas (very advanced divine beings).3 The Lord Buddha says that he enters these eight assemblies/gatherings with the four kinds of fearlessness/intrepidity. 30. "I recall having approached many hundred assemblies of nobles... many hundred assemblies of brahmans... many hundred assemblies of householders... many hundred assemblies of recluses... many hundred assemblies of gods of the heaven of the Four Great Kings... many hundred assemblies of gods of the heaven of the Thirty-three... many hundred assemblies of Mâra's retinue... many hundred assemblies of Brahmas.3 And formerly I had sat with them there and talked with them and held conversations with them, yet I see no ground for thinking that fear or timidity might come upon me there. And seeing no ground for that, I abide in safety, fearlessness and intrepidity. [73] Explanation: The Lord Buddha says that he remembers approaching many hundreds of assemblies/gatherings of noble people, brahmans, lay-people, religious practitioners, divine beings of the heaven of the Four Great Kings, divine beings of the heaven of the Thirty-three, followers of Mâra, Brahmas (very advanced divine beings).3 The Lord Buddha says that he sat and talked with the being in all these assemblies/gatherings, but found no grounds for fear to come upon him while he was there, and because of this abides/lives safety and fearlessness. 31. "Sâriputta, when I know and see thus, should anyone say of me: 'The recluse Gotama does not have any superhuman states, any distinction in knowledge and vision worthy of the noble ones. The recluse Gotama (Lord Buddha's name) teaches a Dhamma (merely) hammered out by reasoning, following his own line of inquiry as it occurs to him' — unless he abandons that assertion and that state of mind and relinquishes that view, then as (surely as if he had been) carried off and put there he will wind up in hell.5 Just as a bhikkhu (monk) possessed of virtue, concentration and wisdom would here and now enjoy final knowledge, so it will happen in this case, I say, that unless he abandons that assertion and that state of mind and relinquishes that view, then as (surely as if he had been) carried off and put there he will wind up in hell. Explanation: The Lord Buddha explains to Ven. Sâriputta that if anyone were to wrongly say that the Lord Buddha did not have any superhuman powers, higher knowledges that a high/noble one can have and only teaches the Dhamma from reasoning, following a line of investigation and if that person does not abandon this opinion/view, then as if s/he were carried off and put there s/he would go to hell after death; in the same way a monk who posses virtue/morality (sîla), concentration (samâdhi) and wisdom (paññâ) would be assured of final knowledge/realization (Nibbâna) right here and now. <....> Notes1. More suttas from AccessToInsight.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/mn/mn.012.ntbb.html and an alternate translation of this sutta can be found here http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima1/012-ma\ hasihanada-sutta-e1.html 3. Also refer to The Thirty-one Planes of Existence here http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sagga/loka.html <....> #86937 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 12:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Stopping akusala sarahprocter... Hi James, --- On Fri, 13/6/08, buddhatrue wrote: J:> What will stop this from happening again is developing Right View. And I mean the Buddha's version of Right View,<...> .... S: We agree on this at least:-) .... James: <...> Moral shame and dread are just what they say: Moral SHAME and DREAD. <...> .... J:> It will be moral shame and dread which stops akusala behavior. .... S: It's very important to stress the mental factors of hiri and ottappa as you do here. I fully agree. When there is any akusala of any kind, there is no hiri or ottappa. I don't mind how these qualities are translated, but let's be very clear that they are 'beautiful' (sobhana) mental factors and there is no aversion or unpleasant feeling, so no fear, shame or dread as we are used to thinking of such qualities, involved. Thanks for your other comments. I'll look forward to further discussion on right view (panna/samma ditthi), moral shame (hiri) and rectitude (ottappa). Even now as we 'speak', we can consider such qualities wisely. This is a form of meditation too. Metta, Sarah ======== #86938 From: "pannabahulo" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 12:55 am Subject: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition pannabahulo To one and all, I would like to point out that I have always shown, and acknowledged, my respect for Ajan Sujin. However,I have seen the effects on others who adhere to the strict and narrow viewpoint that one must have a true understanding of non-self before approaching the study and practice of the Lord Buddha's Dhamma and that this necessarily involves the understanding that everything is conditioned. I do not have any dispute with this whatsoever.But to begin from this point of view does cause some very serious misunderstandings.And it is quite obvious to me that so many people are being introduced to these ideas without even having a basic grasp of the Four Noble Truths and The Noble eightfold Path. It is worthwhile for you to all re-read the 'Anattalakkhana Sutta' to see the way that the Lord Buddha presented this unique teaching. You will note that it was done by reasoning and logical argument. The extreme way that this subject is dealt with on DSG and at the Foundation discussions has led to some very serious misunderstandings. Further,it has resulted in many lazy monks and lay-people no longer bothering with meditation practice as they can use Ajan Sujin's position to defend themselves. The Buddha never taught anyone to abandon meditation which he saw as integral to any progress on the Path. This is one reason I say that Ajan Sujin does not follow the teachings of the Lord Buddha. In the last group discussion I attended,the Ven Guttasila was trying to make the same point re: anapanasati.He was unable to pursue the matter because the meeting ended due to time restrictions. In no way was I blaming the Thai monk's lack of Vinaya on Ajan Sujin. But I was pointing out that the insistence on drawing attention to the 'conditioned 'nature of any phenomena can be - and is -used as a justification for doing whatever one likes. My friend David had a largely Hindu influenced background;what he returned to the US with was this emphasis on 'conditions' without any other understanding of the Dhamma.This absolves one from any form of responsibility (Because there is no self and all is just conditions). I raised my concerns at the Foundation but could not get my point understood. Very recently I have been extremely dismayed to see keen meditators being dissuaded from meditation and given Ajan Sujin's books to read instead.Finding the books too dry and difficult to understand,they spent their time in non Dhammic ways. As to the 'Hate mail' I have received on this site i.e. people whining about bad speech and the 4th precept - that is also not true.I SIMPLY STATED THE TRUTH AS I SEE IT. The fact that so many of you react so violently to any criticism of Ajan Sujin must show you how attached to her - and to yourselves and your viewpoints you are. Attachment to views, your own 'moral outrages,'to what you think a monk shoud say' and so on - all this should show you clearly that the Ajan Sujin way is not working for you. I wrote my first letter from the heart.I was simply telling the truth as I see it. But it now seems that the only defence that so many of you have is to say that the way I write is unsuitable. But that is my style and nobody has ever complained about it before on DSG. Much better you take heed of what I am saying. The rest is emotional reaction. I apologise to all if there is any point that I have made in a way that is offensive. That was never my intention. And I am sorry Howard for not seeing your letter. Following a theme on this site is extremely difficult. I just search under 'Pannabahulo' and - for some reason - your letter does not come up. Hopefully I have clarified things once and for all. I now wish to drop out of this forum. Most scholars agree that the Abhidhamma Pitika is a much later work.This almost certainly means the Abhidhamma is not a reord of the Lord Buddha's teachings. With all the blessings of Thr Triple Gem, Pannabahulo #86939 From: "szmicio" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 1:02 am Subject: akusala citta - mana szmicio Is it citta experiences an object and cetasika helps citta? so mana is a cetasika? What is a function of mana? How could we know mana? Is it another citta which is aware of mana or that is panja which accompany mana? Can mana and panja arise together? If there is a thinking of mana should it be known as just thinking? Is there any need to feel averion to mana,to feel any regret? I know that I have so many grief and sorrow that I am so proud and this is against Buddha Dhamma? bye Lukas #86940 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 1:14 am Subject: Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition kenhowardau Dear Ven. Pannabhulo, --------------------------- <. . .> Ven. P: > But it now seems that the only defence that so many of you have is to say that the way I write is unsuitable. ---------------------------- Some people at DSG strongly agree with the perspective on the Dhamma that is found in the ancient commentaries. (This is the perspective that A Sujin and her students favour.) Others strongly disagree with that perspective and favour instead certain meditation techniques. And so this divergence of opinion has become the single most popular discussion topic at DSG. You can see, therefore, that the "defence" you refer to has been overwhelmingly in the form of Dhamma discussion. Only very rarely is "the way people write" involved in the defence (on either side of the argument). I seem to remember a few times where I have overstepped the limits of what some people have regarded as a "suitable way to write." (I have done this especially where the teaching of Ven. Thanissaro has been concerned.) It's all forgotten very quickly. I hope you will stay with DSG. We need robust discussion on *the* vitally important question: namely, 'Was satipatthana - as taught by the Buddha - a matter of meditation technique, or was it panna - a paramattha dhamma that arises purely by conditions and beyond anyone's control?' Ken H #86941 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] response to hate mail etc upasaka_howard Dear Bhante - In a message dated 6/13/2008 12:40:37 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pannabahulo@... writes: And I am sorry Howard for not seeing your letter. Following a theme on this site is extremely difficult. I just search under 'Pannabahulo' and - for some reason - your letter does not come up. ============================ I'm confused - a bit at a loss. What letter are you referring to? I don't recall writing to you very recently. Could you please elaborate, Sir? With metta, Howard #86942 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 4:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] response to hate mail etc kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > > Dear Bhante - > > In a message dated 6/13/2008 12:40:37 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > pannabahulo@... writes: > > And I am sorry Howard for not seeing your letter. Following a theme on > this site is extremely difficult. I just search under 'Pannabahulo' > and - for some reason - your letter does not come up. > > > ============================ > I'm confused - a bit at a loss. What letter are you referring to? I > don't recall writing to you very recently. Could you please elaborate, Sir? > Hi Howard, I think the confusion is explained by my yahoo ID, kenhowardau. People think I am you. Sorry for any besmirching that may have resulted. :-) Ken H #86943 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 12:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 6/13/2008 1:20:18 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/6/12 : > Hi, Herman (and Sukin) - > > > But before I get too respectful :-), allow me to question 50% of what > you say here. I fully agree with you that craving arises at almost > every turn. But I have no idea what reality you are referring to when > you say the exact same thing about ignorance. And because you include > something that is so utterly meaningless to me, I wonder whether we > actually agree about the craving bit. So, could I ask you , > respectfully, what you mean when you say that ignorance arises > --------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Herman, are you objecting because you view ignorance not as an active > condition but, as the word-syntax suggests, an absence? If so, isn't it > possible that avijja is more than an absence, and that it is an active obscuring and > misperceiving? > ---------------------------------------------------------- Yes, I read ignorance to be an absence, and therefore it doesn't make sense to say that this absence arises. How does ignorance as an active condition fit into a phenomenalist perspective, I wonder? ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I wasn't aware of phenomenalism denying mental activities, some very harmful. I see ignorance as a distortion & confusion & obscuration activity (or cluster of activities). I see wisdom as a countering activity (or cluster of activities). Each of these, as I see the matter, opposes the presence of the other in the course of its acting. --------------------------------------------------- > > The baby knows ONLY the present moment, what more do you want? Isn't > this the state of knowing parramattha dhammas that dsg'ers clamour for > in their twos and threes? :-) (The smiley is for the turn of phrase, > not the sentiment expressed). > ------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > An infant is, emotionally, all about "me," and that is the case very, > very strongly. Sense of self is not only deeply rooted in an infant, but is > actively being expressed in terms of emotional (and physical) grasping and > pushing away almost all the time. In fact, just consider how an adult who is all > about himself/herself is described as "childish". > ------------------------------------------------------ We see things differently here. I see a baby as a bundle of craving and aversion, with no means of mitigating those cravings and aversions, and lacking any psychological sense of self whatsoever. To a third party, already possessed of a sense of self, the baby may be all about "me", but this is not so for the baby, I believe. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: As I see it, tanha (including both craving and aversion) is intimately tied to sense of self. (I say "sense" of self, not explicit cognitive self-view.) ---------------------------------------------------------- It is the craving and aversion which play a role in the psychological birth of the person, as a being with a sense of self, able to mitigate those drives as a self. It is not the sense of self which gives rise to the craving and aversion. I believe this is also reflected in the structure of DO. -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Craving, aversion, and attachment, on the one hand, and sense of self, on the other, are, in my view, mutually dependent and reinforcing. In MN 9, for example, the Buddha says not only "From the origination of fermentation comes the origination of ignorance" but also "From the origination of ignorance comes the origination of fermentation," and included within the fermentations is "the fermentation of sensuality," which I take to be the craving for, aversion to, and attachment to sense-door phenomena. ----------------------------------------------------------- Cheers Herman =============================== With metta, Howard #86944 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 12:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] response to hate mail etc upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 6/13/2008 7:03:41 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, I think the confusion is explained by my yahoo ID, kenhowardau. People think I am you. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: That's okay, so long as they don't think that I am you! LOLOL! -------------------------------------------------- Sorry for any besmirching that may have resulted. :-) ------------------------------------- Howard: I guess we're both in trouble! ;-)) ------------------------------------- Ken H ===================== With metta, Howard #86945 From: "connie" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 5:09 am Subject: Perfections Corner (182) nichiconn Dear Friends, ch.5 continues: We read in the Commentary to the "Sa'mvara Jaataka"(no. 462, Khuddhaka Nikaaya): "At that time when the Buddha was dwelling in the Jeta Grove, he told the following story about a monk who had ceased to strive. When he was a young man he lived at Saavatthii, and after he had heard the Buddha preach the Dhamma, he gained confidence and became a monk. Fulfilling the tasks imposed by his teachers and preceptors, he learnt by heart both divisions of the Paatimokkha. After five years when he had learnt the meditation subjects he took leave of his teachers and preceptors because he wanted to dwell in the forest. When he came to a frontier village people took confidence in him because of his deportment and built a hut of leaves for him, so that he could dwell in that village. When it was the rainy season, he developed with strenuous endeavour his meditation subject during three months, but when he did not reach attainment, he thought that he himself was the lowest among the four classes of people, namely those who could only understand the theory of the teachings, 'pada parama' *1. Hence he returned to the Jeta Grove in order to see the Buddha in person and to listen to his delightful Dhamma Discourses. When the Buddha was informed about this he said to that monk, 'The highest fruit in this teaching which is arahatship cannot be realized by someone who is lazy. In the past you were full of energy and easy to teach. Although you were the youngest of all the hundred sons of the King of Vaaraanasi, you obtained the white umbrella and became the King.' " *1 As to the four classes of people: some could attain enlightenment quickly, even at the beginning of a discourse; some could attain after a more detailed explanation; some could attain after having heard many explanations and after having considered the truth again and again; Some could only understand the theory, the words, and did not attain during that life. They are called "pada parama", those for whom the words (pada) are the highest (parama). The monk in the story thought that he was a pada parama. The Buddha then related the story of the past when that monk was King Sa'mvara. The Buddha spoke about his excellent qualities which caused his brothers and the citizens to pay him honour and to make him King, although he was the youngest of the hundred sons of the King of Vaaraanasi. .. to be continued, connie #86946 From: "connie" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 7:10 am Subject: Re: Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction nichiconn Dear Tep, T: I understand "Konda~n~na truly has understood" means he has attained yathabhuta~nana at that moment. On such occasion the kindest Teacher must have a sense of accomplishment associated with mudita, rather than being satisfied ("the bhikkhus satisfied my mind"). What in your opinion is a Pali word that better describes the Teacher's mental state? C: If you twist my arm, I'll holler "equanamous and mindful", but I think knowing "Kond~n~na truly has understood" IS the "sense of accomplishment" / satisfaction. The meaning / aim / purpose of the Teaching was met / satisfied. It's only some kind of 'personal satisfaction' in the sense that the Teaching is the Teacher. So on second thought, no need to twist my arm - He is the Accomplished One. T: If you don't mind, please let me ask a few more questions out of curiosity. What does the "domain of mindfulness" represent? C: Both mindfulness itself and any 'where' it arises. The four foundations, which come down to (present) nama and rupa. T: Does "surpassing of resentment and gratification" mean overcoming abhijjhaa-domanassa ? C: If that's what equanamous means. But I'd change 'overcoming' to 'having overcome'. Dispeller 1014: (2) As regards the passage: "There are three foundations of mindfulness which the Noble One cultivates, and cultivating which the Noble One is a master who is worthy to instruct his flock" (M iii 216, 221), here it is the "threefold suprassing by the Master of resentment and gratification as regards the entry of the disciples [on the way]" that is called the "foundation of mindfulness". The meaning of that is: "foundation" (pa.t.thaana) is because of what should be founded (pa.t.thapetabba); "because of what should be made to occur" is the meaning. Becauseof what should be made to occur by means of what? By means of mindfulness. So "foundation of mindfulness" (sa.tipa.t.thaana) is the "foundation by means of mindfulness" (satiyaa [instr.] pa.t.thaana.m). peace, connie #86947 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 7:41 am Subject: Re: Ignorance & The Baby truth_aerator Hi Howard and Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > ---------------------------------------------------------- Yes, I read ignorance to be an absence, and therefore it doesn't make sense to say that this absence arises. How does ignorance as an active condition fit into a phenomenalist perspective, I wonder? ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: ... I see ignorance as a distortion & confusion & obscuration activity (or cluster of activities). I see wisdom as a countering activity (or cluster of activities). Each of these, as I see the matter, opposes the presence of the other in the course of its acting. > --------------------------------------------------- IMHO the Ignorance is primary an ABSENCE (or, not-presence) of knowledge. A [is not] + vijja [higher knowledge, science] . Not-presence/Absence of the accurate knowledge of 4NT and/or D.O. . Of course later on, Avijja may pile up 'views'. > > The baby knows ONLY the present moment, what more do you want? Isn't this the state of knowing parramattha dhammas that dsg'ers clamour for in their twos and threes? :-) (The smiley is for the turn of phrase, not the sentiment expressed). > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: An infant is, emotionally, all about "me," and that is the case very, very strongly. Sense of self is not only deeply rooted in an infant, but is actively being expressed in terms of emotional (and physical) grasping and pushing away almost all the time. In fact, just consider how an adult who is all about himself/herself is described as "childish". > > ------------------------------------------------------ In my book, childish = SMALL desires, and perhaps the inability to get them fulfilled in a most efficient manner. An adult has much more desires, and s/he knows the more "socially or morally acceptable" way of behaving to get them. IMHO a person who is really clever and egotistic, would work hard and smart at appearing to be an altruistic and kind person (while being devious and rotten inside) on the outside. -------- [Buddha]... Malunkhyaputta, what do you remember of the five lower bonds of the sensual world preached by me? Venerable sir, I remember self view, doubts holding to virtues as the highest aim, sensual interest and anger as lower bonds of the sensual world preached by the Blessed One. ... Malunkhyaputta, to whom do you know me preaching, the lower bonds of the sensual world in this manner. Wouldn't the ascetics of other sects find fault with this foolish example. To a toddler, who moves about with difficulty, there is not even a self. How could a view arise about a self? The latent tendencies of a self view filter to him. (* 1) Maalunkhyaputta, to a toddler who moves about with difficulty, there are not even thoughts. How could doubts arise to him about thoughts? The latent tendency to doubt, filter to him. To a toddler who moves about with difficulty there are not even virtues. How could there be a holding to virtues as high?.The latent tendency to hold to virtues as high filter to him. Malunkhyaputta, to a toddler there is not even sensual desires..How could there be interest for sensual desires?. The latent tendencies to greed for sensual interest filter to him.Malunkhyaputta, to a toddler beings don't matter. How could he have anger towards beings? The latent tendencies to get angry filter to him. Malunkhyaputta, wouldn't the ascetics of other sects find fault with this foolish example. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/064-maha-malunkhyaputta-e1.htm ===== Best wishes, Alex #86948 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 7:55 am Subject: Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition truth_aerator Hi Bhante, Ken, and everyone, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > I hope you will stay with DSG. We need robust discussion on *the* > vitally important question: namely, 'Was satipatthana - as taught by > the Buddha - a matter of meditation technique, >>> For letting go of stress and suffering. >>> or was it panna - a paramattha dhamma that arises purely by conditions and beyond anyone's control?' > > Ken H > Ask Ajivikas. They know much better and can justify this point, sharpened in the Indian Debates, much better than me or Ven Pannabahulo. Best wishes, Alex #86949 From: Sukinder Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 9:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching sukinderpal Hi Herman (and Howard), You are discussing this with Howard too. =============== > Of course ignorance and craving arising at almost every turn, so much so > that rather than to 'learn' I end up arguing or otherwise indulging in > theorizing /philosophy /thought proliferations. Herman: Yes, we have been interacting for a long time. And that fact may well explain the mutual respect that is creeping into our discussions :-) But before I get too respectful :-), allow me to question 50% of what you say here. I fully agree with you that craving arises at almost every turn. But I have no idea what reality you are referring to when you say the exact same thing about ignorance. And because you include something that is so utterly meaningless to me, I wonder whether we actually agree about the craving bit. So, could I ask you , respectfully, what you mean when you say that ignorance arises S: You have stated in your response to Howard that you consider ignorance to be ‘absence’ and not an active mental factor. I believe ignorance to be a ‘reality’ with characteristic, function and cause. What more can I say about it? To begin, ignorance arises with *all* unwholesome consciousness, this means that with the arising each time of ‘craving’, ignorance accompanies it performing the function of obscuring. So yes it seems that our understanding of craving too must be quite different. ;-) So according to the Abhidhamma, when craving, aversion, conceit, jealousy, wrong view, miserliness etc., arises, there is perception of permanence, pleasure, self and beauty, if not also ‘belief’ in the same. In the suttas, ignorance is described in terms of “not knowing” the 4NTs. In other words, there is no understanding of experiences as being nama and rupa and their being impermanent, suffering and non-self. I know that this is my experience the whole day, everyday. But ignorance as an ‘absence’, this makes no sense to me at all. ================= > about the future. Second, the comparison with the 'stupid baby' in the > Sutta you cited, is reference to *not knowing* anything. Herman: If you wanted to find a being less affected than any other by proliferation, or self-view, or any other view, you cannot go past our stupid baby. And this fact makes the stupid baby most intimately familiar with the present moment, wouldn't you say? S: Well, now you know that I can’t agree with the above. In the absence of dana, sila and bhavana, a baby has ignorance all the time. Even if some kusala cittas could arise, so long as he hasn’t heard the Dhamma, there is no way that he would ever be mindful of present moment realities. =================== > The Buddha I > think, wanted to point out the fact that "not being engaged in certain > forms of evil" does not imply "a corresponding good being done". So I > don't think that it applies to the comparison you are making. The baby > is simply "ignorant", he has no right view but neither does he have > wrong view. Herman: The baby knows ONLY the present moment, what more do you want? Isn't this the state of knowing parramattha dhammas that dsg'ers clamour for in their twos and threes? :-) (The smiley is for the turn of phrase, not the sentiment expressed). S: :-) Perhaps I should change my last sentence above to, “The baby is simply "ignorant", he has no wrong view but neither does he have right view”. ================ > But I may be missing your point, in which case please explain more. Herman: It is going back a while now, but this got started because you conferred some benefit on those who conceived of anatta. Tell me something, Sukin, of what value is it to say that all conditioned phenomena are conditioned? Is there some knowledge or insight being conveyed? If so, what is it? S: You’ve heard so many explanations, so what is it that you are asking? Probably you are looking at this much more deeply that I can imagine? Anyway, I’ll speak and you will let me know what I am missing. Seeing that the present moment has arisen and fallen away already, one knows that realities arise beyond control. Understanding for example, the ‘thinking’ now is conditioned by ‘seeing’ and other realities arising in between, shows to some extent, that “conditionality” is what it is all about. With this in mind and understanding particularly “thinking”, to be variously conditioned, one begins to see through thoughts about “doings” aimed at developing more kusala and understanding. ‘Intentions’ which otherwise appear noble and good, no longer has power when in fact seen to be motivated by “self”. And this as I’ve said in the beginning, must necessarily be rooted in ignorance. Sure, this is understood at the intellectual level mostly. However even at this level, it has the effect of steering one away from taking the wrong path. This, including the idea of “meditation”, not only does it have nothing to do with ‘practice’ / ‘bhavana’, is like it or not, in fact a result of wrong understanding at the *intellectual level*, about Dhamma including conditionality. So called ‘meditators’, need to appreciate this, i.e. the importance of getting it right intellectually! Instead however, having grasped at the uninstructed worldlings conception of ‘practice’ and gone along with it to the extent that they have, they have in the process distant themselves from any prospect of seeing the true value of listening / study, let alone to question their misconception about what constitutes Bhavana. So what could I be conveying to someone with a totally different outlook? I don’t know. But what I don’t know more is the fact of how conditions work. Perhaps something will click some time. So I’ll wait to read your response to see if anything new has been conveyed to you this time. ;-) Conditions are that I feel very sleepy and must go now. Isn’t going to sleep a good example of anatta and conditionality? :-)) Metta, Sukin #86950 From: Dieter Möller Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 10:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Blind and the Cripple /Lame moellerdieter Hi Howard ( Jon, Alex) , may be it is me , who is dense ..nevermind..by patience we may get closer to an understanding ..hence repeating ... I wrote : Let me try to explain what in have in mind: In view of the 1.N.T. suffering is explained in brief by attachment to the five khandas. The 5 khandas present the living being and these are in the center of a conditioned process (D.O.) , which describes the attachment within the whole mass of suffering. In the standard version of D.O. , ..vinnaya conditions nama/ rupa.. nama being a grouping of feeling, perception and mental objects. So there is an interaction between the three (5! ) , not only two ( which enables the blind and the cripple to communicate). In my view a shortcoming of the simile , which may lead to misunderstandings (hence no canonical source ..) Howard : 'More than one sutta dealing with D. O. puts forward the mutual conditioning of vi~n~nana and namarupa. I can think of two ways to understand this. One traditional approach is to take namarupa as indicating the empirical person, a unity of mental and physical phenomena constituting what David Kalupahana has called "the sentient body", and the idea being that death consciousness leads to a new namarupa (sentiient being), in which then arises further consciousness. Another approach, which is my preferred understanding, is that vi~n~nana is the operation of knowing, and 'namarupa' is the aggregate of objects grasped by that knowing (i.e., the collection of all possible object-contents of consciousness), with each depending on the other. D: the mutual conditioning is not in question .. recalling passages of reversed links of the chain.. I have the moment to moment understanding of D.O. in mind , less the jati-(death rebirth consciousness issue ). The empirical person is defined by the 5 khandas , three of them usually grouped under nama. Hence when vinnaya aggregate conditions nama and rupa , it relates to 4 (3+1 ) aggregates., doesn't it? I still need to see the sources , in which the living being is described by the term namarupa. For me confusing too is when you write 'vi~n~nana is the operation of knowing, and 'namarupa' is the aggregate of objects grasped by that knowing ' , as we talk about the 5 respectively 3 aggregates /khandas and see grasping within the background of all links involved in the chain of dependent origination. Refering to the blind and the cripple again, using it as simile of nama and rupa , the factor vinnaya/ consciousness would be missing ..an understanding between both of them seem to me not possible. (As mentioned already to Jon, it would be good to understand the difference between consciousness and mind.. I suppose to be there and (somehow) to know what is going on ..) Howard : ( D: do we disagree in that this mutual conditioning involves 5 Khandas, in reduced form 3 (i.e. vinnaya - nama (involving 3 ) - rupa ) ? 'Dieter, I'm just being "dense," I suppose. I don't understand you. In D. O., I understand namarupa to subsume all the khandhas, and I take the mutual conditioning pointed to between vi~n~nana and namarupa as a two-way relationship along the lines I described in my last post. D: it still makes no sense to me that namarupa should subsume all the khandas ..... you mentioned Nyanatiloka already..quoting from the dictionary: nama rupa : ..snip ..'The third of the seven purifications (s. visuddhi), the purification of views, is defined in Vis.M. XVIII as the "correct seeing of mind-and-body," and various methods for the discernment of mind-and-body by way of insight-meditation (vipassanÄ?, q.v.) are given there. In this context, 'mind' (nÄ?ma) comprises all four mental groups, including consciousness. - See nÄ?ma. nÄ?ma: (lit. 'name'): 'mind', mentality. This term is generally used as a collective name for the 4 mental groups (arÅ«pino khandha), viz. feeling (vedanÄ?), perception (saññÄ?), mental formations (saá¹…khÄ?ra) and consciousness (viññÄ?ṇa). Within the 4th link (nÄ?ma-rÅ«pa) in the formula of the paá¹?da (q.v.), however, it applies only to kamma-resultant (vipÄ?ka) feeling and perception and a few kamma-resultant mental functions inseparable from any consciousness. As it is said (M. 9; D. 15; S. XII, 2): "Feeling (vedanÄ?), perception (saññÄ?), volition (cetanÄ?), impression (phassa), mental advertence (manasikÄ?ra): this, o brother, is called mind (nÄ?ma)." With the addition of 2 more mental factors, namely, mental vitality (jÄ«vita) and concentration (samÄ?dhi), here 'stationary phase of mind' (cittaá¹¹), these 7 factors are said in the Abhidhammatthasaá¹…gaha to be the inseparable mental factors in any state of consciousness. As I take it , only within the context of vipassana , i.e. Sati Patthana , consciousness/citta as an object of mindfulness may be grouped under nama.. otherwise it is misleading. over to you .. ;-) with Metta Dieter #86951 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 6:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin & Herman - In a message dated 6/13/2008 12:56:34 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sukinder@... writes: Hi Herman (and Howard), You are discussing this with Howard too. ========================= Just a bit more with regard to my perspective on ignorance: I see it not as the absence of wisdom, though it does oppose wisdom, but as an active despoiling and obscuring of perception and other cognitive and emotive operations, a clouding, distorting, and corrupting of the mind. One sutta that I think points to this is the pabhassara sutta, which, as I understand it, points to the natural state of mental function as luminous and the mind as only adventitiously defiled. It is avijja that is the root defilement, and it is wisdom, with the support of other helpful functions, that uproots it and the other defilements, permitting proper mental functioning and the seeing of reality as it is. With metta, Howard #86952 From: "Tep" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 11:11 am Subject: Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition dhammanusarin Hi KenH and Alex, - Did you forget the (five) Indriya and the importance of balancing these five faculties(saddha, viriya, sati, samadhi, pa~n~na) ? > > KenH: > > I hope you will stay with DSG. We need robust discussion on *the* > > vitally important question: namely, 'Was satipatthana - as taught > by the Buddha - a matter of meditation technique, > >>> > > For letting go of stress and suffering. > > >>> > or was it panna - a paramattha dhamma that arises purely by > conditions and beyond anyone's control?' > > > > Ken H > > > > Ask Ajivikas. They know much better and can justify this point, > sharpened in the Indian Debates, much better than me or Ven > Pannabahulo. > > Best wishes, > > Alex > ................. T: SN 48.8 states that the five indriyas are necessary for the penetration of the Path (Stream). "Monks, there are these five faculties. Which five? The faculty of conviction, the faculty of persistence, the faculty of mindfulness, the faculty of concentration, and the faculty of discernment. Now where is the faculty of conviction to be seen? In the four factors of stream-entry... And where is the faculty of persistence to be seen? In the four right exertions... And where is the faculty of mindfulness to be seen? In the four frames of reference... And where is the faculty of concentration to be seen? In the four jhanas... And where is the faculty of discernment to be seen? In the four noble truths... [SN 48.8] T: It is wrong to compete pa~n~na with sati. You need them as well as saddha, viriya and samadhi. "With a noble disciple who has conviction, who is resolute and persistent, it may be expected that he will be mindful, highly meticulous, remembering and able to call to mind even things that were done and said long ago. Whatever mindfulness he has, is his faculty of mindfulness. With a noble disciple who has conviction, who is resolute and persistent, and whose mindfulness is established ('tuned'), it may be expected that- making it his object to let- he will attain concentration and singleness of mind. Whatever concentration he has, is his faculty of concentration. With a noble disciple who has conviction, who is resolute and persistent, whose mindfulness is established, and whose mind is rightly concentrated, it may be expected that he will discern: 'From an inconceivable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating and wandering on. The total fading and cessation of ignorance, of this mass of darkness, is this peaceful, exquisite state: the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' Whatever discernment he has, is his faculty of discernment." [SN 48.50] ............... Tep === #86953 From: Dieter Möller Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 11:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition moellerdieter Hi Ken and all, you wrote: 'We need robust discussion on *the* vitally important question: namely, 'Was satipatthana - as taught by the Buddha - a matter of meditation technique, or was it panna - a paramattha dhamma that arises purely by conditions and beyond anyone's control?' D: I think there is a misunderstanding between mindfulness and the foundation of mindfulness, i.e. sati arises , needs no control when the foundation (Maha Satipatthana) is laid , the 7th step of the Noble Path. Within the 3 fold path training - sila, samadhi, panna , the 7th step is part of samadhi -'meditation technique' if you like. Unfortunately- so it seesm to me - the N.P. training is neglected by A.S. and her students , although there are plenty of sutta references . There is a nice passage from the Milindabanha which makes the approach clear too (translation Conze) 'The king asked: "And what is the mark of mindfulness?" - "Calling to mind and taking up." "How is calling to mind a mark of mindfulness?" - "When mindfulness arises, one calls to mind the dharmas which participate in what is wholesome and unwholesome, blamable and blameless, inferior and sublime, dark and light, i.e., these are the four applications of mindfulness, these the four right efforts, these the four roads to psychic power, these the five cardinal virtues, these the five powers, these the seven limbs of enlightenment, this is the holy eightfold path; this is calm, this insight, this knowledge and this emancipation. Thereafter the yogin tends those dharmas which should be tended, and he does not tend those which should not be tended; he partakes of those dharmas which should be followed, and he does not partake of those which should not be followed. It is in this sense that calling to mind is a mark of mindfulness." - "Give me a simile." - "It is like the treasurer of a universal monarch, who each morning and evening reminds his royal master of his magnificent assets: 'So many elephants you have, so many horses, so many chariots, so much infantry, so many gold coins, so much bullion, so much property; may Your Majesty bear this in mind.' In this way he calls to mind his master's wealth." "And how does mindfulness take up?" - "When mindfulness arises, the outcome of beneficial and harmful dharmas is examined in this way: 'These dharmas are beneficial, these harmful; these dharmas are helpful, these unhelpful.' Thereafter the yogin removes the harmful dharmas, and takes up the beneficial ones; he removes the unhelpful dharmas, and takes up the helpful ones. It is in this sense that mindfulness takes up." - "Give me a comparison." - "It is like the invaluable adviser of a universal monarch who knows what is beneficial and what is harmful to his royal master, what is helpful and what is unhelpful. Thereafter what is harmful and unhelpful can be removed, what is beneficial and helpful can be taken up." with Metta Dieter #86954 From: "Tep" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 11:27 am Subject: Re: Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction dhammanusarin Dear Connie, - I am "satisfied" with your reply. Thanks. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > T: I understand "Konda~n~na truly has understood" means he has attained > yathabhuta~nana at that moment. On such occasion the kindest Teacher > must have a sense of accomplishment associated with mudita, rather > than being satisfied ("the bhikkhus satisfied my mind"). What in your > opinion is a Pali word that better describes the Teacher's mental > state? > > C: If you twist my arm, I'll holler "equanamous and mindful", but I think knowing "Kond~n~na truly has understood" IS the "sense of accomplishment" / satisfaction. The meaning / aim / purpose of the Teaching was met / satisfied. It's only some kind of 'personal satisfaction' in the sense that the Teaching is the Teacher. So on second thought, no need to twist my arm - He is the Accomplished One. > > T: If you don't mind, please let me ask a few more questions out of curiosity. > > What does the "domain of mindfulness" represent? > > C: Both mindfulness itself and any 'where' it arises. The four foundations, which come down to (present) nama and rupa. > > T: Does "surpassing of resentment and gratification" mean overcoming abhijjhaa-domanassa ? > > C: If that's what equanamous means. But I'd change 'overcoming' to 'having overcome'. > > Dispeller 1014: (2) As regards the passage: "There are three foundations of mindfulness which the Noble One cultivates, and cultivating which the Noble One is a master who is worthy to instruct his flock" (M iii 216, 221), here it is the "threefold suprassing by the Master of resentment and gratification as regards the entry of the disciples [on the way]" that is called the "foundation of mindfulness". The meaning of that is: "foundation" (pa.t.thaana) is because of what should be founded (pa.t.thapetabba); "because of what should be made to occur" is the meaning. Becauseof what should be made to occur by means of what? By means of mindfulness. So "foundation of mindfulness" (sa.tipa.t.thaana) is the "foundation by means of mindfulness" (satiyaa [instr.] pa.t.thaana.m). > > peace, > connie > .............. Regards, Tep === #86955 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 7:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Blind and the Cripple /Lame upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 6/13/2008 1:28:11 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Refering to the blind and the cripple again, using it as simile of nama and rupa , the factor vinnaya/ consciousness would be missing ..an understanding between both of them seem to me not possible. (As mentioned already to Jon, it would be good to understand the difference between consciousness and mind.. I suppose to be there and (somehow) to know what is going on ..) Howard : ( D: do we disagree in that this mutual conditioning involves 5 Khandas, in reduced form 3 (i.e. vinnaya - nama (involving 3 ) - rupa ) ? 'Dieter, I'm just being "dense," I suppose. I don't understand you. In D. O., I understand namarupa to subsume all the khandhas, and I take the mutual conditioning pointed to between vi~n~nana and namarupa as a two-way relationship along the lines I described in my last post. D: it still makes no sense to me that namarupa should subsume all the khandas ..... you mentioned Nyanatiloka already..quoting from the dictionary: nama rupa : ..snip ..'The third of the seven purifications (s. visuddhi), the purification of views, is defined in Vis.M. XVIII as the "correct seeing of mind-and-body," and various methods for the discernment of mind-and-body by way of insight-meditation (vipassanÄ?, q.v.) are given there. In this context, 'mind' (nÄ?ma) comprises all four mental groups, including consciousness. - See nÄ?ma. nÄ?ma: (lit. 'name'): 'mind', mentality. This term is generally used as a collective name for the 4 mental groups (arÅ«pino khandha), viz. feeling (vedanÄ? ), perception (saññÄ?), mental formations (saá¹…khÄ?ra) and consciousness (viññ Ä?ṇa). Within the 4th link (nÄ?ma-rÅ«pa) in the formula of the paá¹? da (q.v.), however, it applies only to kamma-resultant (vipÄ?ka) feeling and perception and a few kamma-resultant mental functions inseparable from any consciousness. As it is said (M. 9; D. 15; S. XII, 2): "Feeling (vedanÄ?), perception (saññÄ?), volition (cetanÄ?), impression (phassa), mental advertence (manasikÄ?ra): this, o brother, is called mind (nÄ?ma)." With the addition of 2 more mental factors, namely, mental vitality (jÄ«vita) and concentration (samÄ? dhi), here 'stationary phase of mind' (cittaá¹¹), these 7 factors are said in the Abhidhammatthasaá¹…gaha to be the inseparable mental factors in any state of consciousness. As I take it , only within the context of vipassana , i.e. Sati Patthana , consciousness/citta as an object of mindfulness may be grouped under nama.. otherwise it is misleading. over to you .. ;-) with Metta Dieter ============================== Dieter, I think you are making more of this matter than is warranted. It is simply that in the context of dependent origination that relates vi~n~nana to namarupa, vi~n~nana is replaced in the nama group by attention, which amounts to a directing of vi~n~nana). With metta, Howard #86956 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:35 pm Subject: Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition kenhowardau Hi Alex, ---- <. . .> KH: > > or was it panna - a paramattha dhamma that arises purely by conditions and beyond anyone's control?' A: > Ask Ajivikas. They know much better and can justify this point, sharpened in the Indian Debates, much better than me or Ven Pannabahulo. ---- I get your point (thanks to Google); the Ajivikas were fatalists. What can I say, Alex? Many people at DSG have explained conditionality for you in many different ways, and yet you still see it as fatalism. I have sympathy for you, but I don't know what more I can do to help. If you would just disable that auto-disagree function that Scott warned you about we could at least make a start. :-) Ken H #86957 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:53 pm Subject: Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition truth_aerator Dear Ken, Scott and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Hi Alex, > ---- > KH: > > or was it panna - a paramattha dhamma that arises purely by > conditions and beyond anyone's control?' > > A: > Ask Ajivikas. They know much better and can justify this point, > sharpened in the Indian Debates, much better than me or Ven > Pannabahulo. > ---- > > I get your point (thanks to Google); the Ajivikas were fatalists. > > What can I say, Alex? Many people at DSG have explained > conditionality for you in many different ways, and yet you still see it as fatalism. I have sympathy for you, but I don't know what more I can do to help. If you would just disable that auto-disagree function that Scott warned you about we could at least make a start. :-) > > Ken H > Do you have personal and direct knowledge & vision that "everything is conditioned and beyond control?" Thanks, Best wishes, In Metta, Alex #86958 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 4:00 pm Subject: Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition kenhowardau Hi Tep, ------- <. . .> T: It is wrong to compete pa~n~na with sati. You need them as well as saddha, viriya and samadhi. -------- I think you are saying we need to develop these qualities separately. But, as you will know by now, I see them as cetasikas that perform their functions together in a single fleeting moment. Panna (right understanding) is their forerunner; without right understanding there can be no right mindfulness, right effort or right concentration. But with panna, they will all arise and develop together. Ken H #86959 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 4:06 pm Subject: Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition truth_aerator Dear Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > ------- > <. . .> > T: It is wrong to compete pa~n~na with sati. You need them as well as saddha, viriya and samadhi. > -------- > > I think you are saying we need to develop these qualities separately. But, as you will know by now, I see them as cetasikas that perform their functions together in a single fleeting moment. Panna (right understanding) is their forerunner; without right understanding there can be no right mindfulness, right effort or right concentration. But with panna, they will all arise and develop together. > > Ken H > Do you have direct and personal knowledge and vision of what you have said above? Best wishes, Alex #86960 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 4:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction egberdina Hi Tep, 2008/6/12 Tep : > Hi Herman,- > > > T: I appreciate your quote from Ud 4:5 in which the translator used > the word "annoyance" to describe the mental state of the Tathagata > while he was surrounded by a crowd of laypeople and monks. In the > other sutta which we discussed earlier the translator uses the > words "satisfied" and "dissatisfied to decribe the feeling of the > Tathagata towards his disciples. > > What do you understand about the Tathagata who attained Nibbana and > was free from lobha, dosa and moha(greed, aversion and delusion)? Is > it possible, or does it even make sense, to assume that He still felt > annoyed, satisfied and dissatisfied like the ordinary human beings > who have greed, aversion and delusion? Think about it, please. I have done as you asked, and thought about what you wrote very carefully. What you are asking me to do, I believe, is to make a judgment about suttas that contradict a particular view, in favour of that view. I think this would be a dishonest, sometimes even dangerous thing to do. It may well be that suttas that contradict a certain view have been poorly translated, but I would also caution against translating suttas with an intention of making them conform to a certain view. Back to the question at hand. I have tried, and failed, to find any references in the suttas to the notion of kiriya kamma, inoperative action. Yet you are asking me to rule against certain suttas, which are unambiguous in what they state, on the basis of a view that there is a class of being who acts without causing some effect? Where did this idea come from, Tep, and why do you accept it without challenge? Some further thoughts which came to mind were that the Buddha realised that all conditioned phenomena are anicca, anatta and dukkha. Why would you think that the Buddha's life was somehow excluded from that, and that he was unaffected by dukkha? Cheers Herman #86961 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 5:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/6/13 sarah abbott : > Hi Herman, > H:>When I met Jon and Sarah in the Botanical Gardens in Sydney, Sarah > misplaced her sunglasses, and we all went looking for them. > ... > S: Are you suggested that if we misplace our sunglasses (or any other item) that rather than retracing our footsteps and retrieving them, that we should abandon them (in the name of giving up clinging) and go out and a)buy another pair or b)manage without? As I recall, someone had kindly handed them in to the cafe where we'd sat. > .... No, I am not suggesting anything of the kind. What I am suggesting is that a person absorbed in their daily life, like most of us here are, mocks the Dhamma of the Noble Ones by believing in the value of "abhidhamma in daily life" moments. When you hear a siren and say to someone else that it is only sound, all in the same breath, it is only a joke :-) > H:>While Sarah was ahead of us, Jon and I agreed that this was craving in > action, but neither of us had the hide to tell her :-) > ... > S: That sounds like you, but not Jon :-) Of course there's attachment (or craving) 'in action' all day, every day. It's very, very common. Better to understand it when it arrises for ourselves now, rather than be so concerned about any attachment anyone else had a few years ago!! > ... Believe me, it wasn't a problem then, and it still isn't a problem now. > H:> I don't doubt for a moment that Sarah said what you remembered her to > say about the siren only being sound. Statements like this are common > at dsg. > ... > S: Whatever the conventional situation - whether in the Botanic Gardens, listening to the >ambulance siren or sitting at the computer now, there are realities to be known. None of this >means not looking for sunglasses, not listening to sirens, not having ideas about computers. >What it means is being aware of the ordinary, daily realities at the present moment, whether >they be seeing, visible object, attachment, hearing, sound or any other dhamma. >Appreciating that there is just one world at a time, in the example Antony gave, just the >world of hearing, is the way to understand the Buddha's teachings. We think the long story >about the imagined accident and the victim being taken away and so on is real, but at such >times, there are just moments of hearing, thinking and lots more thinking. When you spend your life working, amassing enough wealth to carry you over into middle age :-), and plan a trip overseas, and make the right bookings, and take the right transport to get to the right airport, and you get on the right plane, and arrive at your destination, and find the right transport to where your hotel is, and make arrangements to meet some people, and you have a nice get-together,........ (just catching my breath) when you intend and do all those things it mocks the Dhamma of the Noble Ones to talk about the realities of the present moment. And please believe me, I have no problems with householders, I quite like them, I'm one myself, actually :-) > .... > H:> Such selective non-association, typified by glibly denying the > reality of human suffering (as announced by an emergency service > vehicle), but then being caught up in a quest to find some trifling > bit of personal property the next moment, is not something to emulate, > ..... > S: The only way to ever understand the real truth of Suffering or Dukkha is by understanding the present reality. No other way. > Right. And this is achieved by the householder ensconced in society? This is the Dhamma of the Noble Ones? No, abhidhamma in daily life is only a joke. Cheers Herman #86962 From: "connie" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 5:44 pm Subject: Re: poster nichiconn Dear Herman, H (#86927): If a practice you are engaging in does not lead to joy, cease doing what you are doing. C: There's that "joy" word again. Surely, the joy the texts talk about isn't the same as that in sayings like "eat, drink and be merry" or "ignorance is bliss". Not saying you mean it's something associated with ordinary old sense pleasure, which is surely what most of my being "happy in my walk" is, but what do you mean? thanks in advance, connie #86963 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 6:03 pm Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the reply: Me: "The Epiphenomenalist view is essentially incompatible with the Dhamma. Why? Because it holds that naama is a) a side-effect of physical states (ruupa) and, b) that naama can only be effect, not cause. With this view, it is inconceivable that any sutta is cited in to support the Epiphenomenalist view, since, even in the above, the suttas are replete with the suggestion that naama is not only primary, but a clear cause as well." H: "I'm sorry, but I just don't see what is so self-evident to you. In fact I think you see things that aren't there..." Scott: You wrote, in reply to: Me: "To return to an earlier clarification, the view would suggest that it is the biological imperatives that move the world. Would this be a correct paraphrase? H: "Yes. That would also be a good paraphrase of what the Buddha says in MN121. "And there is just this non-emptiness: that connected with the six sensory spheres, dependent on this very body with life as its condition." Scott: Here also are the other related quotes: H: "Yes, consciousness is an effect, not a cause..." H: "...what is there is empty of what is not there." H: "...consciousness is a fabrication that arises in dependence on living bodies in the context of society." Scott: The Epiphenomenalist view, and you've not yet corrected the way I'm representing it, would seem to hold that naama is effect and not effective (not a cause). It holds that 'consciousness is a fabrication' - and I don't mean to paraphrase this in the sense of sankhaara-khandha - I mean to paraphrase it in the sense of 'fiction'. Given this view, it would seem that any discussion of any sort of consciousness which is cause would be unacceptable. As I read MN 121, it discusses how the penetration, by a mental factor accompanying a moment of consciousness, of another mental state, leads to the mental process whereby the Path is attained and release occurs. I can't see any way around understanding the whole process of cessation as being a) naama and, b) caused by naama. Hence, since the Epiphenomenalist view would essentially deny the possibility that consciousness could be cause for anything, there can be, from this viewpoint, nothing to prevent the perpetual coming into states of being. In order to support a view holding ruupa to be primary, one would have to, for example, adopt a single-existence stance, denying the role of kamma as cause for being in successive states of being. Cessation, under such a view, would be Death; Death would be the End - Nihilism. This is why the suggestion is made that the Epiphenomenalist view is incompatible with Dhamma because it seems to negate the entire culminating process (naama) whereby consciousness takes Nibbaana as object, with this serving as cause for subsequent alteration whereby there would no longer be any coming into any state of being. There is no suggestion whatsoever that ruupa has any part of this because ruupa is not naama. Does this clarify? The suggestion is made that the phrase, 'it is the biological imperatives that move the world', is a good paraphrase of the MN 121 excerpt, 'And there is just this non-emptiness: that connected with the six sensory spheres, dependent on this very body with life as its condition.' Where do you get the translation you cite? And you take such a very small portion of a much larger sutta. Bhikkhu Bodhi renders the phrase: "There is present only this amount of disturbance, namely, that connected with the six sense bases that are dependent on this body and conditioned by life." Thanissaro Bhikkhu renders it: "And there is only this modicum of disturbance: that connected with the six sensory spheres, dependent on this very body with life as its condition." The Paa.li: "Atthi cevida.m asu~n~nata.m yadida.m imameva kaaya.m pa.ticca sa.laayatanika.m jiivitapaccayaati." A broader excerpt, for context (Bh. Bodhi, tr.): "Again, Aananda, a bhikkhu - not attending to the perception of the base of nothingness, not attending to the perception of the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception - attends to the singleness dependent on the signless concentration of mind. His mind enters into that signless concentration of mind and acquires confidence, steadiness, and resolution. He understands thus: 'This signless concentration of mind is conditioned and volitionally produced. But whatever is conditioned and volitionally produced is impermanent, subject to cessation.' When he knows and sees thus, his mind is liberated from the sensual desire, from the taint of being, and from the taint of ignorance. When it is liberated there comes the knowledge: 'It is liberated.' [Tassa eva.m jaanato eva.m passato kaamaasavaapi citta.m vimuccati. Bhavaasavaapi citta.m vimuccati. Avijjaasavaapi citta.m vimuccati. Vimuttasmi.m vimuttamiti ~naa.na.m hoti.] He understands: 'Birth is destroyed, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more coming to any state of being. "He understands thus: 'Whatever disturbances there might be dependent on the taint of sensual desire, those are not present here; whatever disturbances there might be dependent on the taint of being, those are not