#88400 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 5:47 am Subject: Re: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? dhammanusarin Hi Howard (Alex, Sarah), - Thank you for asking me for a clarification. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > > Hi, Tep (and Sarah & Alex) - > > In a message dated 7/25/2008 7:57:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > tepsastri@... writes: > > > Hi, Sarah (Alex and others), - > > In your post #88148, 7/16/2008, SN 35:153 was quoted in order to > answer Alex's question below: > > > > Sarah: <...>It is panna, right understanding > > >that understands dhammas more and more clearly. > > > > > A: <...> >How does one clearly sees the above, what's the method? > > T: In your quote of SN 35: 153 the Buddha gave the "method of > exposition" (by means of which a bhikkhu - apart from faith, apart > from personal preference, apart from oral tradition, apart from > reasoned reflection, apart from acceptance of a view after pondering > it - can declare final knowledge thus: ‘Destroyed is birth, the holy > life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no > more for this state of being’) for attainment of arahantship as > follows: > > "And what is that method of exposition? Here, bhikkhus, having seen a > form with the eye, if there is lust, hatred, or delusion internally, > a bhikkhu understands: ‘There is lust, hatred, or delusion > internally’; or, if there is no lust, hatred, or delusion internally, > he understands: â€Å"There is no lust, hatred, or delusion internally.’ " > [Repeat for having heard a sound with the ear.... having cognized a > mental phenomenon with the mind.] > > > ============================== > I'm confused. On ATI I find the following: > __________________________________ > > > SN 35.153 > Indriya Sutta > Faculties > > Translated from the Pali by > Thanissaro Bhikkhu > > > > PTS: S iv 140 > CDB ii 1216 > > > ____________________________________ > Source: Transcribed from a file provided by the translator. > > ... .... ... > > ____________________________________ > > Then a certain monk went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One, "'Consummate in faculties, consummate in faculties,' it is said. To what extent is one consummate in faculties?" > "If a monk, while keeping track of arising & passing away with regard to the eye-faculty, becomes disenchanted with the eye- faculty; if, while keeping track of arising & passing away with regard to the ear-faculty... the nose-faculty... the tongue- faculty... the body faculty... the intellect-faculty, he > becomes disenchanted with the intellect-faculty; and, disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate; through dispassion, he is fully released; with full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released'; he discerns that 'Birth is depleted, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world,' it is to this extent that one is consummate in faculties." > > ======================= T: The numbering system that is used by Bhikkhu Bodhi is slightly different from that used by ATI. It is SN 35.152 by the ATI system. SN 35.152 : Atthinukhopariyaayo Sutta Is There a Criterion? Translated from the Pali by Maurice O'Connell Walshe http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.152.wlsh.html Tep === #88401 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 6:11 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. jonoabb Hi Andrew I hope you don't mind if I come in on one or two of the comments in your post to Nina. > I think it is very beneficial to study ultimate reality in its > unimaginably fast timeframe. I think this can give some form of > intellectual understanding ... and it cautions us not to be so sure > that we are aware of the motivations behind our conventional actions. > However, I am very dubious about trying to force an ultimate > timeframe upon conventional reality. The shoe doesn't fit! I feel a > niggling discomfort when we talk about (and build a scheme of > thinking based upon) a "present" that is - at our level of > development - a "past". To me, "daily life" connotes the > conventional world of beings and doings - and the conventional > timeframe. I think you are saying that ultimate realities cannot be experienced in a daily life context, because the conventional present always spans a period of time, and it's not realistic to talk about conventional actions in terms of mille-second level experience. I agree in general with the futility of trying to "see" conventional acts into ultimate reality terms. I don't think that was what the Buddha was talking about at all. What he was talking about was what occurs in the ultimate sense, regardless of the conventional circumstances. Not a different way of seeing the conventional world, but a description of a different world altogether. The obstacle to this different world being more clearly seen is not one's immersion in the conventional world, but lack of developed awareness of the dhammas of the different world. > I do not feel that the ultimate teachings have, as one of their > purposes, the debunking of conventional truth. Agreed. > Some DSG members, it > seems to me, have set out to wage a war of ultimate reality versus > conventional reality. I am not in the least convinced that this is a > necessary or fruitful exercise. It may even be harmful. To begin > with, it drops "an act of dana" down into a void of meaninglessness. Any view of ultimate reality that does not leave room for (conventional) acts of dana sounds suspect, to me. I do not think such views are particularly to be found on DSG (but if they are they are very likely to be questioned). > I have decided to leave DSG now for further pastures. During my time > here, I have learned many wise and useful things. Thank you all for > sharing your insights. And thank you for your contributions, Andrew. Jon #88402 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 2:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - Ahh! Thanks! With metta, Howard In a message dated 7/26/2008 8:47:34 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, tepsastri@... writes: T: The numbering system that is used by Bhikkhu Bodhi is slightly different from that used by ATI. It is SN 35.152 by the ATI system. SN 35.152 : Atthinukhopariyaayo Sutta Is There a Criterion? Translated from the Pali by Maurice O'Connell Walshe http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.152.wlsh.html #88403 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 6:22 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma, Logic, Anatta jonoabb Hi Herman > > Getting to another country without doing anything would hardly be > > possible. But then, that's life as we (and rest of the world) know > > it, isn't it? > > It all depends on what self one assumes. Your reference here to the assumption of different selves is a new one to me. I think you'll have to elaborate on it if I'm to respond meaningfully. > I always love the way you assume your myopic understanding to be "the > teachings". But as I said above, the present reality depends on what > self one assumes. With the assuming of a gross self, travelling to > Australia, going to work, eating, drinking and being merry are the > order of the day. In the "lower" jhanas, the subtle self does not > travel to Australia, but is variously the qualities of bliss, > equanimity etc . In the higher jhanas, the immaterial self does not > travel to Australia, is not blissful or equanimous, but approaches as > close as is possible to nothingness. Still, there is the assumption of > a self. I'd be interested to know where I can read more about these different kinds of "self" and their relationship to the jhanas. > Let me reaffirm, the present reality is dependent on which self is assumed. Still trying to get my head around this one. > There are "realities" > > arising now that are independent of the conventional circumstances, > > and it is these realties that are to be the object of insight > > knowledge. > > There is no insight when, having assumed a gross self, there is speech > and thinking in terms of a subtle or immaterial self, while all > realities corresponding to those selves are absent. > > > So conventional doing or not-doing is of no real significance. > > There is no insight when the presently assumed self and its > corresponding reality is being denied. These comments will no doubt become clearer to me when I've understood a little more about the assumption of different selves. Jon #88404 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 6:37 am Subject: Re: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? - THERE IS SUCH A METHOD!!! dhammanusarin Hi Alex, - Thank you very much for this in-depth analysis of the Dhamma. > Alex: > As I understand it, the awareness must be ultra sharp. > Before "greed" arises, what exact steps are present? > Can you name and spot a dozen > of subtle actions that happen (even during a second) that cause > greed/anger/delusion to arise? > > Can you see them? > > For example in a long retreat that I had, sometimes I noticed > a "machine gun like" broken movements of the foot. Can one notice > the same with mind states? > T: I think what you describe is direct knowing that precedes comprehending (equivalently, full understanding) of lobha, dosa, moha and their arising/passing away. ................. > Alex: > Super mindfulness is required for that, and long retreats may be > required for most of us, as ordinary mindfulness is too blunt and > slow. > T: I agree. "Super mindfulness" plus equanimity (not distracted by pleasure/pain, like/dislike, affection/aversion) define the 4th jhana : "With the abandoning of pleasure & pain â€" as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress â€" he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain." [SN 48.10 Indriya Vibhanga Sutta] ............. > Alex: > ===== Furthermore === > The typical anatta teaching: > > Is "X" permanent or impermanent? Here we have anicca sanna or perhaps udaybbaya nana. > > Is "X" pleasure or stress? Here we have dukkha sanna. > Perhaps knowledge of fearfulness, misery & disgust. > > Seeing X, a monk becomes revulsed (nibbida), disspasioned (viraga) > and liberated from (vimutti) form/feeling/perc/vol/consc . He > knows, I am "liberated". Here we have final ~nanas. > T: Right. ............. > Alex: > So as you see, a simple "anatta lakhanna" teaching may be a cryptic > description of vipassana ~nanas (or call them as you will). > > Generally speaking, they may require quite some time in secluded > retreat setting. > === > T: Occasional seclusion is necessary. But anyone can have "personal retreat" at home too. .............. > Alex: > > Another equally valid approach is in MN64. > In the Jhana or immeadetely after it, with a hindrance free mind, > bright, pliable and malleable one can see: > > > "the bhikkhu secluding the mind thoroughly, by dispelling things of > demerit, removes all bodily transgressions that bring remorse. Then > secluding the mind, from sensual thoughts and thoughts of demerit, > with thoughts and discursive thoughts and with joy and pleasantness > born of seclusion abides in the first jhana. Established in it he > reflects all things that matter, all feelings, all perceptive things, all intentions, all conscious signs are impermanent, unpleasant, an illness, an abscess, an arrow, a misfortune, an ailment, foreign, destined for destruction, is void, and devoid of a self. Then he turns the mind to the deathless element: This is peaceful, this is exalted, such as the appeasement of all determinations, the giving up of all endearments, the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation and extinction*1). With that mind he comes to the destruction of desires. If he does not destroy desires on account of greed and interest for those same things. He arises spontaneously, with the destruction of the five lower bonds, of the sensual world, not to proceed. �nanda, this too is a method for overcoming the five lower bonds of the sensual world. " > > http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima- > Nikaya/Majjhima2/064-maha-malunkhyaputta-e1.html > ========= > > Alex: > Notice how impermanence, stressfulness, not self is seen. After or > during JHANA. Appeasement of all determinations and such may be > another word for sankharaupekkha nana. > > The "he reflects all things that matter, all feelings, all perceptive things, all intentions, all conscious signs are impermanent, unpleasant, an illness, an abscess, an arrow, a misfortune, an ailment, foreign, destined for destruction, is void, and devoid of a self." sounds pretty nana-like to me. > T: That reflection is a "touching" of Nibbana (peaceful liberation) as explained in MN 70 :Kitagiri Sutta. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.070.than.html "And what is the individual who is a bodily witness? There is the case where a certain individual remains touching with his body those peaceful liberations that transcend form, that are formless, and â€" having seen with discernment â€" some of his fermentations are ended. This is called an individual who is a bodily witness." Tep === #88405 From: "connie" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 7:47 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. nichiconn Dear Andrew, sure, run off it you like but not on account of war and strife! hells bells, man, that's pretty much anywhere we go. speaking for myself anyway. should be enough on it's own to convince one to do nothing, but who ever stops? and maybe it is less war and strife than lack of serene faith? there's something about not only The Ultimate Ultimate being calm, but also the approach to it. in the books anyway. book camp, that's my call to retreat. See you in the DN33 corner? connie #88406 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 8:29 am Subject: Re: kayagatasati dhammanusarin Hi Howard, - I am confused. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Alex (and Jon & other non-volitionists ;-), > What characterizes "non-volitionists"? Do they think volition does not exists? Or do they think they can live everyday without volition? Or do they think understanding can be developed only when there is no volition in the mind? Or, what else? Tep === #88407 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 4:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 7/26/2008 11:30:03 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, tepsastri@... writes: Hi Howard, - I am confused. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, frankly, I am too! ;-) -------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Alex (and Jon & other non-volitionists ;-), > What characterizes "non-volitionists"? Do they think volition does not exists? Or do they think they can live everyday without volition? Or do they think understanding can be developed only when there is no volition in the mind? Or, what else? --------------------------------------------- Howard: What I think is the case is the following: The folks that I jokingly call "non-volitionists" seem to me to think that exercise of volition requires and always involves the sense or idea of a self or agent who is engaged in willing, and, they thus object when anyone speaks of an activity being carried out intentionally. I, of course, do agree with them that most mental states of worldlings and even of ariyans who are not yet arahants, and not just states involving intention, are polluted by sense-of-self and, for worldlings, outright atta-belief. That is the unfortunate position that we find ourselves in. But I think that to run from engaging in useful intentional actions due to conflating willing with belief in an actor is a darn shame. (What saves folks from doing this when actually living instead of just engaging in theoretical opining are the requisites of life that are rather uncompromising.) -------------------------------------------- Tep ========================== With metta, Howard #88408 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 1:52 pm Subject: Re: kayagatasati dhammanusarin Hi Howard (Alex, Jon), - I asked silly questions : What characterizes "non-volitionists"? Do they think volition does not exists? Or do they think they can live everyday without volition? Or do they think understanding can be developed only when there is no volition in the mind? Or, what else? --------------------------------------------- Howard: What I think is the case is the following: The folks that I jokingly call "non-volitionists" seem to me to think that exercise of volition requires and always involves the sense or idea of a self or agent who is engaged in willing, and, they thus object when anyone speaks of an activity being carried out intentionally. I, of course, do agree with them that most mental states of worldlings and even of ariyans who are not yet arahants, and not just states involving intention, are polluted by sense-of-self and, for worldlings, outright atta-belief. That is the unfortunate position that we find ourselves in. But I think that to run from engaging in useful intentional actions due to conflating willing with belief in an actor is a darn shame. (What saves folks from doing this when actually living instead of just engaging in theoretical opining are the requisites of life that are rather uncompromising.) -------------------------------------------- T: Uncompromising indeed! Thank you for kindly making the best out of my naive questions. Now please allow me to give an opinion concerning volition and non- volition as follows. The non-volitionists' view is a wrong view : "Exercise of volition requires and always involves the sense or idea of a self or agent who is engaged in willing". Not always. But even with some degree of self- view, meritorious intentional actions still are necessary for path development. You say: the non-volitionists "object when anyone speaks of an activity being carried out intentionally". I agree. An example of non-volitional view is : "There was listening in the past and in that way right understanding is accumulated. It can arise again and thus it can grow. Let us forget about doing, cetasikas do their own work. They are not persons who act (little actors), mere conditioned dhammas." This is a wrong view since it does not lead to right thought (samma sankappa) and right effort (samma vayama). It results in 'do nothing' beyond listening to a tape and a lot of thinking & pondering. Disadvantage: No intention, desire and effort to practice according to the Dhamma. Non-volitionists also reject right effort that is inevitably volitional : "There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. ... for the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen. ... for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen. He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This, monks, is called right effort." [SN 45.8] The volitional view that is a right view sees an intentional action (kamma) as volitional formations(sankhara) -- the second link of the Dependent Origination -- that can be meritorious, demeritorious or imperturbable. It is not possible to perform an activity (action/kamma : bodily, verbally, mentally) that is not volitional, unless you are an arahant already. Don't you agree? The meritotious and imperturbable kinds of volition may or may not involve the sense of self that is conditioned by clinging (upadana). There is no disadvantage involved when one's intention is not demeritorious volitional formations; it is compatible with right effort and right thought of the Noble Eightfold Path. Correct me, if I am wrong. That's my one-yen opinion. Tep === #88409 From: "colette" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 8:50 am Subject: Re: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? ksheri3 Good Morning Tep, It was a pleasure to read your reply-questions here, last night. So, lets start taking this apart. > In your post #88148, 7/16/2008, SN 35:153 was quoted in order to > answer Alex's question below: > > > > Sarah: <...>It is panna, right understanding > > >that understands dhammas more and more clearly. > > > > > A: <...> >How does one clearly sees the above, what's the method? > > T: In your quote of SN 35: 153 the Buddha gave the "method of > exposition" (by means of which a bhikkhu - apart from faith, apart > from personal preference, apart from oral tradition, apart from > reasoned reflection, apart from acceptance of a view after pondering > it - can declare final knowledge thus: colette: this may be the true words of the Buddha. This may be an actual methodology or practice to achieve, ENLIGHTENMENT, yet WE MUST REMEMBER that the dharmas are transient and non-existant; they are only here for the individual at a certain time in their existance then immediately fulfill the characteristics of any citta -- THE DHARMA FALLS AWAY, DISIPATES, RETURNS TO IT'S NATURAL STATE OF NON- SVABHAVA OR SHUNYATA. ---------------------------- ‘Destroyed is birth, the holy > life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no > more for this state of being’) for attainment of arahantship as > follows: > colette: this is duplicious since it clearly states that the reasons, rationale, for performing, living, in such a manor are strictly for the purpose of attaining "arahantship". Why, if this actually is an "illusory world", "illusory existance", "illusion", why would an adept or aspirant choose to grasp for a goal, an object (rupa), strive to attain a label (applying the concepts of the Buddhist precept of Name and Form we can simply say that the terminology of "arahantship" is nothing more than a label or a badge to pin on your chest, and what, prey-tell, does this outward appearing gesture of submission to Name & Form define IF NOT A STRONG DESIRE TO GRATIFY AN EGO THAT DOES NOT HAVE SVABHAVA, AN EGO THAT ACTUALLY IS THE TOTALITY OF THE DEFINITION OF THE ILLUSORY WORLD, and, NOTHING MORE THAN THE IGNORANCE PERSONIFIED AND GLORIFIED THAT IS THE BAIN OF THE YOGACARA OR MIND-ONLY SCHOOL and clearly CREATES, MAINTAINS, AND FORTIFIES, ILLUSIONS THAT HAVE PREVIOUSLY EXISTED THROUGH THE PERVERSIONS OF ANOTHER SENTIENT BEING OR THE PERVERSIONS OF AN ENTIRE LINEAGE. For instance we can see the leaders of Myanmar or Burma, the Military Junta, has absolutely no reason to stop the flow of prosperity and wealth that they control and keep from their people simply because this world is full of governmental leaders that exist only for the single purpose of enslaving and torturing the people they govern and lead i.e. the Bush admin. saying that this country is wrong for empoverishing it's people while this kettle, the Bush admin, calls the pot, another countries government, black as if the Bush administrations shit does not nor could not stink. I performed a bit of magik using the internet for the first time, at UIC in 2001 when I had a website and when I knew my experience at university was over, that the same negative and murderous forces that I have been confronted by since 1978, was applying their typical, their standard operating procedure, their ritual behavior, the "Path" that operates the "executive file" in the micro-processor they call a brain, by asking my readers to reach in front of them and grab what was like an inch in front of their chest; I went on to explain that they had to grab something, they had to grab air which from an alchemist's POV is something very special, and now here I'll explain that they did grab air, they did possess it, but no sooner than they opened their hand did that which they grasped fade away, fall away, as any citta falls away. This "qualification" of this single practice by the Buddha, which the Buddha may have actually advocated, is only good UP TO A CERTAIN POINT where we find the Law of Deminishing Returns setting in (The Law of Diminishing REturns is an economic law and it resembles the Standard Normal Curve of statistics, or a Wave, see radio waves, or wave theory, or see ENERGY and THE CONSERVATION OF ENERGY, or you could simply look at the graphics of the Morton Theikal Salt company where we see "When it rains it pours" and the little girl with the umberella in her yellow rain coat stays dry from the rain by simply remaining part of the group of group behavior and group think, and she does this by simply accepting THE STANDARD NORMAL CURVE as a representation of the society she will never leave and never acheive anything greater than what she is achieving at that second as she commits herself to a predetermined path). If you were there when the Buddha actually gave this definition of a goal to achieve, of a Rupa to grasp at, WHEN THE BUDDHA ACTUALLY SAID IT, then you would know the context it was given and the rationale for him giving it therefore YOU WOULD NOT BE MESMERIZED BY THE SLIGHT OF HAND, the chicanery, of charlattans and their only desire to exist and masturbate themselves. --------------------------------- Since I only have a few minutes left and must be off to thank some Kagyus for their gracious gifts I can only address one more issue. > But I possibly can misunderstand you. So please allow me to ask you > some questions for clarification purpose. > > 1.) In your concluding remark, are you talking about the > understanding of someone who is ready to declare that his/her "holy > life has been lived, what had to be done has been done", or is your > remark applicable only to ordinary people and has nothing to do with > the above sutta quote? > > 2.) What are the supporting conditions for such understanding in the > sutta [i.e. knowing and seeing rightly whether or not there is lobha, > dosa, moha internally, after having seen a visible form, ..., having > cognized a dhamma with the mind]? > > 3.) How long (days, months, years, eons) do you think such "method of > exposition" may take before someone can delare that stage of "final > knowledge"? colette: I LOVE IT! I have been trying to do things like this since I began working on the web but my time is sooooooooooooooooooooo limited and constrained that I can never get the multitude, myriad, of questions listed in such a tight unique order such as this where the questions themselves are constrained to the points being made. One of my greatest faults and characteristics, as if any person has not noticed it, is that I go off on tangents and these tangents lead me, and me alone, to such great and greater enlightenment. Unfortunately I am not afforded such luxuries since Chicago and the people of Chicago have only given me their hate, their hatred, and their conspiratorial acts of pre-meditated murder to me, since 1978. Thanx for the reply and for the platform to begin putting an end to something standard bullsh*t that I've found some wannabes of the Golden Dawn and the O.T.O. are attempting to issue to me. toodles, colette #88410 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 10:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 7/26/2008 4:52:24 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, tepsastri@... writes: The volitional view that is a right view sees an intentional action (kamma) as volitional formations(sankhara) -- the second link of the Dependent Origination -- that can be meritorious, demeritorious or imperturbable. It is not possible to perform an activity (action/kamma : bodily, verbally, mentally) that is not volitional, unless you are an arahant already. Don't you agree? ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm, depends on exactly what you mean by that. I do think that even worldlings can very occasionally act with neutral volition, i.e., kiriya cetana. But for the most part, I agree. I generally agree wit your entore post, most of which I haven't copied here. ------------------------------------------- The meritotious and imperturbable kinds of volition may or may not involve the sense of self that is conditioned by clinging (upadana). --------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not so sure about what you call the imperturbable volition, but I certainly agree about kusala cetana. --------------------------------------------- There is no disadvantage involved when one's intention is not demeritorious volitional formations; it is compatible with right effort and right thought of the Noble Eightfold Path. Correct me, if I am wrong. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I can't quite get a grasp on what you are asserting here, Tep. ========================= With metta, Howard #88411 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What is a question? truth_aerator Hi Jon and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > Well everyone has some degree of temporary detachment. When? And is it enough? Look, if you can become a sotopanna and then an Arahant with "access" concentration path moment, then GOOD FOR YOU. I will not argue against that. Sariputta needed all 9 meditation levels to become an Arahant, so did MahaMoggallana - they couldn't follow totally "dry" path. If you can become an Arahant without rupa jhanas and aruppa attainments (including nirodha samapatti) AND Buddha's personal guidance - GOOD FOR YOU! I bet you'd be teaching them, if you could. Who am I to suggest anything to you? > But as I said in my earlier post, it is the development of insight >into the >true nature of things, rather than the development of more Where did I say "samatha only" ? Even anapanasati is satipatthana practice capable to bring one to all 9 meditation levels and paths/fruits. > > Of course the sammadhi is aimed toward relinquishment of all > > attachments. For example in anapanasati sutta this is mention in > the > > last 4 steps. > > Again, the kind of temporary detachment developed by samatha bhavana > does not lead to enlightenment and the eradication of the roots of > attachment. > Anapanasati Bhavana isn't samatha-only. Neither is kayagatasati nor jhanas (withing Buddhist context of course). > > If you aren't of those types that have super sharp faculties, one > who > > is lucky to meet the Buddha, then "Pleasant & quick" mode of > progress > > is most likely ain't yours (or mine). > > > > Again, the often mentioned outline is this: > > > > 1) Conscience & concern > > 2) Purity of conduct > > 3)Restraint of the senses > > 4) Moderation in eating > > 5) Wakefulness > > 6)Mindfulness & alertness > > 7) Abandoning the hindrances > > 8) The four jhanas > > 9) The 1-3 higher knowledges (if not all 6) With the knowledge of > > Liberation. Arhatship. > > > > DN# 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13 > > MN#4, 27,36,39,51,60,65,76,77,79,101,112,119,125 > > Yes, but frequent mention of a given set of circumstances does not > make a general rule out of those circumstances. > > Jon > Jon, when something is repeated with such frequency, I'd take that over some vague & rare sentence (which could have been slipped in or mistranslated by compilers of the canon). I'd also take that above what some modern non-Arahant teacher says. ================ (1) A Ugghatitannu : an individual who encounters a Buddha in person, and who is capable of attaining the Holy Paths and the Holy Fruits through the mere hearing of a short concise discourse. (2) A Vipancitannu: an individual who encounters a Buddha in person, but who is capable of attaining the Paths and the Fruits only when the short discourse is expounded to him at some length. At the present day, only the following Neyya and Padaparama classes of individuals remain. (3) A Neyya : an individual who needs to study the sermon and the exposition, and then to practise the provisions contained therein for 7 days to 60 years, to attain the Paths and the Fruits during this lifetime if he tries hard with guidance from the right teacher. (4) A Padaparama : is an individual who cannot attain the Paths and the Fruits within this lifetime. can attain release from worldly ills in his next existence if he dies while practising samatha or vipassana and attains rebirth either as a human being or a deva within the present Buddha Sasana. Necessary Conditions of Practice for Neyya and Padaparama Individuals Neyya-puggala An individual of the Neyya class can become a Sotpanna in this present life, if he faithfully practises the bodhipakkhiya-dhamma comprising satipatthana (four Applications of Mindfulness), sammapadhana (Right Exertion), etc. If he is lax in his practice, he can become a Sotapanna only in his next existence after being reborn in the deva planes. If he dies while still aloof from these (bodhipakkhiya-Dhammas) he will become a total loss so far as the present Buddha Sasana is concerned, but he can still attain release from worldly ills if he encounters the Sasana of the next Buddha. Padaparama-puggala An individual of the Padaparama class can attain release only within the present Buddha Sasana after rebirth in the deva planes in his next existence, if he can faithfully practise the bodhipakkhiya- Dhammas in his present existence. The present Buddha Sasana will continue to exist so long as the Tipitakas remain in the world. The Padaparama class of individuals have to accumlate as much of the nuclei or seeds of Parami as they can within this lifetime. (According to the Buddha as stated in the 'Puggala Pannatti' and the 'Anguttara Nikaya') Oo Maung (Reference='Bodhipakkhiya Dipani' by Mahathera Ledi Sayadaw, Aggamahapandita, D. Litt.) http://www.triplegem.plus.com/individu.htm ===================== Best wishes, Alex #88412 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 4:02 pm Subject: Re: Retreats (was, response to hate mail etc) truth_aerator Hi Jon and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex >If you can develop skillful states on the level of vipassana jhanas >& nanas without retreats - GOOD FOR YOU. > > It's not a question of what I can or can't do, but whether it was > said by the Buddha. Because regardless of our personal views, if >it wasn't laid down in the teachings then it's not necessary. Where did the Buddha say: "Read Abhidhamma pitaka and live the lay life that you always wanted? No need to strive in the forest, caves, empty houses and so on. Relax, doing is like for them, ignoramuses. Here is TV remote, don't develop attabhava by engaging in like heavy work" Why did He often praise going forth as a monk, and not just that. Being a reclusive monk aloof from other monks? > But "many cases" do not make it a requirement laid down by the Buddha or even a general rule. > If you can achieve nanas and Jhanas at home, GOOD FOR YOU! I can't argue with that. > > Jon, the scenario is repeated in many suttas found in DN and MN! > > Almost 1/3 of DN features this path outline. > > > > 1) Conscience & concern > > 2) Purity of conduct > > 3)Restraint of the senses > > 4) Moderation in eating > > 5) Wakefulness > > 6)Mindfulness & alertness > > 7) Abandoning the hindrances > > 8) The four jhanas > > 9) The three knowledges > > > > DN# 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13 > > MN#4, 27,36,39,51,60,65,76,77,79,101,112,119,125 > > Well I haven't done an analysis, but assuming you're correct about > the prevalence of this "scenario", you are really just drawing an > inference from the numbers. However, unless the Buddha specified > this "scenario" as a required one, it would be wrong to make such an > assumption. > > Jon Sariputta needed 9 meditation levels + Buddha's occasional personal guidance to become an Arahant. That is considering the fact that he became a sotopanna when he heard a line of Dhamma. MN111, MN74 MahaMoggallana needed 9 meditation levels + other things + almost constant help from the Buddha himself. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn40/sn40.009.wlsh.html If you can beat them while cooking at home, I can't argue with that. When you become a Buddha or PaccekaBuddha, please don't forget about me. Okay? Best wishes, Alex #88413 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 4:03 pm Subject: Nibbana "signless" but also "arammana" christine_fo... Hello all, I was having a discussion with a friend about Nibbana - and we were puzzled at how Nibbana is able to be an object (arammana) of mind, considering that it is "signless". The friend mentioned being told of a lengthy passage in the Atthasalini about this, but neither of us have access to a copy. I'm obviously not understanding something. Also, can anyone quote the relevant passage and shed any other light please? metta Chris ~ The trouble is that you think you have time ~ #88414 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 5:58 pm Subject: Re: Of Mice and Men (Re: [dsg] A question on contiguity) egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/7/26 dsgmods : > Hi Herman > >> I am quite happy to proceed using your definition, which is almost >> identical to mine. But the curious thing is that there are items in >> your definition which are quite incongruous with the gist of your >> definition. Definitions and classifications notwithstanding, what is >> lacking is the consciousness that experiences consciousness. What >> would it's name be, Jon? > > It would help if you could give an example of what you mean by "the > consciousness that experiences consciousness". Well, it is actually you who posits such a thing, not me. You talk about seeing-consciousness and hearing-consciousness etc in the context of things that can be known. My assumption was that therefore there must be a consciousness that knowns these different consciousnesses. But you don't mention such a thing. I will rephrase my question. What knows seeing-consciousness, hearing-consciousness etc? > >> But more to the point, I think you are asking me to assume from what >> you have written that realms are not real? > > The question you originally raised was whether realms were realities. > As I said then, the answer will depend on one's definition of > "realities". > > Among the "dhammas" spoken of and classified in the texts, there is no > dhamma called "realm" (or "human realm" or any particular type of realm). > > On the other hand, if you're asking me whether I believe in different > realms, I'd say that the only ones I can be sure about are the human > and animal ones. > Thanks for that clarification. Cheers Herman #88415 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 6:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? truth_aerator Sarah, Jon, Tep and all, Here is addition to the topic about Buddha's questionings that lead people to Arhatship. Some people take Anattalakkhana-like teaching to show that by reasoning and without meditating, one can reach Arhatship. Insight portion taught to Ven. Rahula. This is almost a standart type of sutta that appears to say that by thinking Ven. Rahula achieved Arhatship. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.147.than.html In the above sutta it appears that Rahula became an Arahant after merely talking to the Buddha. No mention of meditation and all of this "rites & rituals" stuff. However if we look at other suttas dealing with Rahula, we will see that -> Lots of meditation subjects were taught. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.062.than.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.2.11.irel.html So by the MN147 insight part, in mn62 Ven. Rahula was taught quite a bit. 12 meditation objects (5 elements, 4 brahmaviharas, asubha, inconstancy, anapanasati). Thus what we have is that multiple suttas may have to get read in order to have a fuller picture. Not everything is mentioned in every sutta. We must be careful not to jump to wishful thinkings from one incomplete sutta that deals only with a certain portion. Buddha's own son needed many meditation objects in order to get ready toward Arahatship while listening. Who thinks that they are more wise and prepared (in order not to meditate) than Ven. Rahula? Or even Sariputta for that matter. He needed 9 meditation levels + personal instruction from the Buddha himself, in order to become an Arahant. The lesser wisdom one has, the more preparatory work is needed and I hope none of us will claim higher wisdom than Sariputtas in order to have it easier than him. One of the things that meditation does is to counteract the hindrances that cloud the mind & heart, and make one avoid seeing with the whole heart what was always there -> anicca-dukkha-anatta. Best wishes, Alex #88416 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 7:32 pm Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. scottduncan2 Dear Andrew, Sorry I replied last time before noticing your departure. I thought I'd add this, which has got me thinking, and which I was reading again before I'd seen you had gone. (Farewell). Patterns, as you suggest, are the lawful behaviour of dhammas. Contemplating continuity and seeking to posit a bridge from the ultimate to the conventional, depends on a consideration of time because one imagines a time frame over which a pattern can be seen to arise: Atthasaalinii (p.78): "...Time is only a concept derived from this or that phenomenon, such as (a) states expressed in such phrases as, 'temporal (aspect of) mind,' 'temporal (aspect of) matter'; (b) the phenomenal occurrence expressed by such phrases as 'the past' and 'the future'; (c) the phenomenal succession in an organism expressed by 'the time of seed germination' and 'the time of sprouting'; (d) the characteristic marks of phenomena expressed by 'the time of genesis' and 'the time of decay'; (e) the functions of phenomena expressed by 'the time of feeling,' and 'the time of cognizing'; (f) functions of beings expressed by 'the time of bathing' and 'the time of drinking'; (g) the modes of posture expressed by 'the time of going' and 'the time of stopping'; (h) the revolution of the moon, sun, etc., expressed by 'morning, evening, day, night'; or (i) the grouping of days and nights, etc., into periods expressed by 'half month,' 'month.' It should be understood that this (abstract time) is a mere concept, because it is not existing by its own nature... Scott: Also, santati seems most often and most clearly described in relation to ruupa. Dhammasa"nga.ni (p.179): "642. What is integration (upacayo) of [material] form? That which is accumulation of form is [also] integration of [material] form - this is integration of material form. "643. What is subsistence of [material] form (ruupassa santati)? That which is integration of form is the subsistence of form. This is the subsistence of [material] form. "644. What is decay of [material] form (ruupassa jarataa)? That decay of form which is ageing, decrepitude, hoariness, wrinkles, the shrinkage in the length of days, the hypermaturity of faculties - that is the decay of [material] form." And in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (CMA, pp. 240-242): "Ruupassa upavacayo, santati, jarataa, aniccataa lakkhan.naruupa.m naama. Jaatiruupa.m eva pan'ettha upacayasantatinaamena pavuccati." "Characteristics of material phenomena: material production, continuity, decay, and impermanence. Here by production and continuity are meant the material phenomena of birth." Scott: The neo-commentary suggests that upacaya (production) and santati (continuity) are 'both terms for genesis'. Upacaya is reserved for the 'first arising of a material process' and santati for 'the repeated genesis of material phenomena in the same material process'. If we return to the description of the concept of time, above, we see that the derivation of the concept time can come from the "characteristic marks of phenomena expressed by 'the time of genesis' and 'the time of decay'." Since one's conception of the 'conventional world' is based on perception - rooted in ignorance - then we can at least start to think about how ideas of patterns based on that which is seen or heard, etc., (ruupa) might come to mind. I'd say that, in relation to the ignorance-based perception of ruupa - which appears to exist over time (when, as we know, it also arises and falls away, according to its own rate of persistence and decay) - certain views arise regarding patterns. Sincerely, Scott. #88417 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 7:36 pm Subject: Re: Nibbana "signless" but also "arammana" scottduncan2 Dear Chris, Regarding: C: "I was having a discussion with a friend about Nibbana - and we were puzzled at how Nibbana is able to be an object (arammana) of mind, considering that it is 'signless'. The friend mentioned being told of a lengthy passage in the Atthasalini about this, but neither of us have access to a copy. I'm obviously not understanding something. Also, can anyone quote the relevant passage and shed any other light please?" Scott: Here, from Dhammasa"ngani (pp. 342-344): "Unconditioned element [asankhataa-dhaatu] is indeterminate, neither result nor productive of result, neither grasped at nor favourable to grasping, neither vitiated nor vicious, 'without applied or sustained thought', to be put away neither by insight nor by culture, somehting the root-conditions of which are to be put away neither by insight nor by culture, that which makes neither for the piling up nor the undoing of rebirth, neither appertaining nor not appertaining to training, infinite, excellent, that which does not entail fixed consequences, invisible and non-reacting, not a root-condition, without root-conditions as concomitants, not associated with a root-condition, without material form, supra-mundane, not an Aasava, not having Aasavas, disconnected with the Aasavas, not a Fetter, unfavourable to the Fetters, disconnected with the Fetters, not a Tie, not that which tends to become tied, disconnected from the Ties, not a Hindrance, disconnected with and unfavourable to the Hindrances, not a perversion, disconnected with perversion and unperverted, without concomitant object of thought, not mind, not mental property, disconnected with thought, detached from thought, not something coming into being connected with thought, not consecutive to thought, not derived, without the attribute of Grasping, disconnected with Grasping, and not favouring it, without attribute of vice, not viscious, not vitiated, disconnected with the vices, and not viscious, without zest, unaccompanied by ease, unaccompanied by indifference, Unincluded, that by which there is no going away, something having no Beyond, not harmful..." (Message #77415). Sincerely, Scott. #88418 From: Sukinder Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 8:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Just studying... sukinderpal Hi Alex, Sorry for the delay on responding. =============== > I've not read any literature about any of this, but > from what I gleaned listening to A. Sujin and reading DSG, > here is my understanding / misunderstanding: > > The Buddha spoke, Alex: Before we proceed: How many suttas have you read? How many KS writings have you read? Do you speak for KS interpretation of "what the Buddha taught" or the bare suttas? Sukin: I’m not sure what the point of your question is, but I’ll answer anyway. If what you are trying to determine is whether I’ve read Suttas first-hand or heard interpretations (A. Sujin’s and others’) / commentaries / Abhidhamma more, the answer is, reading the Suttas has been just a tiny fraction compared to these latter sources. As regards your suggestion of it being between ‘KS interpretation’ vs. ‘bare Sutta reading’, doesn’t it come down more to ‘KS interpretation’ vs. ‘Alex interpretation’? I know that you want me to find out for myself, however at this point in time given that I am completely satisfied with the KS interpretation; what needs is a greater motivating force than just this comparison / distinction that you make. Besides as I said, this actually comes down to KS vs. Alex in my eyes. And Alex has so far not shown me any signs that his own first-hand experience has produced any positive result. Sorry. In fact I’m convinced more and more about the fact of ‘self view’ influencing one’s reading of the Suttas in case of those who deny the Abhidhamma and commentaries. After all it is with the help of this latter that Self View is gradually exposed, and therefore in denying this, indeed not only is it a case of being influenced by this same self view, but of it becoming encouraged consequently more and more. :-/ ================ > This "doing it" is what I see as being the problem with so called > meditators. This I see as being due to not having really had right > intellectual understanding of the Dhamma. Alex: And for whom are you speaking? This doesn't apply to the meditations that I read about. Sukin: And this may be a matter of ‘interpretation’ again? My premise is simple: “There is just the present moment reality”. Therefore the development of understanding is about coming to better understand this. First in principle, and later by virtue of better and better knowing the characteristic of whatever happens to be the reality of the moment. Therefore to entertain any idea of a better time, place, posture and object of concentration etc. is a case of encouraging not only ignorance of the present moment, but in fact of “Wrong View”!! =============== > One important feature of this is that growing more firm with > suttamayapanna, one comes back to the present moment with increased > conviction of this being the only true object of knowledge and > insight. Alex: Many other traditions say this. Just read the Bhagavat Gita, The Bible, Quran, Talmud, Torah, Zohar, Talmud Eser Sfirot, and everything will follow. BULL. "read with intention and the Ohr Makif from Ein Sof will drop toward Malhut and open the spiritual vision in thee" ... I've heard it before... Yeh, sweet dreams... Sukin: Yes, and you can add the Sikh teachings to the above. But as I know in this case, it is not about “realizing Truth” so much as conditioning (conventionally) the mind to think over and reflect on kusala of the kind their teachings know of. In Sikhism in fact they also recognize the danger of associating with, in this case ‘peoples of lower character’, likening this to holding a piece of coal and getting one’s hand black. Of course from our perspective there are pitfalls here. However I wouldn’t go on to completely dismiss what they teach. But coming back to the Dhamma, since suttamayapanna has the reference point the same as that of patipatti or bhavanamayapanna, I see a direct link here in terms of “sati” ‘remembering’ to come back to the present moment and “panna” to better understand whatever the reality happens to be. Your own ideas on the other hand, about Jhana, retreats etc. is at the very outset, stepping into a dream world, so yes, sweet dreams to you, Alex! ;-) Metta, Sukin #88419 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 8:23 pm Subject: Collations, Individuals, Grasping, and Relinquishment (Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, ...) kenhowardau Hi Howard, It occurred to me at the time of writing that the word "mere" did not mean "not real." But in certain contexts it *can* mean not real. So I left what I had written the way it was. ------------- H: > Ken you say "Collations of things are called "mere" because they are not real." They are, of course, real collations! ;-) ------------- :-) I get your point: even a non-reality is a real non-reality. :-) BTW, I was taking the word "collation" to mean "collage" (something made up of pieces), but my dictionary tells me it is nothing of the sort. (!) I assume the translator made the same mistake. --------------------- H: > I'm inclined to observe that they are called "mere collations," because they are not single phenomena uncomposed of parts. --------------------- Nor are they *composed* of parts. Unless, of course, you include illusory parts (i.e., other concepts). A sentient being, for example, is composed of eyes, ears and nose (etc) and can see, hear and smell simultaneously. But that's an illusion. In reality, there is only one sense impression occurring at only one doorway (at any one point in time). -------------------------------- H: > Likewise, the single phenomena we seem to experience may be called "mere conditioned dhammas," because they are radically impermanent and lack independent existence. ---------------------------------- Yes, it is said that only mere dhammas exist. But in that context "mere" denotes the unreality of anything other than dhammas - not the unreality of dhammas themselves. For example: "We think there are people and trees, but mere dhammas exist." ----------------------------------------------- H: > I would like to add that this business of "mere this or that" is a matter of degree of dependence of status, even as regards dependence on parts. Even "single phenomena" are not entirely such. ------------------------------------------------ Yes, I know you have a certain [non-theravadin] theory in which, if I remember correctly, concepts are said to be more real (or less unreal) than dhammas. You can imagine how I mutter every time I read that! :-) ------------------------------------ H: > One's body is certainly a mere collection of sensations - a mere collation. ----------------------------------- One's own body is actually a concept, isn't it? Or a collation (collection) of concepts. It is not a collection of realities. Corrections welcome, BTW. I know some Abhidhamma students talk of the body as being "composed of countless rupas" so maybe there is a way in which that can be said. ---------------------------------------------- H: > But also, as supported by the commentaries, any bodily sensation - pressure or warmth, for example - is also in a way composed of parts, of stages (to be precise), with the sensation building, leveling off, and subsiding (like a wave), ----------------------------------------------- Do the commentaries say that? I think they talk of a 'rising' a 'persisting' and a 'falling.' I don't believe those sub-moments can be broken down further (to create an infinite number of points on a wave). -------------------------------------- H: > making it not entirely an in-dividual [hyphenation intentional]. It is a convention to consider all three stages of a rupa - it's growth, stasis, and decline - to be one single rupa instead of three rupas. Moreover, the growth and decline stages obviously involve change over time. So, a rupa is not so simple, and is not independent of convention. --------------------------------------- Ha, I should have read that part before writing the above! Never mind, no harm done. The thing is; I disagree and I think a rupa *is* simple (independent of convention). ----------------------- H: > At every level, there is nothing to be found that is a separate, self-existent entity. Rather than straining to see discrete, self- existent realities, supporting our tendency to cling, we are better off seeing the radical emptiness and ungraspable character of all aspects of experience, supporting relinquishment. ------------------------ That would be impossible! There could be no empty (anatta) characteristic, and no ungraspable (anicca) characteristic, unless there was something (some separate, self-existent reality) that bore those characteristics. Ken H #88420 From: "nichiconn" Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 8:34 pm Subject: Re: Nibbana "signless" but also "arammana" nichiconn Dear puzzled at how Nibbana is able to be an object (arammana) of mind, considering that it is "signless". How do, Chris. Not sure what you're after, but here are a couple possibilities from rather lengthy passage in the Atthasalini about this. p.303: << Now the paths called Empty and Undesired get their names from their own intrinsic natures and from opposing. They are void of lust, etc., and without the desires springing from lust, etc.; thus they get their names from their own intrinsic nature. And Emptiness is opposed to the (false) conviction of the soul and the Undesired to desire; thus they get the name from opposing. But the Signless Path, owing to the absence of the signs, etc., of lust, of permanence, gets its name from its instrinsic nature, but not from opposing; for it is not opposed to the discernment of impermanence, which has the signs of the complexes as its object, and which stands in conformity to it; thus in all respects, **by Abhidhamma exposition, there is no Signless Path.** But in the Suttanta exposition it is brought out and shown. For on any given occasion there is the emergence of the Path, the three characteristic signs present themselves, as if by a single act of 'adverting.' There is no simultaneous presentation of the three, yet is is said so, to show when the station of religious exercise is manifested. Indeed, from the outset, let there be anywhere a conviction [of the mind], then insight making for emergence, as it emerges, gives the name of its own path to whatever sign it has grasped, placing it at the point of arrival by just that sign. How? >> skimming from pp.94-5: Immaterial states are shown by way of basis or object, both, or by way of their own function or property; ex: mental cognition arises in dependence upon mind-door and object of thought. Adding {Tr.} footnotes on p.95: << 'Cognizable objects' include (a) states due to one, two, three, four {Viz., past action, mind, physical inanimate causes, and nutriment.} or to none {old age & impermanence} of these causes; (b) states past, present or future; and (c) states which cannot be said to be either (a) or (b), i.e., all states said to be the field of consciousness, but other than those five sensibles already described. {Thus (c) refer to concepts and Nibbaana.} >> happy to type out more if you like... also happy to be way off base. peace, connie #88421 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana "signless" but also "arammana" sarahprocter... Hi Chris, --- On Sun, 27/7/08, Christine Forsyth wrote: >I was having a discussion with a friend about Nibbana - and we were puzzled at how Nibbana is able to be an object (arammana) of mind, considering that it is "signless". .... S: I'm wondering why being "signless" (animitta) would make it less possible to be an object of mind (i.e cittas). I'd be interested to hear more if you'd care to elaborate. It's true that all conditioned dhammas have a sign (nimitta) and like in the firebrand simile, it's the nimitta which is seen/known unless there is the direct understanding of the rising and falling away of dhammas now. However, as one of Connie's Atth. quotes (below)* made clear, not only nibbana, but also concepts cannot be said to be impermanent or conditioned, so they also cannot be said to have nimitta. Yet, they too can are the object of cittas even now as we speak. ***** *C:> skimming from pp.94-5: Immaterial states are shown by way of basis or object, both, or by way of their own function or property; ex: mental cognition arises in dependence upon mind-door and object of thought. Adding {Tr.} footnotes on p.95: << 'Cognizable objects' include (a) states due to one, two, three, four {Viz., past action, mind, physical inanimate causes, and nutriment.} or to none {old age & impermanence} of these causes; (b) states past, present or future; and (c) states which cannot be said to be either (a) or (b), i.e., all states said to be the field of consciousness, but other than those five sensibles already described. {Thus (c) refer to concepts and Nibbaana.} >> **** Metta, Sarah p.s I expect you saw my note about possible discussion in Sydney. If you wished to encourage Herman, any of the Qld boys or anyone else to join for a one day discussion here, we would of course be very glad to see you and them. Otherwise, if no one wishes to be told there is no self face-to-face(i.e Herman!), then we're very happy to continue to do so here and enjoy our swimming/surfing/relaxing:-). =============== #88422 From: han tun Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Computer out of order hantun1 Dear Nina, > Nina: I just thought of you yesterday, and missing you on the list. I hope your health is all right. Han: Thank you very much for your kind concern about my health. My computer has just been repaired, but not reliable. Sometimes I can start the computer, sometimes I cannot. Maybe I need a new computer. As regards my health, various illnesses (age related or otherwise) are under control. But I feel very weak. I get easily tired on slightest exertion. For example, I can walk in the mornings only half the distance that I used to walk just a few months ago. On top of that, I have occasional dizzy spells when I have to take hold of someone or something for support. It is the combined impact of jaraa and byaadhi on my physical and mental health. Most of the time, I just want to be left alone. I just want to quietly practice breathing meditation, or pass my time reflecting on the dhammas that I have learned, reflecting on the attributes of Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha, and reflecting on the death. The computer problem does not help me either to invigorate my diminishing energy and enthusiasm. Therefore, I most humbly request you to kindly forgive me if you do not see much of my posts on the list. Respectfully, Han #88423 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sariputta, Accumulations, Paramis, Arhatship under 1 day. sarahprocter... Hi Alex & all, --- On Fri, 18/7/08, Alex wrote: >>S: We were discussing "what's the method" and I gave a sutta quote to >indicate that what is important is the understanding of seeing, >visible object, attachment and other dhammas when they appear now as >mere dhammas. .... A:>What you've said above is a method. Yes it is crucial to understand everything in terms of conditionality- anicca-dukkha- anatta. I just disagree at suggestions that reading and "understanding" dhammas as they arise even in lay life is the best (and the one and only) way to go. .... S: Whatever way is gone, it's conditioned that way already. This is why it's not a matter of any kind of 'doing', but of understanding what has been conditioned already. From the quote Connie gave from the Vibhanga commentary (Dispeller, 926): "One who sees this rightly (S: i.e understands that it is wrong to think "'Formations must be made to arise by me,' or on the part of formations thus: 'Consciousness [must be made to arise]by us' and so on")abandons the self view by comprehending the absence of a doer;" .... A: >As far as I am concerned, "rites & rituals" is more of a deluded approach to doing things, rather than doing all by itself. Some ppl here claim that formal meditation is "rites & ritual", while this can be true for most people, it isn't true for some people. One can study with "rites & ritual" approach even Abhidhamma. As long as sakkayditthi+ other 2 factors wasn't put to rest, one can do anything with improper approach, including "understanding presently arisen realities". .... S: I like your last sentence. Yes! .... .... >> A:> I believe, strongly, that entire Noble8fold path is required. > ... >> S: Yes, no one has ever suggested otherwise. Samma ditthi is >the "forerunner" or leader, but it needs the assistance of all the >other factors. > .... A:> Yes, and some of the factors (such as right energy) do require more than passive stance of the impersonal nama-rupa process. .... S: What does it mean to say that dhammas are active or passive? All mental factors, including right effort, are active in the sense of performing their particular functions and experiencing the same object as experienced by the citta and other cetasikas they accompany. However, no one can make them arise by will. They are conditioned, as you know to arise, perform these functions and then fall away immediately. ... .... A:> Regarding Angulimala & such: >...Furthermore, what about all the bad Kamma he accumulated through doing those deeds in his LAST lifetime. Who here murdered 999 people? Who here murdered just one? >The point is, we can do it! .... S: OK, do it now! Just do it! Done? Arahatship? Why not? ... A:> Since Ang he has murdered them with his hands in his last existence, he would have a lot of memory, nightmares and remorse of what he did and the faces of those whom he killed. ... S: Not after becoming an arahat. .... A:> None of us here (I hope) have murdered 1, let alone 999 people. Aren't you simply guessing about what you did or didn't do in previous lifetimes. You are. ... S: Not at all, not guessing or speculating about previous lifetimes. Useless! However, I think we can be very sure that every conceivable heinous act has been performed countless times. .... A:> But even then, Angulimala had it tougher as he had to deal with what definately has happened in his lifetime. >If he could do it, we could do it! .... S: In spite of all your protestations to the contrary, it always seems to come back to Self and Doing in our discussions. As I said, if you're so sure of this, just do it and tell us when it's done. At the same time, you might tell us how you understand the following from Anatta-lakkhana Sutta(Thanissaro transl on ATI): "I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying at Varanasi in the Game Refuge at Isipatana. There he addressed the group of five monks: "Form, monks, is not self. If form were the self, this form would not lend itself to dis-ease. It would be possible [to say] with regard to form, 'Let this form be thus. Let this form not be thus.' But precisely because form is not self, form lends itself to dis-ease. And it is not possible [to say] with regard to form, 'Let this form be thus. Let this form not be thus.' "Feeling is not self... "Perception is not self... "[Mental] fabrications are not self... "Consciousness is not self. If consciousness were the self, this consciousness would not lend itself to dis-ease. It would be possible [to say] with regard to consciousness, 'Let my consciousness be thus. Let my consciousness not be thus.' But precisely because consciousness is not self, consciousness lends itself to dis-ease. And it is not possible [to say] with regard to consciousness, 'Let my consciousness be thus. Let my consciousness not be thus.' " Metta, Sarah ========= #88424 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 10:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Computer out of order sarahprocter... Dear Han, Nina's away for a few days, but like her, we hope your health and computer problems improve. I know Sukin would be happy to help your buy a new computer. It seems that you're always having problems and this may be inevetible. It's your main dhamma access, so it is a precious investment. Can we do anything here to encourage your usual Dhamma enthusiasm? You may have noticed that yesterday I referred (in a post to Andrew) to the article by Lily de Silva which you posted on dana. An act of dana (as we consider it conventionally) can consist of many different kinds of cittas, many different motives. Can you help with any further comments or links on this topic as it might help the discussion between Andrew, Ken H and others? This is just if your health, enthusiasm and computer is up to it. We are hoping to see you at the end of the month in Bangkok one way or other, but we'll leave it all to conditions at the time. Metta, Sarah (your junior partner:-)) --- On Sun, 27/7/08, han tun wrote: > Nina: I just thought of you yesterday, and missing you on the list. I hope your health is all right. Han: Thank you very much for your kind concern about my health. #88425 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 10:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Accepting Bhaavanaa Means Accepting Development Of Samatha And Vipassana sarahprocter... Dear Suan & all, Thank you for your reply and good wishes. --- On Mon, 21/7/08, abhidhammika wrote: Suan: > 4. Or, are you against both a purposeful following of activities and self with wrong view? .... Sarah: Yes, I see this as being the most serious kilesa (defilement) which has to be eradicated first. It can only be eradicated through the right understanding of namas and rupas as conditioned. .... Suan: >5. Are you merely against the Pali term `bhaavanaa' being translated as formal development or formal meditation? .... Sarah: it's not so much how a term is translated that concerns me, rather the underlying understanding. As Jon wrote: "I think simply "development" is the best translation for "bhavana"....., for the simple reason that "formal development" suggests that bhavana can only occur during formal practice of some kind." As I wrote and quoted before: S:"The Expositor (Pali: Atthasaalinii, comy to the Dhammasa"nganii) gives a detailed elaboration on the meaning of bhaavanaa as used in the Dhammasa"nganii (first book of the Abhidhamma Pitaka), under "Fourfold Jhana", ch1. Here's the relevant extract. [I've inserted some of the Pali terms back into the translation for clarity,so there may be errors]: ***** " 'Develops'(bhaavetii) means to beget, produce, increase (janeti, uppaadeti, va.d.dheti). This is the meaning of bhaavanaa here. Elsewhere the meaning is different according to the preposition, as sambhaavanaa, paribhaavanaa, vibhaavanaa. Of these, sambhaavanaa means religious confidence, thus: 'In my Order, Udaayi,my disciples believe in the higher eithics (adhisiile), knowing that the recluse Gotama is virtuous (siilavaa) and is endowed with the higher ethics.' (MN ii 9). " 'Concentration perfected by virtue is of much fruit(siilaparibhaavito samaadhimahapphalo), of great advantage(mahaanisa.mso); understanding perfected by concentration is of much fruit (samaadhiparibhaavitaa pa~n~naa mahapphalaa), of great advantage; the mind perfected by understanding (pa~n~naaparibhaavita.m citta.m) is well freed from the Intoxicants (sammadeva aasavehi vimuccatii)' (DN ii 81), here paribhaavanaa means perfecting. "Vibhaavanaa means disappearance in: 'cause matter (ruupa.m), cause feeling (vedana.m), perception (sa~n~na.m), activities (sa?nkhaare), consciousness(vi~n~naa.na.m) to disappear (vibhaavehi).' "Again bhaavanaa is used in the sense of producing and increasing (uppaadanava.d.dhana.t.thena), eg:-'Udaayi, I have preached to the disciples the practice (pa.tipadaa) according to which they develop (bhaaventii) the four applications in mindfulness (cattaaro satipa.t.thaane)' (MN ii 11). And such is its meaning here also. "Hence it has been said that bhaaveti means to beget (janeti), produce (uppaadeti), increase (va.d.dhetii)." (#52659) ***** Suan:> In this case, do you accept development of samatha and vipassanaa in line with the Buddha's prescriptions in all Three Pali Pi.taka? Put it another way, you accept the obligations associated with development of samatha and vipassanaa. .... Sarah: I think the Buddha described the 4 Noble Truths including the path to enlightenment. He described all truths, all realities, including both samatha- and vipassana bhaavanaa. What do you mean by 'obligations'? ... Suan: > By the way, both samatha and vipassanaa are compulsory for the successful development of the Noble Eightfold Path (A.t.thangikomaggo) . ... Sarah: Yes, there cannot be any insight without calm. .... Suan: >Sarah also asked: "Btw, where do you read the texts as suggesting bhavana can be translated as 'formal meditation'? " Suan answered: I read Pali texts. .... Sarah: I've given a detailed quote above to indicate that bhaavanaa means development or increase, as in: "Again bhaavanaa is used in the sense of producing and increasing (uppaadanava.d.dhana.t.thena), eg:-'Udaayi, I have preached to the disciples the practice (pa.tipadaa) according to which they develop (bhaaventii) the four applications in mindfulness (cattaaro satipa.t.thaane)' (MN ii 11). I don't see any reference to 'formal meditation' here. .... Suan: > As far as I am concerned, if you accept bhaavanaa and its obligations in line with the Buddha's teachings, we can easily drop the qualifier `formal' from formal development and formal meditation. How about that? Do you have any problems with accepting samatha bhaavanaa and vipassanaa bhaavanaa? .... Sarah: No problems in "accepting samatha bhaavanaa and vipassanaa bhaavanaa" as I understand them to be in the teachings. I'd like to understand (preferably with translated textual support) what you mean by 'obligations' and 'formal meditation' if you still consider this is what the Buddha meant by 'bhaavanaa'. Metta, Sarah ======== #88426 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 11:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? sarahprocter... Hi Tep, (I just lost a reply I sent you when my travel internet connection ran out of $, so this is a second attempt, more in point form this time - apologies) --- On Sat, 26/7/08, Tep wrote: >T: In your quote of SN 35: 153 the Buddha gave the "method of exposition" (by means of which a bhikkhu - apart from faith, apart from personal preference, apart from oral tradition, apart from reasoned reflection, apart from acceptance of a view after pondering it - can declare final knowledge thus: ‘Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being’) for attainment of arahantship as follows: "And what is that method of exposition? Here, bhikkhus, having seen a form with the eye, if there is lust, hatred, or delusion internally, a bhikkhu understands: ‘There is lust, hatred, or delusion internally’; or, if there is no lust, hatred, or delusion internally, he understands: “There is no lust, hatred, or delusion internally.’ " [Repeat for having heard a sound with the ear.... having cognized a mental phenomenon with the mind.] >T: And you quickly drew a conclusion : >S: It all comes down to the understanding of seeing, visible object, attachment and other dhammas when they appear as mere dhammas. No self to do anything at all. >T: I do not see that it is so easy to develop such understanding which when it arises, the bhikkhu "can declare final knowledge thus: ˜Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being" as stated in the sutta quote you gave. .... S: Not a quick conclusion on my part and yes, I agree, not an easy path at all. A subtle, hard-to-see path from the very beginning. .... T:> But I possibly can misunderstand you. So please allow me to ask you some questions for clarification purpose. 1.) In your concluding remark, are you talking about the understanding of someone who is ready to declare that his/her "holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done", or is your remark applicable only to ordinary people and has nothing to do with the above sutta quote? .... S: I see the path as the same from the very beginning. From the outset, it has to be the growth of understanding of present dhammas appearing. This is the same for the ariyans - in their case far deeper and more precisely, without any wrong view in between, of course. For the Buddha too, it was the same dhammas such as seeing and visible object that were fully penetrated, again with far greater wisdom than in the case of other ariyana disciples. .... 2.) What are the supporting conditions for such understanding in the sutta [i.e. knowing and seeing rightly whether or not there is lobha, dosa, moha internally, after having seen a visible form, ..., having cognized a dhamma with the mind]? .... S: Hearing/studying and carefully considering such realities as now. For example, now there is visible form seen, not a computer or hand. Is it understood as such? Is there lobha or dosa at this moment. These are all realities which can be understood now. Not a person or thing involved. This is the path - not a trying to understand or be aware of another object which doesn't appear. I'd particularly like to pursue this point and hear your further comments on it as I think this is the 'essence' of the teachings. .... 3.) How long (days, months, years, eons) do you think such "method of exposition" may take before someone can delare that stage of "final knowledge"? .... S: As you know, this depends entirely on conditions, especially accumulations. Tep, I think such speculation is useless and indicates a clinging to 'me' and 'my practice'. I also think that the more we understand about conditions the more we appreciate that there's nothing self can do about it, so why be concerned? Life is very simple and easy when there's no anxiety about 'when?' and 'how much?' and 'how?'. Metta, Sarah ======== #88427 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jul 26, 2008 11:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Each presently arisen state sarahprocter... Hi Howard (Phil & all), I mostly agree with what you write below: --- On Thu, 24/7/08, upasaka@... wrote: H:> As you know, I don't consider trees, cars, and women (LOL! Why am I thinking of "fast cars" and "fast women"? ;-)) as merely concept let alone nothing-at-all, but as integrated collections of dhammas acting in concert. However, I hasten to add that one never literally *sees* a tree, car, or woman. They are known only through the mind door, and that mind-door knowing is the culmination of a multitude of mental processes of seeing, perceiving, and conceiving, building level upon level upon level of abstraction - and included in all that processing is, for all but arahants, an imposition of wrong view, specifically that of self-existence and of individuals where in fact the trees, cars, and women are only conglomerates. .... S: Do you think this should read 'for all but ariyans'? Also, I think it depends on many conditions whether wrong view, esp. sakkaaya ditthi arises in such processes frequently or seldom if at all for non-ariyans. For example, in the case of Herman's 'stupid' babies, or in the case of animals, are you sure there is any wrong view arising, rather than just lots and lots of ignorance, attachment and aversion? Even for us, I think ignorance and non-thinking about the truths in anyway is far more common in a day than wrong view (which isn't to say it isn't common too:-)). Metta, Sarah =========== #88428 From: han tun Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 12:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Computer out of order hantun1 Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for your cetanaa to help me. But at the moment, though I am very grateful to you, as I said in my post, I just want to be left alone. Respectfully, Han #88429 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 12:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/7/27 sarah abbott : > .... > S: As you know, this depends entirely on conditions, especially accumulations. Tep, I think such speculation is useless and indicates a clinging to 'me' and 'my practice'. I also think that the more we understand about conditions the more we appreciate that there's nothing self can do about it, so why be concerned? Life is very simple and easy when there's no anxiety about 'when?' and 'how much?' and 'how?'. > The proof of the pudding is in the eating. A 10-year old can grasp that if you don't care about anything, then everything that happens is acceptable. That understanding, however, does nothing to make one care less. What people do in the face of dukkha, rather than renounce all craving, is to direct their craving to those things that they feel they can achieve or hang onto. That is not liberating. That is an investment strategy guaranteed to lead to loss and grief in the long run. Daily life is full of opportunities to see that we lie to ourselves when we make believe that we act without attachment to outcomes. Cheers Herman #88430 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Each presently arisen state egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/7/26 dsgmods : > Hi Herman > >> Your whole agenda is laid bare by what you include and exclude. What >> you miss, and very obviously so, is the understanding of multiple >> different moments. That understanding knows a pattern. > > The topic under discussion with Andrew was the understanding of > multiple moments, so I'm not sure in what sense I "missed" that! > > Would you mind giving an example of what you mean by understanding of > multiple moments knowing a pattern? Thanks. What you wrote was the following: > > By spreading understanding over multiple mind moments, do you not > > immediately make that understanding conventional? Can you explain > > what you mean by it not just being a single moment of a dhamma? > > Understanding is always momentary, but that does not necessarily mean > one moment of understanding one (kind of) dhamma is followed by one > moment of understanding another, different (kind of) dhamma. It can > just as well mean multiple moments of understanding of the same (kind > of) dhamma. > > Also, an understanding of rise and fall (as single-moment > understanding of different dhammas would seem to imply) is one of the > stages of insight development. You have allowed for the following possibilities in understanding of dhammas: Understanding of one dhamma in one moment Understanding of one dhamma in many moments What is missing, and that is what I was pointing out in my post, are the following possibilities: Understanding of many dhammas in one moment Understanding of many dhammas in many moments What I am saying is that a pattern consists of many dhammas over time and/or space, and that you cannot just define patterns away. Cheers Herman #88431 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What is a question? egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/7/26 jonoabb : > Hi Alex > >> >> Again, the often mentioned outline is this: >> >> 1) Conscience & concern >> 2) Purity of conduct >> 3)Restraint of the senses >> 4) Moderation in eating >> 5) Wakefulness >> 6)Mindfulness & alertness >> 7) Abandoning the hindrances >> 8) The four jhanas >> 9) The 1-3 higher knowledges (if not all 6) With the knowledge of >> Liberation. Arhatship. >> >> DN# 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13 >> MN#4, 27,36,39,51,60,65,76,77,79,101,112,119,125 > > Yes, but frequent mention of a given set of circumstances does not > make a general rule out of those circumstances. > It would be useful for the discussion if would share with us under what circumstances, in your view, the formation of a general rule from specific examples is warranted. Cheers Herman #88432 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 2:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What is a question? egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/7/26 jonoabb : > Hi Herman > >> There is, in my opinion, no useful way to evaluate intentions. > Because >> intentions have no consequences. There is no harm or benefit, > progress >> or regress in only intending. > > I think you are using "intentions" here in the conventional sense of > intending to do as preparatory to the actual doing. > I'm not sure about that. I recall citta being referred to as a forerunner to all action. Is that a mistranslation in your view? Also, some versions of DO have intention as the second link in a chain of becoming that counts twelve links. Quite preparatory, wouldn't you say? > However, intention in the teachings is a mental factor that > accompanies every moment of consciousness, being of the same moral > quality (kusala or akusala) as the moment of consciousness it > accompanies. I have just quoted you standard Buddhist teachings. Whose teachings are you quoting? > >> But most importantly, no amount of >> evaluating past intentions, by whatever doubtful standard, will > alter >> the quality of future intentions. > > Agreed. But I was not talking about the evaluation of past > intentions. > >> On the other hand, actions can be evaluated, because they do have >> consequences. One can usefully evaluate the consequences of one's >> deeds. One can usefully ask about one's acts whether they are > causing >> harm or benefit, whether they are bringing one closer or further > away >> from an intended goal. The evaluation of actions can and does result >> in actions being aborted, altered or continued. > > Are your referring here to the evaluation of present actions or past > actions? If the former, how are the consequences to be known? I am referring to present actions, actions in progress. (Actions span time, which is, I guess, why the teachings you refer to do not accomodate most of what is taught in the Buddhist Suttas). People have multiple, and often conflicting motivations in any situation. That is because people have multiple, and often conflicting goals. If you watch other people, or yourself, going about their/your daily life, you will soon notice a constant re-evaluation of their/your actions in terms of achieving their/your current number one goal, and a constant re-prioritising of what their/your number one goal is. What are you doing right now? What on earth for? Is it working? :-) Cheers Herman #88433 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Just studying... upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin (and Alex) - In a message dated 7/26/2008 11:12:37 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sukinder@... writes: Sukin: I’m not sure what the point of your question is, but I’ll answer anyway. If what you are trying to determine is whether I’ve read Suttas first-hand or heard interpretations (A. Sujin’s and others’) / commentaries / Abhidhamma more, the answer is, reading the Suttas has been just a tiny fraction compared to these latter sources. As regards your suggestion of it being between ‘KS interpretation’ vs. ‘bare Sutta reading’, doesn’t it come down more to ‘KS interpretation’ vs. ‘Alex interpretation’? I know that you want me to find out for myself, however at this point in time given that I am completely satisfied with the KS interpretation; ============================== Sukin, I think your approach would be somewhat appropriate provided that the following also holds: 1) You have read the Buddha's teaching itself, most especially the suttas, to see what it is that Khun Sujin (or anyone else) is interpreting, and 2) You have read some additional interpretations as a basis for comparison. The reason I say only "SOMEWHAT appropriate" is that I believe that more is required. What I believe is needed in addition is the following: 1) Training the mind in sila and samadhi to make it a fit instrument for understanding reality, including a practice of ongoing mindfulness and guarding the senses, and 2) Paying attention to what the Buddha taught the Kalamas as follows: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------\ ------------------- "It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias toward a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them. and "Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias toward a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,' enter on and abide in them. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------\ --------------------- With metta, Howard #88434 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:58 am Subject: Re: Collations, Individuals, Grasping, and Relinquishment (Re: [dsg] Re: Mett... upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 7/26/2008 11:25:38 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, It occurred to me at the time of writing that the word "mere" did not mean "not real." But in certain contexts it *can* mean not real. So I left what I had written the way it was. ------------- H: > Ken you say "Collations of things are called "mere" because they are not real." They are, of course, real collations! ;-) ------------- :-) I get your point: even a non-reality is a real non-reality. :-) BTW, I was taking the word "collation" to mean "collage" (something made up of pieces), but my dictionary tells me it is nothing of the sort. (!) I assume the translator made the same mistake. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I knew exactly what you meant, and that's all that counts. (BTW, I think that the proper word the translator should have used - and s/he was close - is 'collocation'. ------------------------------------------------ --------------------- H: > I'm inclined to observe that they are called "mere collations," because they are not single phenomena uncomposed of parts. --------------------- Nor are they *composed* of parts. Unless, of course, you include illusory parts (i.e., other concepts). A sentient being, for example, is composed of eyes, ears and nose (etc) and can see, hear and smell simultaneously. But that's an illusion. In reality, there is only one sense impression occurring at only one doorway (at any one point in time). ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: But underlying all those finer and finer collections and subcollections erroneously grasped as individual phenomena are, finally, paramattha dhammas. ------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------- H: > Likewise, the single phenomena we seem to experience may be called "mere conditioned dhammas," because they are radically impermanent and lack independent existence. ---------------------------------- Yes, it is said that only mere dhammas exist. But in that context "mere" denotes the unreality of anything other than dhammas - not the unreality of dhammas themselves. For example: "We think there are people and trees, but mere dhammas exist." --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, you're right - "only" dhammas. (But that wasn't the context I was referring to.) ---------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- H: > I would like to add that this business of "mere this or that" is a matter of degree of dependence of status, even as regards dependence on parts. Even "single phenomena" are not entirely such. ------------------------------------------------ Yes, I know you have a certain [non-theravadin] theory in which, if I remember correctly, concepts are said to be more real (or less unreal) than dhammas. You can imagine how I mutter every time I read that! :-) -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Now, if you would sputter as well that would truly be a sight for these sore eyes! LOLOL! -------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------ H: > One's body is certainly a mere collection of sensations - a mere collation. ----------------------------------- One's own body is actually a concept, isn't it? Or a collation (collection) of concepts. It is not a collection of realities. ------------------------------------------ Howard: It is a collection of actual, observable phenomena, but merely a collection of them. That, BTW, is what 'khandha' means - a collection. And the body isn't a random collection, but a collection of dhammas in close relation. The Buddha wasn't hallucinating when he taught the Kayagattasati Sutta, teaching about mindfulness of bodily phenomena. He was directing attention to an aggregate of closely interrelated phenomena. -------------------------------------------- Corrections welcome, BTW. I know some Abhidhamma students talk of the body as being "composed of countless rupas" so maybe there is a way in which that can be said. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, of course. ---------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- H: > But also, as supported by the commentaries, any bodily sensation - pressure or warmth, for example - is also in a way composed of parts, of stages (to be precise), with the sensation building, leveling off, and subsiding (like a wave), ----------------------------------------------- Do the commentaries say that? I think they talk of a 'rising' a 'persisting' and a 'falling.' I don't believe those sub-moments can be broken down further (to create an infinite number of points on a wave). ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I think it is as I said. But even if it is but three instantaneous moments (which I disbelieve), that is still a "compound." ---------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- H: > making it not entirely an in-dividual [hyphenation intentional]. It is a convention to consider all three stages of a rupa - it's growth, stasis, and decline - to be one single rupa instead of three rupas. Moreover, the growth and decline stages obviously involve change over time. So, a rupa is not so simple, and is not independent of convention. --------------------------------------- Ha, I should have read that part before writing the above! Never mind, no harm done. The thing is; I disagree and I think a rupa *is* simple (independent of convention). --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. I think that is contrary to the commentaries, but that has never bothered me! ;-)) ---------------------------------------------- ----------------------- H: > At every level, there is nothing to be found that is a separate, self-existent entity. Rather than straining to see discrete, self- existent realities, supporting our tendency to cling, we are better off seeing the radical emptiness and ungraspable character of all aspects of experience, supporting relinquishment. ------------------------ That would be impossible! There could be no empty (anatta) characteristic, and no ungraspable (anicca) characteristic, unless there was something (some separate, self-existent reality) that bore those characteristics. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: A dhamma and its characteristic/quality are indistinguishable. The thought that there is some "thing" that HAS the quality is something extra - an exercise in substantialization. --------------------------------------------------- Ken H =========================== With metta, Howard Date #88435 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 2:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Each presently arisen state upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 7/27/2008 2:16:36 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard (Phil & all), I mostly agree with what you write below: --- On Thu, 24/7/08, upasaka@... wrote: H:> As you know, I don't consider trees, cars, and women (LOL! Why am I thinking of "fast cars" and "fast women"? ;-)) as merely concept let alone nothing-at-all, but as integrated collections of dhammas acting in concert. However, I hasten to add that one never literally *sees* a tree, car, or woman. They are known only through the mind door, and that mind-door knowing is the culmination of a multitude of mental processes of seeing, perceiving, and conceiving, building level upon level upon level of abstraction - and included in all that processing is, for all but arahants, an imposition of wrong view, specifically that of self-existence and of individuals where in fact the trees, cars, and women are only conglomerates. .... S: Do you think this should read 'for all but ariyans'? -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I tend to think not. I think that ignorance wanes in steps as the stages of awakening are attained, but the grasping of an aggregate as an individual (though not the belief) isn't entirely gone, I believe, until full awakening. Even a non-returner has the subtle sense of self in the collection called a person. ------------------------------------------------------ Also, I think it depends on many conditions whether wrong view, esp. sakkaaya ditthi arises in such processes frequently or seldom if at all for non-ariyans. For example, in the case of Herman's 'stupid' babies, or in the case of animals, are you sure there is any wrong view arising, rather than just lots and lots of ignorance, attachment and aversion? --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Ahh, I see the problem. I was too fast in writing that paragraph you quoted at the top. I should not have written "an imposition of wrong view." By "wrong view" I didn't mean "wrong belief or supposition" but atta-oriented "misperception." My "bad"! ;-)) -------------------------------------------------------- Even for us, I think ignorance and non-thinking about the truths in anyway is far more common in a day than wrong view (which isn't to say it isn't common too:-)). -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I was off in expressing my meaning. Sorry. ------------------------------------------------------- Metta, Sarah ============================== With metta, Howard #88436 From: "connie" Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:08 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. nichiconn Dear Scott, Atthasaalinii (p.78): "...Time <...snip...> should be understood that this (abstract time) is a mere concept, because it is not existing by its own nature..." Scott: Also, santati seems most often and most clearly described in relation to ruupa. c: another word <* santaana >, the 'pattern' in this example being 'life and death': Dispeller p.200 <> There was this earlier bit on the 'patterns' of ignorance and formations: << Dispeller 627. (4) "As to singlefold and so on". Here ignorance is singlefold as unknowing, unseeing, delusion, etc.; it is twofold as omissions and mistakes; likewise as prompted and unprompted; it is threefold as associated with the three kinds of feeling; it is fourfold as non-penetration of the four truths. It is fivefold as concealing the danger in the five kinds of destiny; but it should be understood that all the immaterial states [in the Dependent Origination] have a sixfold nature with respect to the [six] doors and objects. 628. Formations are singlefold as states subject to cankers, subject to results, etc.; they are twofold as profitable and unprofitable; likewise as limited and expanded, inferior and medium, wrongness and rightness, fixed and unfixed; they are fourfold as leading to the four kinds of generation; they are fivefold as going to the five kinds of destiny. >> ..leading up to the question in << Dispeller 676. But how does one who is confused about them perform these three kinds of formations? Firstly one who is confused about death (cuti), instead of taking death thus: "In all cases, dying (mara.na) is break-up of aggregates", [..snip..] confused about the characteristic of formations, instead of taking their specific and general characteristics, figures that formations are self, belong to self, are lasting, beautiful and pleasant. One who is confused about states dependently arisen, instead of taking the occurrence of formations, etc. as due to ignorance, etc., figures that it is the self that knows or does not know, that acts and causes action, appears in rebirth-linking,[..snip..]touches, feels, craves, clings, strives, [..snip..] 677. Thus he figures, blinded by ignorance. Like a blind man wandering on the earth who encounters right and wrong paths, high and low, even and uneven ground, he thus forms formations of merit and demerit and the imperturbable. Hence this is said: Just as a man blind from his birth goes about with a guide At one time on the right road walks and at another on the wrong, >> walk on, fare well! connie #88437 From: Sukinder Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 9:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Each presently arisen state sukinderpal Hi Phil and TG, ================ Phil: Sukin, you say that you have only read a few suttas. That's nuts, my friend! It's fine to question our ability to understand them, but to fail to read them and reflect on them is nuts! Nuts, I say! Compelled by metta to quickly write this, TG: Phil is right on! Suttas, the Four Great Nikayas, need to be read repetitively for many years in order to potentially be able to penetrate them. I can't think of a more important practice. Sukin: I know that you both sincerely want to help, this I appreciate. As you may know, I have difficulty reading anything, not only the Suttas. And yes the real problem is the kilesas, sensuality and lack of patience. However conventionally it may be explained as being that of short attention / interest span and tendency to drift off. In any case this has resulted in me not being able to complete even one of Nina’s books. Also the difficulty with the Suttas has in addition, to do with language comprehension, but in this regard, I sometimes have even greater problem with some of the commentaries, such as the one’s quoted by Scott and Connie earlier today about Nibbana. So Phil, I don’t mind reading about things I don’t have the ability to understand deeply; after all understanding them superficially with less panna is still useful. Besides not all suttas are equally difficult and even if I found some to be beyond me, this should not deter from reading other suttas. With this general difficulty with reading, I end up spending much time as it is, reading DSG; so much so that I’m unwilling to spend any more time reading any other Dhamma material. Besides here, it is about posts relatively short and in various styles enough to maintain some interest. Yes, this is lobha ;-). And I think that you have read me say that the amount of reading I’ve done here, is *several times* the reading I’ve done outside and during the rest of my life. So it is not so simple, certainly being told simply that it is valuable to read the Suttas won’t do the trick. Moreover, a few years ago I often felt bad thinking that I wasn’t as Dhamma literate as most people and therefore felt lacking in something essential. Later I came to accept that it was part of what I am to dislike reading and something which is hard to change. Now I understand that not only is it pointless to ‘fight’ it, it is *not* even necessary to make the particular change in habit. I know how interested I am in the Dhamma, and this is all I need to know! Understanding the Dhamma is understanding one’s accumulations, and this leads to more understanding of the Dhamma. The problem with most of us is that because we don’t understand the Dhamma, we don’t know where we are at and so we end up overreaching / straining to understand something which has nothing to do with the reality of our moment to moment experiences. Besides given that the point of studying the Texts is being able to then understand directly the realities, reading more or less suttas is no determining factor of this happening or being encouraged. It may reflect understanding the value of the Suttas, but so what if one does not get a chance to read for what ever reason, wouldn’t it be more important that the interest in Dhamma is maintained at most if not all times? On the other hand, what are the chances, given that your perception is that I lack necessary understanding, on hearing your suggestion to read more Suttas, that this won’t condition tendency to rite and ritual? Is there not a danger that this might serve to hide the accumulations? And TG, given that you do encourage ‘meditation’, at which point according to you does it dawn upon a person, that ‘meditation’ is a necessary part of what the Buddha taught? In fact all the way from beginning to end must involve panna, right? So according to your theory this must develop increasingly as time proceeds, however your suggestion of the need to keep at it for years, how is one to understand this, and how does one discriminate between this and instances of tanha jumping at the same suggestion, especially since in the beginning the panna must be very weak? ================= Phil: And I'll add that if your friends in Bangkok/at AS gatherings fail to tell you what I told you below because of some "no control" doctrine, they are failing you as Dhamma friends! Sukin: They’ll never deny the value of the Suttas for sure and if they know that I was regularly reading them, would indeed feel mudita. But they also know as I do, that it is *more* important to understand oneself / present moment experiences, and this may cause some of them to question whether my reading of the Suttas has helped me in this regard. If I answer yes, they would feel even more mudita, if however I am not able to answer in the affirmative, they might want me to consider the attitude with which I read the Suttas. And this is “always” a good check, I think. Either way, the fact of “no control” would cause them not to have any expectations of me or anyone else. And what could be a better expression of and lesson in ‘right understanding’ of the Dhamma? ;-) The above was written with a heavy head due to high blood pressure caused by some viral infection and lack of rest. According to the doctor I should be taking good rest and this is what I am leaving to do now. What I am trying to say is that I have the impression of not having expressed my thoughts very well nor said everything that I wanted to say. ;-) Metta, Sukin #88438 From: mlnease Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 9:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Each