present here; whatever disturbances there might be dependent of the taint of ignorance, those are not here. There is present only this amount of disturbance, namely, that connected with the six bases that are dependent on this body and conditioned by life.' He understands: 'This field of perception is void of the taint of sensual desire; this field of perception is void of the taint of being; this field of perception is void of the taint of ignorance. There is present only this non-voidness, namely, that connected with the six bases that are dependent on this body and conditioned by life.' Thus he regards it as void of what is not there, but as to what remains there he understands that which is present: 'This is present.' Thus, Aananda, this is his genuine, undistorted, pure descent into voidness, supreme and unsurpassed." Scott: In context, the sutta excerpt is simply describing the experience of the arahat prior to parinibbaana while abiding in su~n~nataphala-samaapatti. He or she knows that there is nothing but 'the six bases that are dependent on this body and conditioned by life'. And it is clear that it is naama - pa~n~naa - which is cause for liberation (vimmutti). The Epiphenomenalist view cannot accept this, and therefore negates the validity of the culmination of existence as taught by a Buddha. H: "Can we take DO to be a representative teaching, overarching all suttas?" Scott: The teaching of Dependent Origination, as far as I understand, is a method of explanation, describing in broad terms the sequence whereby the round of existence proceeds. It is not, as far as I understand, a method which describes the finer points of cause and effect and the related forces which hold sway from moment to moment; this is described by the method of Conditional Relations, which is a complementary method of explanation with a sharper focus. H: "It is explicit that vinnana and namarupa are mutually conditioning, and it is also explicit that it is namarupa that conditions the ayatanas, etc and NOT vinnana." Scott: Do you now suggest that vi~n~naa.na, or the naama of 'naama-ruupa', is more than epiphenomenal? I read the Epiphenomenalist view to hold that ruupa is primary, and to imbue ruupa with some sort of consciousness-creating property. I don't read the view to accept that consciousness is a reality of equal status, albeit different characteristics. H: "H: "Well, how about we start with the conditions for the Path experience to take place, as described in this sutta? Is the setting of this sutta relevant, do you think? Do you agree that the setting for the experience is a complete absence of people and their society? And is that absence mental in nature?" Scott: Can you clarify the question? Do you refer to jhaana (which I assume, for you, would be mere epiphenomenal mental states) here? If so, I still see there being no point in holding a discussion about anything related to consciousness, when the Epiphenomenalist view has it that consciousness is virtually irrelevant in the end. It would be like having a discussion on the personality dynamics of Santa Claus - what in his past might have lead him to take on his life of toy-making and yearly giving to children, what motivates him. Since he is a fabrication, why bother? If hold that consciousness is epiphenomenal - that it is a 'fabrication' - how then can you accept the Buddha's apparent premise? Sincerely, Scott. #86964 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 6:38 pm Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) truth_aerator Dear Scott & Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: In order to support a view holding ruupa to be primary, one would have to, for example, adopt a single-existence stance, denying the role of kamma as cause for being in successive states of being. Cessation, under such a view, would be Death; Death would be the End - Nihilism. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1st) How can it be Nihilism if no one (no self, no soul) "ceases"? 2nd) What is the difference between this and Arhat's passing away? 3rd) It IS possible to argue for Rebirth in a purely materialistic world. In fact in one of my posts, "crisis", I had this in mind. If we consider what sort of perpetual rebirth this entails, its terrible. Modern science has emperically shown that at least some (if not all) aspects of personality are based on matter. Thus if this view is correct, then if your body would be exactly duplicated - you would be duplicated with consciousness and personality. Modern Astrophysics claims that Big Bang can come out from nothing and that when this universe suffers heat death, another universes may be formed from Big Bangs. These cycles could have went without a beginning, or at least can continue without end. After enough of Big Bangs, there may be universe formed EXACTLY like this one, with exactly the same conditions that have no freedom of will and everything will evolve as it has. This means, that your body (and thus your personality & consciousness) can arise again. Of course it may take trillions ^ trillions of big bangs (or the next one) for such a repeat. However, subjectively you will NOT feel that much time elapsed (you won't feel anything, you wouldn't even know the gap was there). When your body (and consciousness has ceased) you will NOT feel the elapsed time (or space). So after the last conscious moment, the next one may be you being born yourself AGAIN. So if a person was born lets say in Jan 1st 1950, and died in 2030, the rebirth could be in... Jan 1st, 1950.... http://space.newscientist.com/article/mg19325904.400-new-universes- will-be-born-from-ours.html >>>>>>>>>>> This is why the suggestion is made that the Epiphenomenalist view is incompatible with Dhamma because it seems to negate the entire culminating process (naama) whereby consciousness takes Nibbaana as object, with this serving as cause for subsequent alteration whereby there would no longer be any coming into any state of being. There is no suggestion whatsoever that ruupa has any part of this because ruupa is not naama. Does this clarify? >>>>>> What exactly do you mean "Nibbana as an object"? If Nibbana is cessation of ALL consciousness, then this can't be an object of consciousness. Unconsciousness itself can't be an object of consciousness! Best wishes, Alex #86965 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 7:01 pm Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Thanks for the reply: A: "1st) How can it be Nihilism if no one (no self, no soul) "ceases"? 2nd) What is the difference between this and Arhat's passing away? 3rd) It IS possible to argue for Rebirth in a purely materialistic world. In fact in one of my posts, 'crisis', I had this in mind. If we consider what sort of perpetual rebirth this entails, its terrible." Scott: Let's wait until Herman replies. Let's read it carefully. I suggest you pay attention. My thesis is that the Epiphenomenalist view is essentially non-buddhist because it denies that anything is knowable and denies kamma, taking naama to be epiphenomenal. This should be raising your Anti-Heretic hackles, Alex, but if it turns out to actually be Heresy (OMG!), please be kind to Herman. He's a good man. A: "Modern science..." Scott: In case you missed it the first time: SCIENCE SCHMIENCE. Sincerely, Scott. #86966 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 7:22 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition kenhowardau Hi Dieter, --------- KH: > > Was satipatthana - as taught by the Buddha - a matter of meditation technique, or was it panna - a paramattha dhamma that arises purely by conditions and beyond anyone's control?' > > D: > I think there is a misunderstanding between mindfulness and the foundation of mindfulness, i.e. sati arises , needs no control when the foundation (Maha Satipatthana) is laid , the 7th step of the Noble Path. Within the 3 fold path training - sila, samadhi, panna , the 7th step is part of samadhi -'meditation technique' if you like. Unfortunately- so it seems to me - the N.P. training is neglected by A.S. and her students , although there are plenty of sutta references . ---------- If I understand you correctly you are saying that satipatthana *is* a meditation technique. In other words: it is not the mere arising of the conditioned dhammas known as 'panna' and 'samma-sati' etc., to know a paramattha dhamma. If you are right then, certainly, A.S. and her students have been neglecting their N.P. training. :-) ------------------------- D: > There is a nice passage from the Milindabanha which makes the approach clear too (translation Conze) 'The king asked: "And what is the mark of mindfulness?" - "Calling to mind and taking up." "How is calling to mind a mark of mindfulness?" - "When mindfulness arises, one calls to mind the dharmas which participate in what is wholesome and unwholesome, blamable and blameless, inferior and sublime, dark and light, -------------------------- Please explain how that quote makes a meditation technique clear. I see no reference to a technique. I see a description of the arising of panna, samma-sati and samma-viriya (etc) to directly know a paramattha dhamma. Further on in your quote we read: ""Give me a simile." - "It is like the treasurer of a universal monarch, who each morning and evening reminds his royal master of his magnificent assets: 'So many elephants you have, so many horses, so many chariots, so much infantry, Is this where you see a technique? Do you think the practice of satipatthana is literally to recite (or have someone recite to you) a list of the dhammas that you possess? No, of course you don't. That was just a simile. Similes give us an idea of the nature of panna, and samma-sati etc., which are cetasikas. They are the cetasikas that make the citta in which they arise great (noble) - just like a good treasurer makes a universal monarch great. We need similes because cetasikas (as conditioned dhammas) are totally unknown to us. (Except, that is, for what we have already learnt from the Abhidhamma.) Ken H #86967 From: "Tep" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 8:11 pm Subject: Error in the Vism Definition of Pari~n~na (Full Understanding)? Part I dhammanusarin Dear Sarah, Nina, Jon, Alex, Han, Connie, - I studied the 'useful posts' on 'pari~n~na' as you, Sarah, had suggested. The messages in this group that I found interesting are : # 22710, 50716, 50747, 67114, and 73936. All of them are based on the definition of 'pari~n~na' in the Vism XX, 4. In these posts there are also sub-commentaries from Bhikkhu Bodhi's writing as well as other personal opinions that are based on the original Vism's definition. In this present message (Part I) the key ideas in these "useful posts" are presented. I have some evidences to believe that the original definition in Vism. XX, 4 does not agree with the Buddha's words in both Pari~n~na Sutta [SN 22.23] and Mulapariyaya Sutta [DN 1]. Further, I actually find that the Vism's definition of Pari~n~na is not supported by the Patisambhidamagga. The question I have now is : supposed the Vism's definition was originally in error, then wouldn't all these commentaries, subcommentaries and personal opinions (in these "useful" posts) be in error as well? I intend to give some "proofs" in Part II. ............................................... (Part I) Summary of the useful posts: ==================================== Nina (#73936): >There are three degrees of pariññå or full understanding: ñåta pariññå or full understanding of the known, tíra.na pariññå or full understanding as investigation, pahåna pariññå or full understanding as abandoning. >N ("explains" further): The full understanding as the known considers the characteristics of nåma and rúpa, applying the knowledge gained at the first stage of insight, which is then a foundation for the further development of paññå. ... The full understanding as investigating, tíra.na pariññå, considers the characteristics of all nåmas and rúpas which appear without selecting any specific ones. It sees them as equal, that means: it sees them as only realities which are conditioned. .... The third pariññå, full understanding as abandoning, extends from the knowledge of dissolution onwards, until enlightenment is attained, because from then on there can be more detachment from nåma and rúpa. Tep: Nina's message #73936 is very similar to #22710, so I will skip the latter. ................................ Tep: Sarah interestingly uses the three kinds of pariññå in the Vism and the commentary to "interpret" DN 1 (Mulapariyaya Sutta) as follows. Sarah (#50716): >In the Mulapariyaya Sutta, DN1, we read that the ignorant worldling conceives all kinds of objects, such as the elements and people, wrongly with self-views and delights in them. ".....he delights in earth. What is the reason? Because it has not been fully understood by him, I declare." >In the commentary we read that `He who fully understands earth understands it by the three types of full understanding." These refer to the 3 kinds of pari~n~naa (full understanding). 1. ~Naata-pari~n~naa (full understanding of the known) refers to the first stage of insight, i.e naamaruupa vavatthaana (or nama-rupa pariccheda nana). 2. Tiira.na pari~n~naa (full understanding of scrutinization/as investigating) refers to insight/vipassana from the third stage up to anuloma knowledge. 3. Pahaanapari~n~naa (full understanding by abandoning) refers to the understanding of the ariyan path. >Sub-commentary note (Bodhi transl): "Therein, the `full understanding of the known' is the wisdom of full understanding by which one fully understands, delimits (paricchindati), the plane of insight (vipassanaabhuumi). For this understands the dhammas of the three planes, delimiting them as internal and external and defining their characteristics, functions, etc; thereby it makes it known, understood, evident, that `this is the plane of insight.' "Here [S: in the context of the sutta] it should be understood in terms of the earth element. The `full understanding of scrutinization' understands the five clinging aggregates in their true nature as impermanent, (suffering and non-self), by delimiting them through insight-comprehension and scrutinizing their modes of impermanence, etc, together with their accompaniments. "The `supreme path' is the path of arahatship, for this abandons desire and lust without remainder; or it is the supramundane path (in general). Either is the full understanding of abandoning, which in the abstract sense is the wisdom which abandons (defilements) by eradicating them (samucchedapahaanakaarii pa~n~naa)." ......................... Tep: I find too much individual extension/opinion added on to the the original concept a disadvantage; doubts creep up in my mind as I keep wondering what the Buddha and Arahant Sariputta said about these full understandings. ......................... Sarah (#50747): > Tep: I want to remark that the Buddha's definition for parinna is the greatest : > > "And which is comprehension? Any ending of passion, ending of > aversion, ending of delusion. [1] This is called comprehension." >[SN XXII.23 Parinna, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu] > > [Footnote] > [1] Comprehension here means the arahant's full-knowing (see MN > 117). ... .... > Tep: So it is clear that full understanding (parinna) is not for > those non-Arahants among us to claim to possess. :-) >S: This is referring to the third parinna, pahana parinna (full understanding as abandoning). >BB gives this note to his translation: "The explanation of pari~n~na, full understanding, in terms of the destruction of lust (raagakkhaya) etc, initially seems puzzling, but see MN1 66-67, where pari~n~na is used as a virtual synonym for pahaana. Spk specifies pari~n~na here as accantapari~n~na, ultimate abaondonment, which it glosses as samatikkama, transcendence, and identifies with Nibbaana. Apparently accantapari~n~na is distinct from the usual three kinds of pari~n~na, on which see the following note. >S:The following note he gives refers to the following sutta, SN24:3 'Directly Knowing' which refers to 'directly knowing and fully understanding form' etc. >Note: "Anabhijaan.m, etc, are present participles, glosses anabhijaananto, etc. Spk: By 'directly knowing' (abhijaana.m), the full understanding of the known (~naatapari~n~na) is indicated; by 'full understanding' (parijaana.m), full understanding by scrutinization (tiira.napari~n~naa); by 'beoming dispassionate' and 'abandoning', the full understanding as abandonment (pahaanapari~n~naa)." >S: So it is clear we need to read the suttas carefully, to appreciate that understanding has to develop and there can never be full understanding by abandoning (pahana parinna) if the earlier stages of insight, beginning with the insight into namas and rupas directly (~naatapari~n~naa) hasn't been realised first. >As the note I gave yestereday made clear, pahana parinna can either refer to ariyan wisdom or to the full abandoning at the stage or arahantship only as in the sutta you quoted. ============================ T: Following Part I, the coming-soon Part II will explain the specific differences I've found, making use of two suttas and the Patism. Then you can tell me what you think about the error I see in the original Vism definition. Thank you. Tep === #86968 From: "Tep" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 9:28 pm Subject: Re: Satisfaction & Dissatisfaction dhammanusarin Hi Herman, - Issues sometimes can grow from non-issues, depending on how one interprets another person's words. Dhamma discussion among worldlings is more complicated than that of the ariyans because of non-issues. >H: >I have done as you asked, and thought about what you wrote very carefully. What you are asking me to do, I believe, is to make a judgment about suttas that contradict a particular view, in favour of that view. I think this would be a dishonest, sometimes even dangerous thing to do. T: Thank you very much! But I don't follow the logic behind the dishonest/dangerous thing you are conceiving. My good friend, I only asked you to rely on your saddha in the Tathagata and your knowledge about Him in order to guide your sutta reading with confidence. The non-issues here are judging the suttas and dishonesty. As Alex rightly observed, lacking of proper English words or wrong translation may be an issue. Get the Pali version. >H: Back to the question at hand. I have tried, and failed, to find any references in the suttas to the notion of kiriya kamma, inoperative action. Yet you are asking me to rule against certain suttas, which are unambiguous in what they state, on the basis of a view that there is a class of being who acts without causing some effect? Where did this idea come from, Tep, and why do you accept it without challenge? T: There is no challenge when you know the fact that Arahants (including the Buddha ) can maintain only wholesome actions. The following sutta describes the inoperative action/reaction in arahants. "And how is one a noble one with developed faculties? There is the case where, when seeing a form with the eye, there arises in a monk what is agreeable, what is disagreeable, what is agreeable & disagreeable. If he wants, he remains percipient of loathsomeness in the presence of what is not loathsome. If he wants, he remains percipient of unloathsomeness in the presence of what is loathsome. If he wants, he remains percipient of loathsomeness in the presence of what is not loathsome & what is. If he wants, he remains percipient of unloathsomeness in the presence of what is loathsome & what is not. If he wants — in the presence of what is loathsome & what is not — cutting himself off from both, he remains equanimous, alert, & mindful. "When hearing a sound with the ear... When smelling an aroma with the nose... When tasting a flavor with the tongue... When touching a tactile sensation with the body... When cognizing an idea with the intellect, there arises in him what is agreeable, what is disagreeable, what is agreeable & disagreeable. .... If he wants — in the presence of what is loathsome & what is not — cutting himself off from both, he remains equanimous, alert, & mindful. [MN 152 : Indriya-bhavana Sutta] T: Someone may doubt why the arahant still "wants" a certain mental state as stated in the above sutta. This is again an improper use of word. ........... > H: > Some further thoughts which came to mind were that the Buddha realised that all conditioned phenomena are anicca, anatta and dukkha. Why would you think that the Buddha's life was somehow excluded from that, and that he was unaffected by dukkha? > > Not true, Herman, that is not what I think. In the Mahaparinibbana Sutta [DN 16] it is clear that He suffered bodily pains, yet the vedana did not affect the mind. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.1-6.vaji.html Tep === #86969 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 10:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/6/13 jonoabb : > Hi Herman > >> As you have explained it, I see no inconsistency between anatta and >> kamma. Kamma is "only" a subset of anatta, it identifies a specific >> causal connection between certain experiences. This applies only at >> the level of experience at which it was explained, and thus is not >> relevant to a level where there is thinking in terms of self and other >> (selves), if I have understood you correctly. >> >> If I have understood you correctly, thank you for explaining. If not, >> feel free to explain some more :-) > > I'm not sure whether we are on the same page or not. Let me add > something to what I said in my earlier post that may help answer that. > > I said: > My understanding of kamma is that it refers to the intention > accompanying kusala and akusala consciousness, and that this intention > conditions the later arising of certain types of consciousness such as > the experiencing of objects through the sense-doors (called 'vipaka' > consciousness); and furthermore that all such vipaka consciousness is > conditioned by prior intention (kamma). > > What I would add, in case it was not clear, is that the vipaka > consciousness conditioned by the kamma intention arises in the same > stream of consciousness as the intention. > > Don't know if this makes any difference to your understanding of what > I said earlier. > You wrote the following to me on the 5th of June, in this thread: >To my understanding, there is no entity of 'stream of consciousness'. >The only 'entities' are things having a characteristic that can be >directly experienced (referred to in the texts as "dhammas", >"khandhas", "dhatus", etc). But in the post I am replying to you say " ....the vipaka consciousness conditioned by the kamma intention arises in the same stream of consciousness as the intention." I'm always happy to be convinced that I'm being dense, but to me it seems you are contradicting yourself. What is it you are refering to when you refer to a "stream of consciousness"? Cheers Herman #86970 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 10:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations: Epiphenomenalist Explanation Requested egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/6/12 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Consider AN IX, 14 Samiddhi: > > "...'What, Samiddhi, is the conditioning basis of the purposive > thoughts that arise in a person?' - 'Name-and-form, venerable sir.'* > 'From what does their variety derive?' - 'From the elements.' > 'What is their origin?' - 'Contact.' > 'On what do they converge?' - 'Feeling' > 'What is their head?' - 'Concentration.' > 'What is their master?' - 'Mindfulness.' > 'What is their climax?' - 'Wisdom.' > 'What is their essence?' - 'Liberation.' > 'Where do they merge?' - 'In the Deathless'"** > > > Scott: If you wish, Herman, might you provide the epiphenomenalist > revision of the above? It is clear to me that naama cannot possibly > be seen as epiphenomenal, given the sequence shown. Again, the thesis > I set forward is that Epiphenomenalism is incompatible with the > Dhamma. Are you able to show how it might be compatible? > I didn't see the spectre of naama anywhere in the above, and I didn't see it said that naama was causal in any of the items on the list. As I have previously pointed out, it is clearly stated in expositions of DO that vinnana and namarupa mutually condition each other, but that it is namarupa that conditions the further links in the chain. I do not equate namarupa with consciousness, and it is consciousness that I reject as being causal. I am happy for you to probe me as much as you are inclined, but how about you show me something that demonstrates that vinnana is causal? Cheers Herman #86971 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jun 13, 2008 11:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/6/13 : > Hi, Herman - > > Yes, I read ignorance to be an absence, and therefore it doesn't make > sense to say that this absence arises. How does ignorance as an active > condition fit into a phenomenalist perspective, I wonder? > ---------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I wasn't aware of phenomenalism denying mental activities, some very > harmful. Sorry that I was unclear. What I was alluding to was that if ignorance is an active way of perceiving, then how is ignorant experience different from luminous experience? > I see ignorance as a distortion & confusion & obscuration activity (or > cluster of activities). I see wisdom as a countering activity (or cluster of > activities). Each of these, as I see the matter, opposes the presence of the > other in the course of its acting. > --------------------------------------------------- It sounds to me like you are saying that in the case of normal (ignorant) perception, we do not really perceive what we perceive, that there is a true perception waiting to be uncovered "behind" it. Is that an acceptable paraphrase? > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Craving, aversion, and attachment, on the one hand, and sense of self, > on the other, are, in my view, mutually dependent and reinforcing. In MN 9, > for example, the Buddha says not only "From the origination of fermentation > comes the origination of ignorance" but also "From the origination of ignorance > comes the origination of fermentation," and included within the fermentations > is "the fermentation of sensuality," which I take to be the craving for, > aversion to, and attachment to sense-door phenomena. > ----------------------------------------------------------- To be honest, I do not understand a lot of that sutta, or how it fits into your view of ignorance. It defines ignorance as the not knowing of the 4 Noble Truths, which doesn't sound like an active condition, but the lack of one. It further says that the taint of ignorance is a condition for the arising of ignorance. This makes ignorance a condition for itself, which pretty well renders it a perpetuum mobile, and the Path an impossibility. I'm happy for you to put me straight, Howard :-) Cheers Herman #86972 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 12:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Stopping akusala buddhatrue Hi Sarah, Thank you for your response. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > .... > S: It's very important to stress the mental factors of hiri and ottappa as you do here. I fully agree. When there is any akusala of any kind, there is no hiri or ottappa. > > I don't mind how these qualities are translated, but let's be very clear that they are 'beautiful' (sobhana) mental factors and there is no aversion or unpleasant feeling, so no fear, shame or dread as we are used to thinking of such qualities, involved. James: I believe we discussed this before but it wouldn't hurt to discuss again. Even though hiri and ottappa are wholesome mental factors, they are accompanied by unpleasant feeling. If moral shame and dread were accompanied by equanimity, calm, or happiness, they wouldn't do what they are designed to do: stop acts of akusala. Here is a reference to Buddhaghosa (who I think you accept as an authority): Acariya Buddhaghosa illustrates the difference between the two with the simile of an iron rod smeared with excrement at one end and heated to a glow at the other end: hiri is like one's disgust at grabbing the rod in the place where it is smeared with excrement, ottappa is like one's fear of grabbing it in the place where it is red hot. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/bps-essay_23.html I believe that this is pretty explicit. And, if you believe that hiri and ottappa are not accompanied by unpleasant feeling, how do you explain them? You don't explain them, you just state that "they aren't what we think". Well, then, what are they? Can you provide an explanation. > I'll look forward to further discussion on right view (panna/samma ditthi), moral shame (hiri) and rectitude (ottappa). Even now as we 'speak', we can consider such qualities wisely. This is a form of meditation too. James: Unless such discussion supresses the hindrances, it isn't meditation- it is just discussion. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== > Metta, James #86973 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 12:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching egberdina Hi Sukin, 2008/6/14 Sukinder : > Hi Herman (and Howard), > S: You have stated in your response to Howard that you consider > ignorance to be 'absence' and not an active mental factor. I believe > ignorance to be a 'reality' with characteristic, function and cause. > What more can I say about it? > To begin, ignorance arises with *all* unwholesome consciousness, this > means that with the arising each time of 'craving', ignorance > accompanies it performing the function of obscuring. So yes it seems > that our understanding of craving too must be quite different. ;-) OK, so ignorance is a "something" that makes whatever arises appear to be different to what it really is? > > So according to the Abhidhamma, when craving, aversion, conceit, > jealousy, wrong view, miserliness etc., arises, there is perception of > permanence, pleasure, self and beauty, if not also 'belief' in the same. > In the suttas, ignorance is described in terms of "not knowing" the > 4NTs. In other words, there is no understanding of experiences as being > nama and rupa and their being impermanent, suffering and non-self. If that is how one should understand it, what do you make of the following? "Seeking satisfaction in the world, monks, I had pursued my way. That satisfaction in the world I found. In so far as satisfaction existed in the world, I have well perceived it by wisdom. Seeking for misery in the world, monks, I had pursued my way. That misery in the world I found. In so far as misery existed in the world, I have well perceived it by wisdom. Seeking for the escape from the world, monks, I had pursued my way. That escape from the world I found. In so far as an escape from the world existed, I have well perceived it by wisdom" (A. 111, 101). "If there were no satisfaction to be found in the world, beings would not be attached to the world .... If there were no misery to be found in the world, beings would not be repelled by the world .... If there were no escape from the world, beings could not escape therefrom" (A. 111, 102). It does not seem to me to be the case that ignorance plays any role in seeing satisfaction in the world. > > Herman: > If you wanted to find a being less affected than any other by > proliferation, or self-view, or any other view, you cannot go past our > stupid baby. And this fact makes the stupid baby most intimately > familiar with the present moment, wouldn't you say? > > S: Well, now you know that I can't agree with the above. In the absence > of dana, sila and bhavana, a baby has ignorance all the time. The way I see it, dana and sila are meaningless in the absence of a concept of beings, both other and self. You are in fact saying that the baby needs to develop self-view in order to not be ignorant. Are you saying that wrong view is a pre-requisite for right view? Even if > some kusala cittas could arise, so long as he hasn't heard the Dhamma, > there is no way that he would ever be mindful of present moment realities. Ahhhh, now you're talking. Mindfulness. Not your explanation of what it is, or how it arises, but the fact of mindfulness. I agree that the baby lacks the ability to be mindful, But in order for mindfulness to become possible, the baby needs to develop awareness of itself. > =================== > > The Buddha I > > think, wanted to point out the fact that "not being engaged in certain > > forms of evil" does not imply "a corresponding good being done". So I > > don't think that it applies to the comparison you are making. The baby > > is simply "ignorant", he has no right view but neither does he have > > wrong view. > > Herman: > The baby knows ONLY the present moment, what more do you want? Isn't > this the state of knowing parramattha dhammas that dsg'ers clamour for > in their twos and threes? :-) (The smiley is for the turn of phrase, > not the sentiment expressed). > > S: :-) Perhaps I should change my last sentence above to, "The baby is > simply "ignorant", he has no wrong view but neither does he have right > view". > > ================ > > But I may be missing your point, in which case please explain more. Well, the point is simply that the baby knows every sensation that is occuring, and doesn't label them, doesn't proliferate, doesn't conceive of sirens or funerals or persons. The baby is unmitigated, unadulterated dsg heaven :-) > > Herman: > It is going back a while now, but this got started because you > conferred some benefit on those who conceived of anatta. Tell me > something, Sukin, of what value is it to say that all conditioned > phenomena are conditioned? Is there some knowledge or insight being > conveyed? If so, what is it? > > S: You've heard so many explanations, so what is it that you are asking? > Probably you are looking at this much more deeply that I can imagine? > Anyway, I'll speak and you will let me know what I am missing. > > Seeing that the present moment has arisen and fallen away already, one > knows that realities arise beyond control. Understanding for example, > the 'thinking' now is conditioned by 'seeing' and other realities > arising in between, shows to some extent, that "conditionality" is what > it is all about. With this in mind and understanding particularly > "thinking", to be variously conditioned, one begins to see through > thoughts about "doings" aimed at developing more kusala and > understanding. 'Intentions' which otherwise appear noble and good, no > longer has power when in fact seen to be motivated by "self". And this > as I've said in the beginning, must necessarily be rooted in ignorance. > > Sure, this is understood at the intellectual level mostly. However even > at this level, it has the effect of steering one away from taking the > wrong path. This, including the idea of "meditation", not only does it > have nothing to do with 'practice' / 'bhavana', is like it or not, in > fact a result of wrong understanding at the *intellectual level*, about > Dhamma including conditionality. So called 'meditators', need to > appreciate this, i.e. the importance of getting it right intellectually! > Instead however, having grasped at the uninstructed worldlings > conception of 'practice' and gone along with it to the extent that they > have, they have in the process distant themselves from any prospect of > seeing the true value of listening / study, let alone to question their > misconception about what constitutes Bhavana. > > So what could I be conveying to someone with a totally different > outlook? I don't know. But what I don't know more is the fact of how > conditions work. Perhaps something will click some time. So I'll wait to > read your response to see if anything new has been conveyed to you this > time. ;-) I highlighted mindfulness earlier on in your post. One of the startling features of mindfulness is the realisation that no action (kamma) is ever necessary, forced or caused. There is no condition, in a mindful state, which is causing me to do anything. I always do something, but whatever I do, it is not conditioned, it is unconditioned. We have an obvious problem here, Sukin. You seem to deny action, because everything that happens is down to conditions, as far as you're concerned, But you acknowledge that you just don't know what those conditions are. But I'm saying that taking the position that everything is down to conditions, is an act, and that there are no conditions which are sufficient to explain you taking that position, if you are mindful. I deny that conditions can explain the reality of any action taken mindfully. > > Conditions are that I feel very sleepy and must go now. Isn't going to > sleep a good example of anatta and conditionality? :-)) > No, there is nothing making you go to bed. Still, you go, and that is kamma, not anatta. You cannot have your anatta and your kamma, Sukin, sorry :-) Cheers Herman #86974 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 2:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Stopping akusala sarahprocter... Hi James (Han & all), You raise some good points for further discussion. --- On Sat, 14/6/08, buddhatrue wrote: >James: I believe we discussed this before but it wouldn't hurt to discuss again. Even though hiri and ottappa are wholesome mental factors, they are accompanied by unpleasant feeling. ... S: No wholesome mental factors are accompanied by unpleasant feeling. Whenever there is unpleasant feeling, there is dosa, one of the 3 roots of all unwholesome states, never a root of wholesome states. .... J:>If moral shame and dread were accompanied by equanimity, calm, or happiness, they wouldn't do what they are designed to do: stop acts of akusala. .... S: On the contrary, when hiri and ottppa arise, they perform their functions of 'guarding' virtue and preventing akusala from arising. Visuddhimagga (I, 22): " For when conscience (hiri) and shame (ottappa) are in existence, virtue arises and persists; and when they are not, it neither arises nor persists" Virtue and other wholesome states can only arise with calm, equanimity and happiness or neutral feeling. .... J:>Here is a reference to Buddhaghosa (who I think you accept as an authority): >Acariya Buddhaghosa illustrates the difference between the two with the simile of an iron rod smeared with excrement at one end and heated to a glow at the other end: hiri is like one's disgust at grabbing the rod in the place where it is smeared with excrement, ottappa is like one's fear of grabbing it in the place where it is red hot. http://www.accessto insight.org/ lib/authors/ bodhi/bps- essay_23. html .... S: As I said, the 'disgust' and 'fear' referred to here do not refer to aversion or fear about our akusala as we usually understand such terms. Hiri and ottappa only accompany kusala cittas, leading us to shrink.from akusala, seeing the harm in it, such as in gross misdeeds, unkind speech or thoughts or even in much more subtle attachment. We agree that the Buddha encouraged us to see the danger in the slightest faults and laid down rules for the bhikkhus to assist in this. So, as understanding grows, so do the hiri and ottappa, seeing the harm in more and more akusala. They become more and more refined, even seeing the harm in ignorance of realities now and the danger of conituation in samsara. ... >James: Unless such discussion supresses the hindrances, it isn't meditation- it is just discussion. .... S: When there is wise reflection with panna, it is bhavana (mental development/meditation). At such moments hiri and ottappa arise, 'guarding' the citta from any akusala from arising. Only right understanding can know at any moment whether the citta is kusala, whether there is such bhavana or 'meditation'. Remember the 10 meritorious deeds which can be divided into dana, sila and bhavana? Han gave a good summary before(66074): H:>In this post the "ten bases of meritorious deeds" (pu~n~nakiriya-vatthus) are listed. They can be grouped into three groups, namely, generosity (daana) group, morality (siila) group, and mental development (bhaavanaa) group. As the presentation proceeds the reader will know which base of meritorious deeds belongs to which group. But I think it will be useful if we know the grouping even at this stage. The three groups are as follows. Generosity (daana) Group 1) charity or generosity (daana) 2) sharing one's merit (pattidaana) 3) thanksgiving or appreciation of someone else's good deeds (pattaanumodana) Morality (siila) Group 1) virtue or morality (siila) 2) respect (pacaayana) 3) dutifulness or helpfulness (veyaavacca) Mental development (bhaavanaa) Group 1) culture or mental development (bhaavanaa) 2) teaching Dhamma (dhamma-desanaa) 3) listening to Dhamma(dhamma-savana) 4) rectification of opinion (correction of one's views) (ditthijjukamma) It is to be noted that although the rectification of opinion (correction of one's views) (ditthijjukamma) is listed in mental development (bhaavanaa) group, actually it may be included in all three groups, because one will perform daana, siila and bhaavanaa only if one has the right view about kamma and its effect.