presently arisen state m_nease Hi Sukin, Sukinder wrote: > The problem with most of > us is that because we don’t understand the Dhamma, we don’t know where > we are at and so we end up overreaching / straining to understand > something which has nothing to do with the reality of our moment to > moment experiences. This was nicely put, I thought. Get well soon. mike #88439 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 5:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Each presently arisen state upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin (and Phil and TG) - Sukin, as will not surprise you, my perspective differs from yours significantly on numerous aspects of the Dhamma. But that is not at all why I'm writing you now. I'm writing with regard to what I see as standing out in the following post of yours - namely the magnificent honesty expressed in it! It's not less than wonderful, IMO, and I salute you for it. :-) Well done!! With metta & much respect, Howard In a message dated 7/27/2008 12:16:45 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sukinder@... writes: Hi Phil and TG, ================ Phil: Sukin, you say that you have only read a few suttas. That's nuts, my friend! It's fine to question our ability to understand them, but to fail to read them and reflect on them is nuts! Nuts, I say! Compelled by metta to quickly write this, #88440 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 10:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Just studying... truth_aerator Hi Sukin and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder wrote: > Alex: > Do you speak for KS interpretation of "what the Buddha taught" or >the bare suttas? > > Sukin: I'm not sure what the point of your question is, but I'll ? >answer anyway. If what you are trying to determine is whether I've >read Suttas first-hand or heard interpretations (A. Sujin's and >others') / commentaries / Abhidhamma more, the answer is, reading >the Suttas >has > been just a tiny fraction compared to these latter sources. > > As regards your suggestion of it being between `KS interpretation' >vs. `bare Sutta reading', doesn't it come down more to `KS >interpretation' vs. `Alex interpretation'? The issue is: KS interpretations vs what is said in the suttas. You seem to imply that KS knows more about Buddha's teaching, than Buddha himself. I have to give you the credit for honesty though. Anyhow, please comment: DN#2 ...he seeks out a secluded dwelling: a forest, the shade of a tree, a mountain, a glen, a hillside cave, a charnel ground, a jungle grove, the open air, a heap of straw. After his meal, returning from his alms round, he sits down, crosses his legs, holds his body erect, and brings mindfulness to the fore. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.02.0.than.html ================================================================== "And who is the individual who goes with the flow? There is the case where an individual indulges in sensual passions and does evil deeds. This is called the individual who goes with the flow. "And who is the individual who goes against the flow? There is the case where an individual doesn't indulge in sensual passions and doesn't do evil deeds. !!!****Even though it may be with pain, even though it may be with sorrow, even though he may be crying, his face in tears***!!!, he lives the holy life that is perfect & pure. This is called the individual who goes against the flow. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.005.than.html "When anyone has developed & pursued mindfulness immersed in the body [see the entire sutta], then whichever of the six higher knowledges he turns his mind to know & realize, he can witness them for himself whenever there is an opening. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.119.than.html Please comment, Best wishes, Alex #88441 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 10:19 am Subject: Silabatta paramasa truth_aerator Dear Sarah, Jon, Sukinder, Scott, Nina and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: >S: Whatever way is gone, it's conditioned that way already. >>> Can you please quote the suttas of Buddha saying that? I'll start first: ========================================================= But when — by following a life of !!!precept & practice!!!, a life, a holy life that is followed as of essential worth — one's unskillful mental qualities decline while one's skillful mental qualities increase: that sort of precept & practice, life, holy life that is followed as of essential worth is fruitful." That is what Ven. Ananda said, and the Teacher approved. Then Ven. Ananda, [realizing,] "The Teacher approves of me," got up from his seat and, having bowed down to the Blessed One and circumambulating him, left. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.078.than.html =================================================================== "'This body comes into being through craving. And yet it is by relying on craving that craving is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? There is the case, sister, where a monk hears, 'The monk named such-and-such, they say, through the ending of the fermentations, has entered & remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & realized them for himself in the here & now.' The thought occurs to him, 'I hope that I, too, will — through the ending of the fermentations — enter & remain in the fermentation-free awareness- release & discernment-release, having known & realized them for myself in the here & now.' Then, at a later time, he abandons craving, having relied on craving. 'This body comes into being through craving. And yet it is by relying on craving that craving is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said. "'This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? There is the case, sister, where a monk hears, 'The monk named such-and-such, they say, through the ending of the fermentations, has entered & remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & realized them for himself in the here & now.' The thought occurs to him, 'The monk named such-and-such, they say, through the ending of the fermentations, has entered & remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & realized them for himself in the here & now. Then why not me?' Then, at a later time, he abandons conceit, having relied on conceit. 'This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said, and in reference to this was it said. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.159.than.html > S: At the same time, you might tell us how you understand the >following from Anatta-lakkhana Sutta(Thanissaro transl on ATI): In one of the recent posts here I've said that anattalakkhana teachings imply a) Advanced Nana knowledges and/or b) Advanced Bhavana being done before that. Ven Rahula was taught about 12 meditation subjects before going through Anattalakkhana teaching and becoming an Arahant. If you can achieve Arahatship without preparation as tough as Rahula's, GOOD FOR YOU SARAH! Of course the undertaking of Meditation, stirring up energy is conditioned as well. I believe that "I can do it" approach is better than "I can't do it" to eventually get rid of "I" but leave the "can do it" . Best wishes, Alex #88442 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 6:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Silabatta paramasa upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.159.than.html ============================== Thank you for quoting this wonderful sutta. It makes me think of what I say so often - ad nauseum to many here, I'm sure: "We start where we are, not where we'd hope to be." With metta, Howard #88443 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 11:43 am Subject: Re: kayagatasati dhammanusarin Hi Howard, - We continue to discuss volition, volitional view, non-volitionists, and volitional formations. >Tep: The volitional view that is a right view sees an intentional action (kamma) as volitional formations(sankhara) -- the second link of the Dependent Origination -- that can be meritorious, demeritorious or imperturbable. It is not possible to perform an activity (action/kamma : bodily, verbally, mentally) that is not volitional, unless you are an arahant already. Don't you agree? Howard: Mmm, depends on exactly what you mean by that. I do think that even worldlings can very occasionally act with neutral volition, i.e., kiriya cetana. But for the most part, I agree. I generally agree wit your entore post, most of which I haven't copied here. ------------------------------------------- T: The most difficult I have been trying, and failed so far, is to explain/elaborate/exemplify such that someone can understand exactly what I mean ! But, isn't neutral volition is still aan action(kamma)? ................................................... >Tep: The meritotious and imperturbable kinds of volition may or may not involve the sense of self that is conditioned by clinging (upadana). Howard: I'm not so sure about what you call the imperturbable volition, but I certainly agree about kusala cetana. --------------------------------------------- T: A simple meaning of "imperturbable volition" is given by Bhikkhu Bodhi (in Anicca Vata Sankhara): " ...the sankharas are divided into the meritorious, demeritorious, and "imperturbable," i.e., the volitions present in the four formless meditations. ... if one masters the formless meditations, these "imperturbable" sankharas will propel consciousness toward rebirth in the formless realms." .................................................. >Tep: There is no disadvantage involved when one's intention is not demeritorious volitional formations; it is compatible with right effort and right thought of the Noble Eightfold Path. Correct me, if I am wrong. Howard: I can't quite get a grasp on what you are asserting here, Tep. T: It is very likely that what I wrote is nothing profound, Howard. The difficulty may simply be caused by my poor writing quality. ;-)) But if you are mostly in agreement with my earlier statement, i.e. "But even with some degree of self-view, meritorious intentional actions still are necessary for path development.", then it may follow that some path factors such as right effort(upholding & exerting intent to stop unwholesome action, etc.) and right thought (being resolved on renunciation, non-ill-will, harmlessness) are intentional. Regards, Tep === #88444 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 7/27/2008 2:44:07 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, tepsastri@... writes: But if you are mostly in agreement with my earlier statement, i.e. "But even with some degree of self-view, meritorious intentional actions still are necessary for path development.", then it may follow that some path factors such as right effort(upholding & exerting intent to stop unwholesome action, etc.) and right thought (being resolved on renunciation, non-ill-will, harmlessness) are intentional. --------------------------------------- Howard: I am indeed. ======================= With metta, Howard #88445 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:17 pm Subject: Re: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? dhammanusarin Hi Colette, - It is likewise a pleasure to read your detailed analysis and unique interpretation. :-) I have a few questions/comments this time: C: THE DHARMA FALLS AWAY, DISIPATES, RETURNS TO IT'S NATURAL STATE OF NON-SVABHAVA OR SHUNYATA. T: Is this 'Dharma' same as CITTA, or do you mean a dharma principle (e.g. the Four Noble Truths)? ............... C: Why, if this actually is an "illusory world", "illusory existance", "illusion", why would an adept or aspirant choose to grasp for a goal, an object (rupa), strive to attain a label (applying the concepts of the Buddhist precept of Name and Form we can simply say that the terminology of "arahantship" is nothing more than a label or a badge to pin on your chest, and what, prey-tell, does this outward appearing gesture of submission to Name & Form define IF NOT A STRONG DESIRE TO GRATIFY AN EGO THAT DOES NOT HAVE SVABHAVA, ... If you were there when the Buddha actually gave this definition of a goal to achieve, of a Rupa to grasp at, WHEN THE BUDDHA ACTUALLY SAID IT, then you would know the context it was given and the rationale for him giving it ... T: So, given that there is nothing to hold onto as a self, and that all thing are void of substance, then what do you see as a goal for following the Buddha's Teachings? If arahantship is just a label, theb is Nibbana an illusion too? ............. C: This "qualification" of this single practice by the Buddha, which the Buddha may have actually advocated, is only good UP TO A CERTAIN POINT where we find the Law of Deminishing Returns setting in. T: What is the benefit do you see before the Law of Deminishing Returns sets in? ............... C: Thanx for the reply and for the platform to begin putting an end to something standard bullsh*t that I've found some wannabes of the Golden Dawn and the O.T.O. are attempting to issue to me. T: We'll see how it may go. My past experience here indicated that it often returned to the beginning again and again-- i.e. no progress was made 90% of the time. Tep === #88446 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:00 pm Subject: Re: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? .. You May Disagree Again ... dhammanusarin Hi Sarah (and others), - Thank you for giving appropriate attention to the main points I made and for answering all the questions. I have no problem with reading your reply that may come later than sooner. [Question 1] >S: I see the path as the same from the very beginning. From the outset, it has to be the growth of understanding of present dhammas appearing. This is the same for the ariyans - in their case far deeper and more precisely, without any wrong view in between, of course. T: I agree with you about the gradual growth of understanding of "present dhammas appearing", given there are supporting conditions for the growth. Yet, I do believe there is much more to practice (patipada) beyond observing/considering/reflecting on the realities here and now. MN 70 is a great sutta that explains the what, why and how of the Buddhist practice/training for reaching the goal (ËœDestroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being"). "Monks, I do not say that the attainment of gnosis is all at once. Rather, the attainment of gnosis is after gradual training, gradual action, gradual practice. And how is there the attainment of gnosis after gradual training, gradual action, gradual practice? There is the case where, when conviction has arisen, one visits [a teacher]. Having visited, one grows close. Having grown close, one lends ear. Having lent ear, one hears the Dhamma. Having heard the Dhamma, one remembers it. Remembering, one penetrates the meaning of the teachings. Penetrating the meaning, one comes to an agreement through pondering the teachings. There being an agreement through pondering the teachings, desire arises. When desire has arisen, one is willing. When one is willing, one contemplates. Having contemplated, one makes an exertion. Having made an exertion, one realizes with the body the ultimate truth and, having penetrated it with discernment, sees it." [MN 70] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.070.than.html ................................ [Question 2] >S: Hearing/studying and carefully considering such realities as now. For example, now there is visible form seen, not a computer or hand. Is it understood as such? Is there lobha or dosa at this moment. These are all realities which can be understood now. Not a person or thing involved. This is the path - not a trying to understand or be aware of another object which doesn't appear. >S: I'd particularly like to pursue this point and hear your further comments on it as I think this is the 'essence' of the teachings. T: The essence of the Teachings is in having the realities (the 'All') comprehended or "fully understood". The comprehension (pari~n~na) of lust, hatred, or delusion whenever any of them arises and passes away at any moment must be supported by higher sila, higher samadhi, and higher pa~n~na, so that the steady/unbroken awareness always arises just in time (no time lapse). Whenever the mind (mano, cognizance) is directed inward and unified, it is not affected by an externally sensed object (visible forms, sounds, ...); so there is no lust, hatred, or delusion internally in one who is comprehending. And the bhikkhu also directly knows that mental state the way it truly is. Yet, for a trainer(sekha) he still has fermentations (asavas); so lust, hatred, or delusion are recurring. If the bhikkhu knows when there is (absolutely) no lust, hatred, or delusion in the mind all the time. That is when he can declare final knowledge thus: ‘Destroyed is birth....there is no more for this state of being.’ He is an arahant who has permanently eradicated tanha and avijja. There is no clinging, thus no self-identification views and conceit can be found in him. ............................... [Question 3] >S: As you know, this depends entirely on conditions, especially accumulations. Tep, I think such speculation is useless and indicates a clinging to 'me' and 'my practice'. I also think that the more we understand about conditions the more we appreciate that there's nothing self can do about it, so why be concerned? Life is very simple and easy when there's no anxiety about 'when?' and 'how much?' and 'how?'