< ***** S: I'll look forward to any further comments you, Han or anyone else have on hiri, ottappa, bhavana/meditation, suppression of hindrances or any other aspect of the Dhamma. Metta, Sarah ========= #86975 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 12:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Jon) - In a message dated 6/14/2008 1:27:37 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: You wrote the following to me on the 5th of June, in this thread: >To my understanding, there is no entity of 'stream of consciousness'. >The only 'entities' are things having a characteristic that can be >directly experienced (referred to in the texts as "dhammas", >"khandhas", "dhatus", etc). But in the post I am replying to you say " ....the vipaka consciousness conditioned by the kamma intention arises in the same stream of consciousness as the intention." I'm always happy to be convinced that I'm being dense, but to me it seems you are contradicting yourself. What is it you are refering to when you refer to a "stream of consciousness"? ============================== I think this matter of distinguishing namarupic streams is extemely important. And, Herman, I agree that there is an apparent contradiction that calls out for resolution. It seems to me that the Buddha's statements with regard to kamma demand distinguishing of mind streams. At the same time, it is also clear to me that a namarupic stream consists of nothing but khandhic elements, and it is also clear that there is interaction among namarupic streams - significant interdependency, so that while streams are distinguishable, they are also inseparable and not existing as independent entities, depending as they do for their very existence first of all on their dhammic constituents, secondly on the interdependencies among those dhammas, and thirdly on other streams of consciousness. So, streams of consciousness are not nothing at all, nor are they self-existent entities with own being or identity (which latter term literally means "self"). I think the fundamental "solution" to all this lies in the details of relations. The interrelationships among the dhammas of "the same" stream are more intimate and strong than those among dhammas from differing streams, the difference in type and strength of interrelationships actually being what enables the distinguishing of streams. In particular, the dhammas related by the kamma-to-vipaka relation is the strongest determiner of dhammas being "in the same stream." It is not so much that kamma has its results within the same mind stream as that what conventionally constitutes a given mind stream is largely determined by what phenomena are related by kamma! In other words, the matter is close to the reverse of the way it is usually formulated. A final point that I would quickly hasten to make, is that unless one accepts streams of dhammas as having some level of existence/reality, the notion of kammic inheritance as given by the Buddha is incoherent nonsense. I think this is your point, Herman. But the thing is, as I see it, that "some level of existence/reality," if it is contingent and based on dependencies, is not in contradiction to the not-self (or emptiness) perspective of the Dhamma. Jon, I think, may slightly list towards the nihilist side on this matter and you towards the substantialist side, but I think the Dhamma, as always, stands at the middle. With metta, Howard #86976 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 4:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Stopping akusala buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > J:>Here is a reference to Buddhaghosa (who I think you accept as an > authority): > > >Acariya Buddhaghosa illustrates the difference between the two with > the simile of an iron rod smeared with excrement at one end and > heated to a glow at the other end: hiri is like one's disgust at > grabbing the rod in the place where it is smeared with excrement, > ottappa is like one's fear of grabbing it in the place where it is > red hot. > http://www.accessto insight.org/ lib/authors/ bodhi/bps- essay_23. html > .... > S: As I said, the 'disgust' and 'fear' referred to here do not > refer to aversion or fear about our akusala as we usually understand such terms. James: It seems to me that you are just repeating yourself. I asked you to explain what "disgust" and "fear" really mean if they don't mean disgust and fear. What do they mean? If an apple isn't an apple then what is the apple? And, remember, hiri and ottappa may or may not be accompanied by panna. Everyday folks, never hearing of the Dhamma, experience hiri and ottappa- as well as those on the path to enlightenment. Metta, James ps. I cut out the part about meditation because your reply went in several different directions at once. #86977 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 12:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 6/14/2008 2:12:35 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/6/13 : > Hi, Herman - > > Yes, I read ignorance to be an absence, and therefore it doesn't make > sense to say that this absence arises. How does ignorance as an active > condition fit into a phenomenalist perspective, I wonder? > ---------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I wasn't aware of phenomenalism denying mental activities, some very > harmful. Sorry that I was unclear. What I was alluding to was that if ignorance is an active way of perceiving, then how is ignorant experience different from luminous experience? --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Ah, I see what you are after. You want an objective basis for distinguishing between "correct" and "incorrect," and you believe that only an experience-independent reality could serve as that. But I say that it would NOT serve as that, for without *experiencing* it, it could serve as nothing. What I think serves for this distinguishing is an internal and pragmatic matter - namely what conduces to lasting peace and long-term effective functioning. Ultimately, each of us has to find our way to "the truth," and there is no way to persuade anyone of it by pointing to an alleged objective, external reality. There is only the approach taken by the Buddha, to wit, paraphrasing: "This is what I've seen to be so. Ehipassiko!" ------------------------------------------------------------- > I see ignorance as a distortion & confusion & obscuration activity (or > cluster of activities). I see wisdom as a countering activity (or cluster of > activities). Each of these, as I see the matter, opposes the presence of the > other in the course of its acting. > --------------------------------------------------- It sounds to me like you are saying that in the case of normal (ignorant) perception, we do not really perceive what we perceive, that there is a true perception waiting to be uncovered "behind" it. Is that an acceptable paraphrase? -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, but see what I wrote above. The "correctness" of vision cannot be justified on the basis of an un-viewable objectivity, but only on a basis of pragmatic consequence and intersubjective agreement, and that is not definitively satisfying to folks who want nicely tied and wrapped packages. ---------------------------------------------- > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Craving, aversion, and attachment, on the one hand, and sense of self, > on the other, are, in my view, mutually dependent and reinforcing. In MN 9, > for example, the Buddha says not only "From the origination of fermentation > comes the origination of ignorance" but also "From the origination of ignorance > comes the origination of fermentation," and included within the fermentations > is "the fermentation of sensuality," which I take to be the craving for, > aversion to, and attachment to sense-door phenomena. > ----------------------------------------------------------- To be honest, I do not understand a lot of that sutta, or how it fits into your view of ignorance. It defines ignorance as the not knowing of the 4 Noble Truths, which doesn't sound like an active condition, but the lack of one. It further says that the taint of ignorance is a condition for the arising of ignorance. This makes ignorance a condition for itself, which pretty well renders it a perpetuum mobile, and the Path an impossibility. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: The "not knowing" of the four noble truths includes the non-realization of nibbana, leaving one with a sense of personal self, of self in all dhammas, and of separateness. It is an active misperceiving of seamless reality. ------------------------------------------------------ I'm happy for you to put me straight, Howard :-) ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm just putting forward my perspective. I wouldn't presume to "put you straight"! ;-) ----------------------------------------------------- Cheers Herman ============================= With metta, Howard #86978 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 5:08 am Subject: Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition dhammanusarin Dear KenH, - I can tell that it is your message right away even before looking at the name. It rings the same bell over and over very consistently. ............................ Hi Tep, ------- <. . .> T: It is wrong to compete pa~n~na with sati. You need them as well as saddha, viriya and samadhi. -------- I think you are saying we need to develop these qualities separately. But, as you will know by now, I see them as cetasikas that perform their functions together in a single fleeting moment. Panna (right understanding) is their forerunner; without right understanding there can be no right mindfulness, right effort or right concentration. But with panna, they will all arise and develop together. Ken H ......................... T: I do not think they are totally independent; therefore, developing one separately from the others is not possible. But I do not know how "with panna, they will all arise and develop together". Please explain. Tep === #86979 From: "connie" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 5:44 am Subject: Perfections Corner (183) nichiconn Dear Friends, continuing ch.5: King Sa'mvara spoke to Prince Uposatha, who was his eldest brother and who was in his last life the venerable Saariputta, the following words: "I never grudge, O Prince, great sages who are seeking what is supreme and ready to pay them honour due with humble mind, I fall before their feet." When the prince with humble mind paid honour, falling at other people's feet, he must have had viriya, endeavour, to eradicate defilements, such as conceit or attachment to the importance of self, the importance of being a prince, the son of the King of Vaaraanasi. Here we see that nothing can be accomplished without viriya. Cittas are varied: some people are jealous of those who have knowledge, but they are not envious in other respects. It depends on someone's accumulations on account of which kind of object he has envy. If a person has knowledge and understanding, other people should have respect for his understanding, but some people are still inclined to be jealous. One needs to have viriya, one needs to make an effort to see the danger of jealousy and to get rid of it. King Sa'mvara continued with the words: "Wise sages who delight in the excellent teaching of those who seek what is excellent, taught me continuously. I, who was intent on what is right and liked to listen, had no envy. I listened to the words of the wise sages who are seeking what is supreme, I did not despise any cousel and was delighted with the teaching. I did not reduce the allowances of the elephant troops and chariotmen, royal guard and infantry, and I paid them the bonus and reward due to them. Great nobles and wise counsellors are waiting on me and giving me assistance so that the city of Vaaraanasi abounds with rice, fish and drinking water. Merchants who come from different states prosper, and I assist and protect them. Now you know the truth, Uposatha." Because of these words all people could see that the King was endowed with excellent qualities and therefore worthy to be the King of Vaaraanasi. The Buddha, after he had finished the discourse, spoke the following words: "Monk, long ago you followed the instruction, but why do you not now strive?" The Buddha declared the Truths and at the conclusion that monk was established in the fruition of streamwinning. The Buddha identified the persons in that former life: "That monk was prince Sa'mvara who became the King at that time, Saariputta was prince Uposatha, the Elders and secondary Elders were the other princes, the buddhist followers were their followers, and I myself was the courtier who advised the King." .. to be continued, connie #86980 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 5:58 am Subject: Re: Error in the Vism Definition of Pari~n~na (Full Understanding)? Part I dhammanusarin Hi Sarah, Nina, Jon, Alex, Han, Connie, - There was an error in the first message of this thread. Please notice that DN 1 is not Mulapariyaya Sutta, but MN 1 is. MN 1: Mulapariyaya Sutta — The Root Sequence http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.001.than.html Thanks. Tep === #86981 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 6:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Stopping akusala buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: Something more on this thread. You could try a little mental experiment: Pick one of your parents, either your mom or dad. Now mentally picture yourself killing him or her. It could be in any manner: stabbing, shooting, poisoning, etc. But really imagine it happening and imagine it in graphic detail. If you are like most people (and I hope you are) you will immediately have a feeling of disgust arise in your mind. The thought of you killing one of your parents is disgusting to you. And if you imagine the moment after it is done, you will feel a feeling of fear. You will be afraid of what the consequences will be (kamma wise and criminal wise). These feelings are moral dread and shame. They are unpleasant feelings, they are wholesome, and they stop you from committing the act of patricide. The Buddha wanted us to develop these feelings of moral dread and shame for even the smallest act of akusala, not just for the biggies like killing your parents. If you thought about killing your parents in graphic detail and all you felt was calm, equanimity, or happiness, there would be nothing stopping you from doing it. A friend sent me an e-mail with witicisms about life, and one funny one relates to this issue: "Some people are alive only because it is illegal to kill them." :-) Metta, James #86982 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 7:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations: Epiphenomenalist Explanation Requested scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the reply. Discussion with you always pushes me beyond my capabilities. Regarding: AN IX, 14 Samiddhi sutta.m: "...'What, Samiddhi, is the conditioning basis of the purposive thoughts that arise in a person?' - 'Name-and-form, venerable sir.' 'From what does their variety derive?' - 'From the elements.' 'What is their origin?' - 'Contact.' 'On what do they converge?' - 'Feeling' 'What is their head?' - 'Concentration.' 'What is their master?' - 'Mindfulness.' 'What is their climax?' - 'Wisdom.' 'What is their essence?' - 'Liberation.' 'Where do they merge?' - 'In the Deathless'" ['Kimaaramma.naa samiddhi, purisassa sa"nkappavitakkaa uppajjantiiti? Naamaruupaaramma.naa bhanteti. Te pana samiddhi, kva naanatta.m gacchantiiti? Dhaatusu bhanteti. Te pana samiddhi, ki.m samudayaati? Phassasamudayaa bhanteti. Te pana samiddhi, ki.m samosara.naati? Vedanaa samosara.naa bhanteti. Te pana samiddhi, ki.m pamukhaati? Samaadhipamukhaa bhanteti. Te pana samiddhi, ki.m aadhipateyyaati? Sataadhipateyyaa bhanteti. Te pana samiddhi, kimuttaraati? Pa~n~nuttaraa bhanteti. Te pana samiddhi, ki.m saaraati? Vimuttisaaraa bhanteti. Te pana samiddhi ki.m ogadhaati? Amatogadhaa bhanteti. Kimaaramma.naa samiddhi, purisassa sa"nkappavitakkaa uppajjantiiti? Iti pu~n~nho samaano naamaruupaaramma.naa bhanteti vadesi. Te pana samiddhi, kva naanatta.m gacchantiiti iti pu~n~nho samaano dhaatusu bhanteti vadesi.] H: "I didn't see the spectre of naama anywhere in the above..." Scott: I think that these are or include naama: 1)'Purposive Thoughts' (Sa"nkappavitakkaa) 2)'Name-and-form' (Naamaruupa) 3)'Contact' (Phassa) 4)'Feeling' (Vedanaa) 5)'Concentration' (Samaadhi) 6)'Mindfulness' (Sati) 7)'Wisdom' (Pa~n~naa) I'd expect that you see these (including the 'naama' of 'naamaruupa') to be naama as well (whether spectral or not, I don't know). Would this be so? Again, I'm also assuming that the way in which I characterise the Epiphenomenalist view is correct, since you've not said otherwise - that is that naama is not causal. H: "...and I didn't see it said that naama was causal in any of the items on the list..." Scott: The sutta is referring to sa"nkappavitakkaa ('purposive thoughts'). Subject, of course, to correction, I think that these refer to the Samma-sa"nkappa of the Noble Eightfold Path - thoughts of renunciation (nekkhamma), thoughts of hatelessness (avyaapaada), and thoughts of not-harming (avihimsaa) - in other words, thoughts free from sense-desire, from ill-will, and cruelty. When it is said that the essence of sa"nkappavitakkaa is liberation (vimuttisaaraa), then this would suggest that naama is causal. The term 'vimuttisaaraa' is a compound combining 'vimutti' with 'sarati'. Sarati is "to go, flow, run, move along Caus. saareti...to make go", (PTS PED); 'vimutti' is, of course, "release, deliverance, emanci- pation." Thus the meaning would be that the essence (sarati) of sa"nkappavitakkaa is to facilitate deliverance or release. Again, in this case, naama is causal. H: "...As I have previously pointed out, it is clearly stated in expositions of DO that vinnana and namarupa mutually condition each other, but that it is namarupa that conditions the further links in the chain. I do not equate namarupa with consciousness, and it is consciousness that I reject as being causal..." Scott: How do you define 'naamaruupa'? This would be a helpful clarification. I imagine that the definition would diverge from the one I wish to understand, since its quite clear we differ when it comes to views on 'orthodoxy'. This essential divergence would then render the views we present to be incompatible. I discuss and study here only to come to an intellectual understanding of the 'traditional' Theravaada view, including the Commentarial position. 'Vi~n~naa.na' ("the [khandha] of consciousness"), according to Dhammasa"nga.nii (p.27) is: "The thought which on that occasion is ideation, mind, the heart, that which is clear, ideation as the sphere of mind, as the faculty of mind, the [khandha] of consciousness..." According to the sutta, naamaruupa is support for all the rest (naamaruupaaramma.naa). Can we agree on this?. Sticking with pa.ticca samuppaada, aviija (ignorance), a mental factor (naama), is cause for the whole chain. Do you see it this way? Pa.ticca samuppaada starts with naama. Aviija (naama) is condition for sa"nkhaara. Sa"nkhaara is the aspect of forming related to the kusala and akusala function of cetanaa - again naama. Sa"nkhaara is condition for vi~n~naa.na, defined above - again naama. Ruupa comes in and, as you note, giving naamaruupa - mental and physical phenomena. You do not equate naamaruupa with consciousness, yet naama is cause for the arising of naamaruuupa, is it not? Over to you, for now. Sincerely, Scott. #86983 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 9:02 am Subject: Error in the Vism; Part II: Vism and Patism. dhammanusarin Dear Sarah, Nina, Jon, Alex, Han, Connie, - Let me step back from the individual opinions and interpretations in Part I to examine the passages about pari~n~na in the Visuddhimagga (XXII, 3, 4. XXII,106-108) that use Patism as the reference. And along with these Vism passages, I also present the original Patisambhidamagga passages (paragraphs) I can find from my book. Finally, in Part III, I will impersonally connect them to the Buddha's words in Pari~n~na Sutta[SN 22.23] and Mulapariyaya Sutta [MN 1]. I think we need to examine the original sources in order to have a clear picture that is not tainted by our own views. I will leave it to you to decide if there indeed is an error in the Vism about what pari~n~na truly means, according to the Arahants: Samma-sambuddha and Sariputta. (Please note that message #50716 and myself mistakenly refer to DN 1 as Mulapariyaya Sutta.) .............................. Vism XX, 3: Here is the exposition: there are three kinds of mundane full understanding, that is, full-understanding of the known, full understanding as investigation, and full-understanding as abandoning, with reference to which it was said: 'Understanding that is direct-knowledge is knowledge in the sense of being known. Understanding that is full understanding is knowledge in the sense of investigating. Understanding that is abandoning is knowledge in the sense of giving up' [Ps.i.87] T: Ps.i.87 stands for Patisambhidamagga, Treatise i : on Knowledge, paragraph 87. But the paragraph number 87 does not match with my Patism book. Patism i, 29. Adverting as a meaning is to be directly known. Cognizing as a meaning ... The act of understanding as a meaning ... Perceiving as a meaning ... Singleness as a meaning is to be directly known. What-is-known as the meaning of direct knowledge Judging (investigating) as the meaning of full-understanding ... Giving up as the meaning of abandoning ... Single function as the meaning of developing ... Sounding(phassana) as the meaning of realizing ... etc. T: I also find more detail about full-understanding(pari~n~na) in Patism i, 265 (hard-bound copy, PTS Publication, 2002). Patism i, 265. ... ... [T: I am skipping the part on training in the higher virtue] ... ... He trains by adverting to these three kinds of training, he trains by knowing them, by seeing them, by reviewing them, by steadying [cognizance] upon them, by resolving with faith upon them, by exerting energy upon them, by establishing mindfulness upon them, by concentrating cognizance upon them, by understanding them with understanding, by directly knowing what is to be directly known, by fully understanding what is to be fully understood, by abandoning what is to be abandoned, by realizing what is to be realized, he trains by developing what should be developed. etc. T: As shown above "full understanding" is just one kind (not three kinds, or three-fold) of knowledge (~nana) among the other five kinds, namely : 1. understanding with understanding(cariyananatta~nana), 2. directly knowing what is to be directly known(~natatta~nana), 3. abandoning what is to be abandoned (pariccagatta~nana), 4. realizing what is to be realized(phassanatta~nana), and 5. developing what should be developed(ekarasatta~nana). ........................ Vism XX,4 : Herein, the plane of full-understanding as the known extends from the delimitation of formations up to the discernment of conditions; for in this interval the penetration of the specific characteristics of states predominates. The plane of full- understanding as investigation extends from comprehension by groups up to contemplation of rise and fall; for in this interval the penetration of the general characteristics predominates. The plane of full-understanding as abandoning extends from contemplation of dissolution onwards; for from these onwards the seven contemplations that affect the abandoning of the perception of permanence, etc., predominate ... ... Vism XXII, 106-108: (a) Full-understanding is threefold, that is (i) full-understanding as the known, (ii) full-understanding as investigating(judging), and (ii) full-understanding as abandoning (see Ch. XX, 3). (i) Herein, full-understanding as the knownis summarized thus: 'Understanding that is direct knowledge is knowledge in the sense of the known' (Ps.i.87). It is briefly stated thus: 'Whatever states are directly known are known' (Ps.i.87). It is given in detail in the way beginning: 'Bhikkhus, all is to be directly known. And what is to be directly known? Eye is to be directly known ...' (Ps.i.5) Its particular plane is the direct knowing of mentality- materiality with its conditions. (ii) Full-understanding as investigating (judging) is summarized thus: 'Understanding that is full-understanding is knowledge in the sense of investigation(judging)' (Ps.i.87). It is briefly stated thus: 'Whatever states are understood are investigated(judged)' (Ps.i.87). It is given in detail in the way beginning: 'Bhikkhus, all is to be understood. And what is all that is to be understood? The eye is to be fully understood ...' (Ps.i.22). Its particular plane starts with comprehension by groups, and occurring as investigation of impermanence, suffering, and not-self, it extends as far as conformity (cf. Ch. XX, 4). (iii) Full-understanding as abanding is summarized thus: 'Understanding that is abandoning is knowledge in the sense of giving up' (Ps.i.87). It is stated in detail thus: 'Whatever states are abandoned are given up' (Ps.i.87). It occurs in the way beginning: 'Through the contemplation of impermanence he abandons the perception of permanence (Cf. Ps.i.87). Its plane extends from the contemplation of dissolution to path knowledge. This is what is intended here. T: Ven. Buddhaghosa heavily refered to the Patisambhidamagga. But it should be carefully noticed that the Arahant Sariputta or the Buddha did not wrap the other two knowledges with "fully understanding what is to be fully understood" (tiranatta~nana) and call it 'pari~n~na' like the venerable did. The evidence is seen in Patism i, 413-415 : 413. How is it that (XX) understanding as direct knowledge is knowledge in the sense of what-is-known? That (XXI) understanding as full understanding is knowledge in the sense of judging (investigating)? That (XXII) abandoning is knowledge in the sense of giving up? That (XXIII) understanding as developing is knowledge in the sense of single function? That (XIV) understanding as realizing is knowledge in the sense of sounding(phassana)? [T: the Roman numerals denote the particular kinds of the 73 knowledges (~nanas) in Patism Treatise i, On Knowledge.] 414. Whatever ideas(dhammas) are directly known are known. Whatever ideas are fully understood are judged(investigated). Whatever ideas are abandoned are given up. What ever ideas are developed have a single function(rasa, taste). Whatever ideas are realized are sounded. 415, Knowledge is in the sense of that being known and understanding is in the sense of the act of understanding that. Hence it was said : 'understanding as direct knowledge is knowledge in the sense of what-is-know; understanding as full understanding is knowledge in the sense of judging (investigating); understanding as abandoning is knowledge in the sense of giving up; understanding as developing is knowledge in the sense of single function; understanding as realizing is knowledge in the sense of sounding'. ................................. That is enough for Part II. In Part III I will wrap up the presentation. Thank you for your unbroken attention. Tep === #86984 From: Dieter Möller Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 9:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Blind and the Cripple /Lame moellerdieter Hi Howard (Jon,Alex), ' Dieter, I think you are making more of this matter than is warranted.' Howard, you don't help me to get a better understanding of a matter I cónsider confusing when you don't refer to my arguments. The Khanda/aggregate understanding and its relation in D.O. is certainly crucial, finally it concerns ' sankhittena pancupadanakhanda ' There are questions I try to find an answer ..e.g. consciousness and mind and its khanda arrangement , about which we talked a already. If the matter is clear to you and you don't get my points of doubt , it is ok and I will study it by myself....no bad feelings ;-) with Metta Dieter #86985 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 9:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] akusala citta - mana sarahprocter... Hi Lukas, I find ou're asking good questions and making useful comments. --- On Fri, 13/6/08, szmicio wrote: L:>Is it citta experiences an object and cetasika helps citta? ... S: Yes, the citta is the 'chief' in experiencing an object and it is always acompanied by at least 7 cetasikas which assist it and experience the same object. [Btw, I think you would like and find Nina's book 'Cetasikas' (on-line) particularly helpful.] .... L:>so mana is a cetasika? ... S: Yes. It's a cetasika which always arises with lobha (attachment). ... L:> What is a function of mana? ... S: Here is an extract from ch 17 of the book I just referred to which I quoted before: >The Atthasaalinii (II, Part IX, Chapter III, 256) gives the following definition of conceit: * "Herein conceit is fancying (deeming, vain imagining). It has haughtiness as characteristic, self-praise as function, desire to (advertise self like) a banner as manifestation, greed dissociated from opinionativeness as proximate cause, and should be regarded as (a form of) lunacy." * Attachment is the proximate cause of conceit, but it is attachment which is dissociated from wrong view (di.t.thigata-vippayutta). As we have seen, conceit does not arise together with wrong view; it arises with lobha-m�la-citta which is dissociated from wrong view. The Visuddhimagga (XIV, 168) gives a similar definition, but it mentions as manifestation of conceit "vaingloriousness" and it does not mention the desire to advertise oneself like a banner(1). In the definition of the Atthasaalinii conceit as desire for selfadvertisement is compared to the desire for a banner. A banner is hoisted into the air so that everyone can see it. We tend to find ourselves important, to uphold ourselves. Conceit is like a lunacy or madness. Although there is no need for self-advertisement or for comparing ourselves with others we still do so, because conceit has been accumulated. The study of akusala dhammas is most helpful. If we do not know what conceit is and in which cases it can arise, we will accumulate more and more conceit without realizing it. *** 1) Compare also Dhammasangani,1116, and the explanation of it in the Atthasaalinii, Book II, Summary, Chapter II, 372.< ***** S: So whenever there is the finding of ourselves important, the 'waving of the banner', the comparing of ourselves with others (even when finding ourselves equal or inferior in some regard), there is maana (conceit) present. ... L:>How could we know mana? ... S: Only pa~n~naa (right understanding) can know it, when it arises. ... L:>Is it another citta which is aware of mana or that is panja which accompany mana? Can mana and panja arise together? ... S: Maana and pa~n~naa cannot arise together. However, the characteristic of the maana can be known by the subsequent pa~n~na arising immediately afterwards. ... L:>If there is a thinking of mana should it be known as just thinking? ... S: Yes, exactly. You get the point! ... L:>Is there any need to feel averion to mana,to feel any regret? ... S: It's seless to have aversion or regret anytime about anything. It's just more akusala being accumulated. Of course, it's natural for such states to arise and they too can be the objects of right understanding. ... L:>I know that I have so many grief and sorrow that I am so proud and this is against Buddha Dhamma? ... S: Remember that they are just conditioned states that don't belong to anyone! They're anatta, which means they cannot be controlled. However, understanding can develop to know these or any other dhammas arising. Don't cling to the idea of Lukas having such qualities! **** Metta, Sarah P.S. Btw, You mentioned that you're interested to collect all Nina's translations of A.Sujin's books. If you'd care to give your postal address off-line to Sukin or myself, we can send you a copy of her book 'Survey of Paramattha Dhammas'. I think you'd also appreciate the edited audio recordings of discussions with A.Sujin at: www.dhammastudygroup.org At this link, scroll down to the audio files below the archived messages. Also, the PTS translation of the Vinaya (which Nina referred to) by I.B.Horner, is now available on-line. Connie can gave the link again, if you're interested. ================= #86986 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 10:15 am Subject: Rebirth&Gods allegory? The horrors of eternal return in materialistic world truth_aerator Hello all, -- Here is interesting review of a Book by a Scholar about Early Buddhism --- This book ... explains a number of key strategies the Buddha employed in order to convert his listeners, many of whom were adherents to other religious persuasions, most notably Brahminism. Gombrich's theses, resulting from a close analysis of the earliest extant Buddhist canonical texts, that the Buddha deliberately used Brahminical concepts such as "karma" ("kamma" in Pali) in his sermons but covertly twisting their meanings to expound his doctrines, and that the Buddha used "satirical allegory" through, e.g., parodying Brahminical texts such as the B.rhadaara.nyaka Upani.sad, are utterly original contributions to the history of early Buddhist thought. Seen in this light, the Buddha was far from the solemn, straight-faced preacher many would have assumed; instead, his humour and clarity of mind shines through the pages of this book, as it would through the pages of the Pali passages on which Gombrich gives his inspirational interpretation. - Jerome (For Scott: no, not Iginla) Chiu reviewing Richard Gombrich's book "How Buddhism began" at Amazon.com Notice words "deliberately used Brahmanical concepts". The dry suttas divorced from Hindu cultural mileau, his bodily/facial expressions, sense of humour, etc could have been easily mis interpreted by dry humourless, scholars later on. Furthermore it is of important note that Buddhist Cosmology seems to be almost and exact replica of Hindu cosmologies of that time. The reason I say "almost" is that in Buddhist Cosmologies, the Brahma's powers and understanding are diminished. In some suttas such as DN11, there is a satire on Brahma. Now if one wanted to make a satire out of something, then you have to reproduce the object of satire pretty accurately right? Some Cosmological things look very satirical, maybe even allegorical and so on. Lets take the deluded God Brahma. He was the first to be reborn into 1st Jhanic plane of Rupa Loka, not due to Merit, but on the contrary, to the lack of it. His Good Kamma from higher planes has expired before other's and due to this worser Kamma he was downgraded. Then in his delusion he has thought to create other beings in the empty realm that he has inhabited. So when others, due to perhaps better Kamma, expired from higher worlds and were downgraded to, they were reborn as his servants. So on with Humans. Then some human has a question "where does earth,water, fire, air, cease without remainder" and THROUGH MEDITATION goes to heavenly plane for answers. The Devas there are ignorant and they say, "Go to our superiors". The same happens in the higher and higher planes, until the Great Brahma appears. After a while, the reluctant God Brahma, whispers a secret "I don't know! Ask the Buddha, but don't tell anyone!" (Don't reveal that I am ignorant, endowed with lesser Kamma and merely pretending to be omniscient) . If this ain't a satire, then I don't know what is. Strait faced, no humour, literalists may not understand what sort of a Joke on Brahmanical Cosmology this is... No wonder Buddhist cosmology and terminology is exact duplicate of Brahmanical one, + the downgrading of Gods as being worse than Buddha and fairly thick. Also, the rupa&arupa lokas where "Brahmas" live fit very much into a meditational roadmap. In fact a person who meditates a lot shines, and could be allegorically called "a deva" or "Brahma". Mara could be simply an allegory of a hurting knee or back, or all the sensual thoughts distracting one in meditation. After all, Mara could be derived from Marana (death) or from Mara-Khanda (craving toward khandas). The suttas were compiled and later written down by ancient Indians who were brought up in that culture and they may not have known that Buddha was making a big satire on the cultural beliefs of his times. Considering that it is said that they couldn't figure out which rules were minor and which were Major, I think it is important to consider that they may have MIS INTERPRETED Buddha by perhaps taking things too literally. With all of the above said, it isn't strange that Buddhist cosmology is so similiar (sometimes Absurdly so) to the ridiculous geocentric flat Earth of the Hindus where rain Devas cause Rain (I wonder what do they do?). Remember that when we READ as opposed to LISTEN to the Buddha - we are missing quite a lot. Most of communication isn't verbal anyways. It may be hard to separate humor, allegory, satire from emotionless text that was formatted and translated, and some most likely weren't taken to mean what Buddha has said anyways. It may not be unlikely that the Deva Lokas & The hells are highly allegorical states of mind, described in a such a way by the Buddha to convert more people. Remember, he USED Brahminical terminology while fully knowing what they were, or were not. ---------- these are the world's designations, the world's expressions, the world's ways of speaking, the world's descriptions, with which the Tathagata expresses himself but without grasping to them http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.09.0.than.html#t-10 -------- Another thing is that Brahmanical elements may have crept into the canon as the Sangha started to deteriorate after Buddha was gone. Not only the Buddha was the best (he was the best), but he was a Vedagu (master of Vedas), the Arahat monks = Brahmins, 31 Brahmanical marks of Great Man (A super Brahmin?), etc etc/ ================================================================ Lets talk to the main Point now, REBIRTH. Modern science has emperically shown that at least some (if not all) aspects of personality are based on genes, brain, and firing of neurons - aka matter. Thus if this view is correct, then if your body would be exactly duplicated - you would be exactly duplicated with consciousness and personality. The Buddha wasn't far away: "Were someone to say, 'I will describe a coming, a going, a passing away, an arising, a growth, an increase, or a proliferation of consciousness apart from form, from feeling, from perception, from fabrications,' that would be impossible http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.054.than.html In other words, consciousness depends on the 4 other aggregates. It can't exist without them. Thus how can consciousness itself transmigrate, or be reborn, unless it is carried over with Matter. Modern Astrophysics claims that Big Bang can come out from nothing (actually a quantum fluctuation in a vaccum or near vaccum state) and that when this universe suffers heat death, another universes may be formed from Big Bangs. These cycles could have went without a beginning, or at least can continue without end and if we have parallel universes, then we have a LOT of Big Bangs. After enough of Big Bangs, there may be universe formed EXACTLY like this one, with exactly the same conditions that have no freedom of will and everything will evolve as it has. This means, that your body (and thus your personality & consciousness) can arise again. Of course it may take trillions ^ trillions of big bangs (or the next one) for such a repeat. However, subjectively you will NOT feel that much time elapsed (you won't even feel anything, you wouldn't even know the gap was there). When your body (and consciousness has ceased) you will NOT feel the elapsed time (or space). So after the last conscious moment, the next one may be you being born yourself AGAIN. So if a person was born lets say in Jan 1st 1950, and died in 2030, the rebirth could be in... Jan 1st, 1950.... This is terrible... Reliving one life over and over again... Thus let us make the most of it, reach as many Jhanas possible (be devas and Brahmas!) and don't do anything bad that could echo throught eternity... As someone has said: "What you do in life, echoes in Eternity!" http://space.newscientist.com/article/mg19325904.400-new-universes- will-be-born-from-ours.html ======== IMHO of course. Best wishes, Alex #86987 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 11:01 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN2 jonoabb Hi Herman > I do not "buy" the hearing of "only > sound" being followed by an announcement to an other self that this > was the case. Communication is based on self-view, in the context of > other selves. A person in a social context announcing that a signal > was not a signal, is a sign of bad faith, not insight. I think you are mistaken in taking the comment about "the hearing of only sound" as a declaration of an actual personal experience of the moment. It was, as far as I know, simply an instancing of something then being discussed by reference to an presently occurring event. I think you are further mistaken in taking the idea that "it is (only) sound that is heard, not an ambulance siren" as involving a denial of the conventional context of an ambulance siren. To my understanding, there is no such denial involved, no disassociation (as you call it), in this. > I know and accept it is possible for red to be only red, green to be > only green, and a sound to be only sound. But Jon, in a social > context, red means stop, green means go, a siren means get out of the > way. Neither Sarah or KS have any business disassociating in public. As I said above, I think you have this wrong. It is not a matter of focussing on red and blocking out thoughts of 'stop sign'. > The Buddha said quite a lot about seeking out the base of trees and > empty huts. He said nothing about abhidhamma in daily life. I think it > is quite dangerous for anyone to suggest that He did. Yes, the Buddha did on occasion mention the base of trees and empty huts; but this was to selected audiences and not in terms of declaring those situations to be a necessary prerequisite to the development of insight. The Buddha also mentioned, and much, much more frequently, the khandhas, dhatus and ayatanas, that is to say, presently occurring dhammas, and how it was the understanding of these dhammas that constituted the development of the path; and he did so without specifying the need for the base of trees and empty huts for that understanding to occur. Jon #86988 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 11:07 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Blind and the Cripple /Lame jonoabb Hi Dieter > D: you are right: in a different context different meanings may > be found.. sometimes confusing often due to language/translation > difficulties. But I believe that concerns mainly the Sutta Pitaka .. > are there different definitions of nama as well in Abh and how to > understand the assumed different context? There are not different *definitions* of nama, but in the case of DO the term "nama", as part of the compound "namarupa", is used with a different *meaning* than the usual (defined) meaning of nama elsewhere. > Vinnaya =consciousness, nama = mind .. what is the difference > between both in English language? I assume the former excels > the latter, which excludes that the latter can include the former, > doesn't it? To my understanding: Vinnana = consciousness (other synonyms are: mano, citta) Nama = the kind of dhamma that experiences an object (vs. rupa, which = the kind of dhamma that does not experience an object). Nama comprises all cittas and all cetasikas. Thus, vinnana (= citta) is a subset of nama. Hoping this clarifies. > P.S. : more to say.. but sorry ...there is lobha to see soccer now (Germany vs Croatia) ;-) Same here. Sarah and I are in the co-host country Switzerland at the moment. As you know, they are not doing too well, so not much excitement around here (except among the Portuguese expats, of which there are many, who are very fervent supporters of their country's team - lots of Portuguese flags around). Jon #86989 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 11:10 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN29 jonoabb Hi Antony and Herman The Ven Sayadaw seems to be advocating a practice of mentally noting sense-door experiences, as a technique for allowing a "usual practice" of noting rising and falling to continue, without being distracted by the incoming sense-door experience. I see some similarities in the analogy of the deaf person here to the "disassociating" mentioned by Herman. As I indicated in my post to Herman of a short time ago, that is not my understanding of the development of insight as taught by the Buddha. Jon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Antony Woods" wrote: > > Hi Herman, Jon, Sarah, > I've never understood this teaching by Mahasi Sayadaw: > "It is necessary for a yogi to behave like a deaf person also. #86990 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 11:11 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN29 jonoabb Hi Antony --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Antony Woods" wrote: > > Hi Herman, Jon, Sarah, > > Sarah's comment during the siren "It's just hearing" was with a sense > of humor rather than being deadly serious, which makes a big > difference to the meaning doesn't it? I'd say it was neither of those (sense of humour, deadly serious), but was like the rest of our chat that day: light-hearted and pleasant but useful ;-)) Jon #86991 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 11:13 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN29 jonoabb Hi Antony --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Antony Woods" wrote: > > Hi Jon, Herman, Sarah, > > In another post I wrote: > "Sarah's comment during the siren "It's just hearing" was with a sense > of humor rather than being deadly serious, which makes a big > difference to the meaning doesn't it?" > > It might be helpful to take the alternative to the absurd: > "Oh No there's a siren! Quick let's radiate some compassion!" Right. Any idea of an "appropriate" response is likely to involve some element of wrong view. Jon #86992 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 11:24 am Subject: Re: response to hate mail etc - revised and corrected edition jonoabb Dear Ven Pannabahulo There are many points raised in your recent posts, but as regards the understanding and practice of the teachings (which I am sure you will agree is the thing of most value to discuss) there are the following comments on the subject of meditation: > ... As I said to one > DSG member recently, if one went through the entire Vinaya and studied > every sutta, and then highlighted the places where the Lord Buddha > teaches, or discusses,meditation - there wouldn't be much left of the > texts that are un-highlighted. [msg #86852] and: > The Buddha never taught anyone to abandon meditation which he saw as > integral to any progress on the Path. ... > > In the last group discussion I attended,the Ven Guttasila was trying > to make the same point re: anapanasati.He was unable to pursue the > matter because the meeting ended due to time restrictions. [msg #86938] Since there are no time restrictions on the discussions here ;-)), perhaps this would be a suitable place to pursue this important subject. If you are interested (and I hope you are), then a possible starting point would be for you to indicate how you are using the term "meditation" (since it is not a term met in the texts). The possibilities would include, for example: - as a synonym for samatha bhavana and/or vipassana bhavana - as a technique/method of practice for a person who aspires to the development of samatha or bhavana Looking forward to hearing further from you, and to discussing this subject without too much reference to recent events or absent third parties! Respectfully Jon #86993 From: "m. nease" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 11:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Views re self & the world DN2 m_nease Hi Jon, > ...the Buddha did on occasion mention the base of trees and empty > huts; but this was to selected audiences and not in terms of declaring > those situations to be a necessary prerequisite to the development of > insight. > > The Buddha also mentioned, and much, much more frequently, the > khandhas, dhatus and ayatanas, that is to say, presently occurring > dhammas, and how it was the understanding of these dhammas that > constituted the development of the path; and he did so without > specifying the need for the base of trees and empty huts for that > understanding to occur. An outstanding response even by your standards--thanks. mike #86994 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 11:39 am Subject: Error in the Vism. Part III: Comprehend & Comprehended. dhammanusarin Dear Sarah, Nina, Jon, Alex, Han, Connie, - Patism i, 414 lists four kinds of understanding, only one of which is the full understanding : Whatever ideas(dhammas) are directly known are known. Whatever ideas are fully understood are judged(investigated). Whatever ideas are abandoned are given up. What ever ideas are developed have a single function(rasa, taste). Whatever ideas are realized are sounded(phassita). According to Pari~n~a Sutta [SN 22.23], when the dhammas (e.g. the upadanakkhandha, the 'all', or the world) are comprehended (fully understood) lobha, dosa and moha are totally abandoned. ................................ The Blessed One said, "And which are the phenomena to be comprehended? Form is a phenomenon to be comprehended. Feeling ... Perception ... Fabrications ... Consciousness is a phenomenon to be comprehended. These are called phenomena to be comprehended. "And which is comprehension? Any ending of passion, ending of aversion, ending of delusion. [Note1] This is called comprehension." [SN 22.23] Translator's Note 1. Comprehension here means the arahant's full- knowing (see MN 117). As SN 56.11 shows, the first noble truth of suffering and stress is to be comprehended. As SN 56.20 further implies, when the first noble truth has been comprehended, the tasks with regard to all the other noble truths have been completed as well. ................................ In MN 1 (Mulapariyaya Sutta) the meaning of "conceiving" in the puthujjana who does not directly know 'the world' is contrasted to "direct knowing" of the 'one in training' (sekha). The highlight of MN 1 is in stressing that the purpose of such direct knowing of the sekha puggala is for comprehending. And when the dhammas are "comprehended", that is the ending of lobha, dosa and moha in the one beyond training (i.e. arahant). ...................................... http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.001.than.html [Puthujjana level] The Blessed One said: "There is the case, monks, where an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — perceives earth as earth. Perceiving earth as earth, he conceives [things] about earth, he conceives [things] in earth, he conceives [things] coming out of earth, he conceives earth as 'mine,' he delights in earth. Why is that? Because he has not comprehended it, I tell you. "He perceives water as water... fire as fire... ... ... the All as the All ... "He perceives Unbinding as Unbinding. Perceiving Unbinding as Unbinding, he conceives things about Unbinding, he conceives things in Unbinding, he conceives things coming out of Unbinding, he conceives Unbinding as 'mine,' he delights in Unbinding. Why is that? Because he has not comprehended it, I tell you. [Sekha level] "A monk who is a trainee — yearning for the unexcelled relief from bondage, his aspirations as yet unfulfilled — directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, let him not conceive things about earth, let him not conceive things in earth, let him not conceive things coming out of earth, let him not conceive earth as 'mine,' let him not delight in earth. Why is that? So that he may comprehend it, I tell you. "He directly knows water as water... fire as fire... ... ... the All as the All... "He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, let him not conceive things about Unbinding, let him not conceive things in Unbinding, let him not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, let him not conceive Unbinding as 'mine,' let him not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? So that he may comprehend it, I tell you. [Arahant level] "A monk who is a Worthy One, devoid of mental fermentations — who has attained completion, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the fetters of becoming, and is released through right knowledge — directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, he does not conceive things about earth, does not conceive things in earth, does not conceive things coming out of earth, does not conceive earth as 'mine,' does not delight in earth. Why is that? Because he has comprehended it, I tell you. "He directly knows water as water... fire as fire...... ..... the All as the All... "He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, he does not conceive things about Unbinding, does not conceive things in Unbinding, does not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, does not conceive Unbinding as 'mine,' does not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? Because he has comprehended it, I tell you." ................................ In conclusion: direct knowing and comprehending (fully understanding) the dhammas are in the sekha who is on the Path (Stream). When the dhammas are fully understood, the monk becomes an arahant. This is what the Buddha and Arahant Sariputta taught, not the three-fold full understanding in the Vism. What is your thought? Any disagreement, slightly different opinion, or complete agreement are all welcome ! Yours truly, Tep === #86995 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:22 pm Subject: Jhana Meditation. Again. truth_aerator Dearest Jon, Scott, Ken, and all, In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Dear Ven Pannabahulo > > > ... As I said to one DSG member recently, if one went through the entire Vinaya and studied every sutta, and then highlighted the places where the Lord Buddha teaches, or discusses,meditation - there wouldn't be much left of the texts that are un-highlighted. > [msg #86852] > > and: > > The Buddha never taught anyone to abandon meditation which he saw as integral to any progress on the Path. ... >>> Jon: ...perhaps this would be a suitable place to pursue this important subject. >>> It is good that you have called it "important". > Jon:>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > If you are interested (and I hope you are), then a possible starting > point would be for you to indicate how you are using the term > "meditation" (since it is not a term met in the texts). The > possibilities would include, for example: > - as a synonym for samatha bhavana and/or vipassana bhavana > - as a technique/method of practice for a person who aspires to the > development of samatha or bhavana >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jhana and Immaterial spheres - base of (infinite space, consciousness, nothingness, neither perception nor non perception). ================================================================ Lets take MN52: 11 doorways to Nibbana. "As he was sitting there, he said to Ven. Ananda: "Venerable sir, is there a single quality declared by the Blessed One — the one who knows, the one who sees, worthy & rightly self-awakened — where the unreleased mind of a monk who dwells there heedful, ardent, & resolute becomes released, or his unended fermentations go to their total ending, or he attains the unexcelled security from the yoke that he had not attained before?" "Yes, householder, there is..." "And what is that one quality, venerable sir...?" "There is the case, householder, 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 reflects on this and discerns, 'This first jhana is fabricated & intended. Now whatever is fabricated & intended is inconstant & subject to cessation.' Staying right there, he reaches the ending of the mental fermentations. Or, if not, then — through this very Dhamma-passion, this Dhamma-delight, and from the total wasting away of the first five Fetters1 — he is due to be reborn [in the Pure Abodes], there to be totally unbound, never again to return from that world. " "This, householder, is a single quality declared by the Blessed One — the one who knows, the one who sees, worthy & rightly self-awakened — where the unreleased mind of a monk who dwells there heedful, ardent, & resolute becomes released, or his unended fermentations go to their total ending, or he attains the unexcelled security from the yoke that he had not attained before. [Similarly with the second, third, and fourth jhanas.] [Similiar with 4 Brahmaviharas] "Then again, a monk — 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' — enters & remains in the dimension of the infinitude of space. He reflects on this and discerns, 'This attainment of the infinitude of space is fabricated & intended. Now whatever is fabricated & intended is inconstant & subject to cessation.' Staying right there, he reaches the ending of the mental fermentations. Or, if not, then — through this very Dhamma-passion, this Dhamma-delight, and from the total wasting away of the first five Fetters — he is due to be reborn [in the Pure Abodes], there to be totally unbound, never again to return from that world. "This too, householder, is a single quality declared by the Blessed One — the one who knows, the one who sees, worthy & rightly self- awakened — where the unreleased mind of a monk who dwells there heedful, ardent, & resolute becomes released, or his unended fermentations go to their total ending, or he attains the unexcelled security from the yoke that he had not attained before. [Similarly with the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness and the dimension of nothingness.] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.052.than.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an11/an11.017.than.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.036.than.html ================================================================ Again, Ananda, the bhikkhu overcoming all peceptions of space, with consciousness is boundless, abides in the sphere of consciousness.-- overcoming all the sphere of conscioussness, with there is nothing, abides in the sphere of no-thingness Attained to it he reflects all things that matter, all feelings, all perceptive things, all intentions, all conscious signs::are impermanent, unpleasant, an illness, an abscess, an arrow, a misfortune, an ailment, foreign, destined for destruction, void, devoid of a self. Then he turns the mind to the deathless element: This is peaceful, this is exalted, such as the appeasement of all determinations, the giving up of all endearments, the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation and extinction. With that mind he comes to the destruction of desires. If he does not destroy desires on account of greed and interest for those same things, he arises spontaneously with the destruction of the five lower bonds not to proceed. Ananda, this too is a method for the dispelling of the five lower bonds for the sensual world. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/064-maha-malunkhyaputta-e1.htm =============================================================== 1) Can you please describe what is mean by Jhana and arupa Jhana in the suttas? 2) How "concentrated" are the states? 3) Are they reachable through reading books? If so, which Jhana. 1st one? 4) Is this something done in the library or on the floor (should I cut and past links about sitting down crossleged and watching in-out breaths?) 5) How long does each Jhanic state lasts? 6) What do you say about "heedful, ardent & resolute" part in MN52 (and many suttas). 7) If these Jhana states are easily achievable at home, why become a Monk (or go on long meditation retreats?) as the Buddha has often stated? 8) If a person cannot let go enough to reach even the 1st Jhana for a short moment of time, what makes you think that the person can let go of the same fetters forever? "withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana..." - Ven TB translation. If you can't do the above, than what makes you think you can ever drop those fetters forever? If your "insight" can't set down conditions for that, what good of an "insight" is it? And is it like waiting for cows to come home with that sort of "insight", or should more insight-muscle be developed in order to be able to let go of fetters? Best wishes, Alex #86996 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:38 pm Subject: Visuddhimagga & Buddhaghosa - Is this true? truth_aerator Hello all, 1) Is this true that Buddhgahosa has written VsM to earn Merit and become Awakened? "His Visuddhimagga is supposed to be a detailed, step by step guide to enlightenment. And yet in the postscript he says he hopes that the merit he has earned by writing the Visuddhimagga will allow him to be reborn in heaven, abide there until Metteyya appears, hear his teaching and then attain enlightenment." - By Ven. Dhammika (was a long time Theravadin Monk) 2) Is it also true that some Buddhists would side with Buddhaghosa even when it directy contradicts Buddha himself? Best wishes, Alex #86997 From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 1:41 pm Subject: New file uploaded to dhammastudygroup dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the dhammastudygroup group. File : /Broken-Buddha 2nd. Version _engl._.pdf Uploaded by : truth_aerator Description : Ven Dhammika (senior Theravadin monk) talks about Theravada You can access this file at the URL: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Broken-Buddha%202nd.%20Vers\ ion%20_engl._.pdf To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit: http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/web/index.htmlfiles Regards, truth_aerator #86998 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 4:53 pm Subject: How does rebirth happen? Can someone explain? truth_aerator Hello all, "Were someone to say, 'I will describe a coming, a going, a passing away, an arising, a growth, an increase, or a proliferation of consciousness apart from form, from feeling, from perception, from fabrications,' that would be impossible " http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.054.than.html There are, Ananda, three kinds of feelings: pleasant, painful and neutral. Through the origin of sense-impression there is origin of feelings; through the cessation of sense-impression there is cessation of feelings. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn36/sn36.015.nypo.html "Contact is the origination of feeling. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn36/sn36.023.than.html Considering that consciousness is dependent on 4 aggregates (which in turn are dependent on Rupa) - how does rebirth happen? What and HOW connects one body to another? How does Arahats passing into final nibbana happens? Thanks, Alex #86999 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jun 14, 2008 5:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: poster egberdina Hi connie (and colette) 2008/6/14 connie : > Dear Herman, > > H (#86927): If a practice you are engaging in does not lead to joy, cease doing what you are doing. > > C: There's that "joy" word again. Surely, the joy the texts talk about isn't the same as that in sayings like "eat, drink and be merry" or "ignorance is bliss". Not saying you mean it's something associated with ordinary old sense pleasure, which is surely what most of my being "happy in my walk" is, but what do you mean? > There's a feeling I get ........(when I look to the west And my spirit is crying for leaving - Led Zeppelin) Seriously, there's a feeling I get, when discursive thought is absent. I call that joy. It is not like this: MN137 "And what are the six kinds of household joy? The joy that arises when one regards as an acquisition the acquisition of forms cognizable by the eye — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, connected with worldly baits — or when one recalls the previous acquisition of such forms after they have passed, ceased, & changed: That is called household joy. (Similarly with sounds, smells, tastes, tactile sensations, & ideas.) or this: AN 4:62 "These are the four kinds of bliss that can be attained in the proper season, on the proper occasions, by a householder partaking of sensuality." Knowing the bliss of debtlessness, & recollecting the bliss of having, enjoying the bliss of wealth, the mortal then sees clearly with discernment. Seeing clearly — the wise one — he knows both sides: that these are not worth one sixteenth-sixteenth of the bliss of blamelessness. Hope that clarifies Cheers Herman