. T: The third question aims at assessing the effectiveness of Khun Sujin's "method" that you briefly described in your answer to Question 2, namely, "Hearing/studying and carefully considering such realities as now." No, Sarah, it is not a speculation at all. It is very useful and purposeful, since it focuses on the true outcome, or goal of the practice in accordance with the Dhamma : penetration of the ultimate truth with discernment [MN 70], or attainment of the final knowledge thus: ËœDestroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being" [SN35: 153 (8), Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation]. The numerous number of suttas indicate that there is always a time frame as an important measure of "when" the supreme goal of the Holy Life can be attained. For example, 7 days to 7 years in DN 22. Nobody would want to practice Satipatthana, if the Buddha did not make such a clear statement about how long it would take to reach the goal of the practice. Regards, Tep === #88447 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:58 pm Subject: What did Ananda lack? truth_aerator Hi Sarah, Jon, Sukinder, Tep and all Ananda had faith, virtue, wisdom, good kammic 'accumulations', listening & considering A LOT of what the Buddha has said for like 20 years of being his personal attendant (much longer than what Satipatthana promises as the longest time - 7 years.). Why couldn't Ananda become an Arahant before Buddha's parinibbana? What did Ananda lack? Best wishes, Alex #88448 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:33 pm Subject: Re: What did Ananda lack? dhammanusarin Dear Alex, - You asked: >Why couldn't Ananda become an Arahant before Buddha's parinibbana? >What did Ananda lack? > The venerable had had so many duties that tied him down -- he lacked the sense of urgency for the kind of strenuous practice that was required for arahantship. The sense of urgency came just the night before the meeting of the council members (to strengthen the Teaching and the Discipline). "When the date set for the council came closer, Anuruddha suggested that his brother Ananda should only be admitted if he had overcome the last taints and had become an arahant. He knew the power of such an incentive. When Ananda heard this, he decided to employ every bit of strength and ability he possessed to realize Nibbana. He practiced the four foundations of mindfulness, a way which came most natural to him according to his tendencies. In the early hours of the morning, when he wanted to rest after his exertion, he knew without a doubt the he had attained release from all passions. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/hecker/wheel273.html#sectio n-10 Tep === #88449 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 6:49 pm Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. kenhowardau Hi Scott (and Sarah), Thanks for your thoughts on bridging the conventional and the ultimate. As you say, it would depend on time and (as your quote says): "time is only a concept derived from this or that phenomenon." I try to empathise with people who want to construct such a bridge. But why not just come back to the present moment? Having come back to the present moment, where is the need for bridging with the conventional? Nowhere! (At least, nowhere that I can see.) I think you have got it spot on again with the following. The only thing I would advise your readers, however, is to note the difference between "conception" when it means 'to conceive [a view about]' and "conception" when it simply means 'to conceptualise [a concept of]:' ---------- S: > Since one's conception of the 'conventional world' is based on perception - rooted in ignorance - then we can at least start to think about how ideas of patterns based on that which is seen or heard, etc., (ruupa) might come to mind. I'd say that, in relation to the ignorance-based perception of ruupa - which appears to exist over time (when, as we know, it also arises and falls away, according to its own rate of persistence and decay) - certain views arise regarding patterns. ----------- Ken H PS: Recently, you and Sarah have lost work before posting due to your internet connections dropping out. Here is a simple trick I have been meaning to share with you, and everyone. Make a habit of *always* - religiously, ritualistically - before pressing the "send" or "preview" buttons, selecting 'all' and copying. Then, if something goes wrong, you can simply go back to the "reply" stage and post your *saved* work into a new window. Too easy? :-) #88450 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma, Logic, Anatta egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/7/26 dsgmods : > Hi Andrew > > So whether we are travelling, at work, on the computer at home, or > whatever, there are basically the same (relatively few) dhammas > arising and falling away. > > And it is these dhammas that are to be known as they truly are, not > the conventional circumstances. > The universals of the suttas are limited to anicca, dukkha and anatta, and liberating insight consists of an understanding that whatever arises is anicca, dukkha and anatta. The belief that whatever arises is an instance of one of the universals as specified by and limited to the makita of the Abhidhamma is a latterday (read commentarial) development, and irrelevant to the development of insight, as is the belief that these universals need to be known. As BB points out in his intro to CMA: The phrase in the Dhammasangani, "or whatever other (unmentioned) conditionally arisen immaterial phenomena there are on that occasion," apparently envisages an open-ended universe of mental factors, which the Commentaries delimit by specifying the "or-whatever states" (yevapanaka dhamma). Cheers Herman #88451 From: "connie" Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 9:24 pm Subject: Accepting Bhaavanaa Means Accepting Development Of Samatha And Vipassana nichiconn Dear Friends (of Sarah), The king once asked about the characteristic mark[s] of faith, perseverance, mindfulness and meditation. Naagasena said that of faith is << tranquillisation, O king, and aspiration. The rendering of support, O king, is the mark of perseverance. All those good qualities which it supports do not fall away >>. He explains that: << 'As mindfulness, o king, springs up in his heart he repeats over the good and evil, right and wrong, slight and important, dark and light qualities, and those that resemble them, saying to himself: "These are the four modes of keeping oneself ready and mindful, these the four modes of spiritual effort, these the four bases of extraordinary powers, these the five organs of the moral sense, these the five mental powers, these the seven bases of Arahatship, these the eight divisions of the Excellent Way, this is serenity and this insight, this is wisdom and this emancipation." Thus does the recluse follow after those qualities that are desirable, and not after those that are not; thus does he cultivate those which ought to be practised, and not those which ought not. That is how repetition is the mark of mindfulness.' 'As mindfulness springs up in his heart, O king, he searches out the categories of good qualities and their opposites, saying to himself: "Such and such qualities are good, and such bad; [38] such and such qualities helpful, and such the reverse." Thus does the recluse make what is evil in himself to disappear, and keeps up what is good. That is how keeping up is the mark of mindfulness.' >> Then, meditation's characteristic mark: 'Being the leader, O king. All good qualities have meditation as their chief, they incline to it, lead up towards it, are as so many slopes up the side of the mountain of meditation.' Or as Sarah recently put it: "Travelling to another smaller mountain place tomorrow and it'll be difficult to find internet access, but we'll see." -sorry! but only for the half in jest; the footnote (58:3) calls "meditation" << the various moral qualities and mental habits which together make up Arahatship >>, which is certainly formal enuf for my book. In a later footnote, 'being unshaken by spiritual pride' is a mark of samaadhi-bala... and of course, thinking of DN33, Saariputta comes to mind. peace, connie DN33 Cy << There should not be a dispute as to meaning and letter. >> #88452 From: "connie" Date: Sun Jul 27, 2008 10:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana "signless" but also "arammana" nichiconn ps. Chris, from Nina's #88137, in DN33 corner: << nibbaana bends blameless dhammas on to itself because it is the condition of predominance of object (aaramma.naadhipati-paccaya) for them. >> peace, connie #88453 From: "Sukinder" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 12:12 am Subject: Re: Each presently arisen state sukinderpal Hi Howard, ============ > Sukin, as will not surprise you, my perspective differs from yours > significantly on numerous aspects of the Dhamma. But that is not at all why I'm > writing you now. I'm writing with regard to what I see as standing out in the > following post of yours - namely the magnificent honesty expressed in it! It's > not less than wonderful, IMO, and I salute you for it. :-) Well done!! Thank you and my salute to you for expressing yourself. But the day your perspective has changed to one which I agree with, that will be the day that I will actually celebrate! :-) Metta, Sukin #88454 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 12:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Dhammadharo sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, (Azita, Nina & all) --- On Thu, 24/7/08, szmicio wrote: >I've missed you. All your ansewers helps me so much. ... S: Thank you. I'm sorry that my replies are usually slow and slower still when I'm travelling (which is often, it seems!). .... >S: I too felt shocked and unhappy when I first heard he'd died. >You'll see in one of the messages how I recall arriving at the >funeral in tears. >L: What to do if such thinking and feelings appear? ... S: There's no choice but to understand thinking, feelings or any other dhammas for what they are: not self or belonging to a self....just common dhammas which don't last. .... >S: However, after A.Sujin's reminders about the clinging to one's >own feelings, reminders about awareness now of seeing and visible >object, reminders about being lost in stories and a dream-world and >so on, there were no more tears, no more grief at all. >L: But if we stays in dream-world the whole day? Is it OK? Can we do anything about this? .... S: When there isn't seeing, hearing and other sense experiences, there is thinking and dreaming. WE can't do anything about anything, but gradually there can be the growth of right understanding. Again, not 'my' dreaming or ignorance. Just common dhammas. .... >S: We know that death can come anytime, depending on kamma. >L: Yes, but it is a little bit frightening. I feel a depresion about that I can die even now or tommorow. I am afraid that I can lost my Path(Dhamma) . ... S: Lukas, it's only frightening and depressing because there's so much clinging to self - 'my life', 'my death', 'my Path'. When we understand more and more about dhammas, there's nothing to fear, nothing to be lost at all. .... > I am afraid of pain. There was a time when I was feeling pain as diffrent rupas. .... S: Actually, the only rupas which are experienced through the body-sense are hardness/softness, heat/cold and pressure. The painful bodily feeling is a nama. .... >But usualy when I feel bodily pain I think that is my heart, or liver.or if i hear anything about blood, then.. ...black out. .... S: There is the experiencing of say, hardness and then immediately (because of sa~n~naa), the ideas of 'body', 'my heart' and so on. Actually, it's all just thinking. There is the hearing of sound only, and then ideas about 'blood', thinking of stories, dream-worlds, aversion and so on. That's all so very common and ordinary. Slowly we can learn more about the distinction between realities and concepts. This is the way that understanding, detachment and less clinging to self grows. .... >Sarah it is very important what you write about venerable Dhammadharo. I dont know why but i like him very much. hHe was really great Dhamma teacher. If you have any materials about him please share with me. ... S: Sukin and I were discussing and arranging off-list to send you a copy of a Phra Dhammadharo c.d. Please share any extracts you find helpful. He did have an extraordinary gift for sharing dhamma with those completely new to it. For example, I know many of the people in Adelaide, Australia who listened when he gave his 'Be Here Now' talk and other discussions in the early 70s. Most of them were completely new to the Dhamma and it was out of curiosity that they went to listen at that time, some because they'd known him from before. For many, it really changed their view of the world. I always found it more helpful to listen to A.Sujin herself, but I know others (inc. Azita here) found his talks invaluable. Perhaps I can encourage her to say more about her experiences? Metta, Sarah p.s Nina, I think you're right that it was some friends in Adelaide who transcribed/wrote down the talk. When we return to Hong Kong, we need to look at the manuscript I mentioned we came across again. Jon says it may have been another one with a similar title, such as 'Be Aware Now'. We only had a very quick look as we were busy. ================== #88455 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 12:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? sarahprocter... Hi Tep, [We lost the internet connection in our apartment building by the sea for 24 hours after a big hail-storm yesterday. We've just got the connection back and with it, the initial version of my response to you! So you can compare and see which you prefer:-))] Thank you again for the good points you raise. --- On Sat, 26/7/08, Tep wrote: >T: In your quote of SN 35: 153 the Buddha gave the "method of exposition" (by means of which a bhikkhu - apart from faith, apart from personal preference, apart from oral tradition, apart from reasoned reflection, apart from acceptance of a view after pondering it - can declare final knowledge thus: ËœDestroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being') for attainment of arahantship as follows: "And what is that method of exposition? Here, bhikkhus, having seen a form with the eye, if there is lust, hatred, or delusion internally, a bhikkhu understands: ËœThere is lust, hatred, or delusion internally'; or, if there is no lust, hatred, or delusion internally, he understands: 'There is no lust, hatred, or delusion internally.' " [Repeat for having heard a sound with the ear.... having cognized a mental phenomenon with the mind.] >T: And you quickly drew a conclusion : >S: It all comes down to the understanding of seeing, visible object, attachment and other dhammas when they appear as mere dhammas. No self to do anything at all. >T: I do not see that it is so easy to develop such understanding which when it arises, the bhikkhu "can declare final knowledge thus: ËœDestroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being" as stated in the sutta quote you gave. .... S: Not a quick conclusion on my part and I agree that it is definitely not easy to develop such understanding:-) As the Buddha stressed, it is a very subtle teaching, very hard to see. However, if there is not a beginning now of understanding such dhammas as they appear (one at a time), there will be no development at all. .... T:> But I possibly can misunderstand you. So please allow me to ask you some questions for clarification purpose. 1.) In your concluding remark, are you talking about the understanding of someone who is ready to declare that his/her "holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done", or is your remark applicable only to ordinary people and has nothing to do with the above sutta quote? ... S: My remark ("It all comes down to the understanding of seeing......No self to do anything at all) refers to the understanding at all levels. What is understood now at the very beginning of the path are the same realities which are understood (far more precisely and deeply, of course) for those who have developed insights and become enlightened. The truths they understand, in turn, are the same as those penetrated by the Buddha's wisdom (again far more deeply). .... T:> 2.) What are the supporting conditions for such understanding in the sutta [i.e. knowing and seeing rightly whether or not there is lobha, dosa, moha internally, after having seen a visible form, ..., having cognized a dhamma with the mind]? ..... S: Hearing and considering very carefully as now. For example, at this moment, considering wisely that what is seen is just visible object (no computer, no hand, no print) is a condition for right understanding to develop and directly understand visible object as visible object. [Please let me know if this makes sense to you as I think it's an important point to discuss further.] ..... T: >3.) How long (days, months, years, eons) do you think such "method of exposition" may take before someone can delare that stage of "final knowledge"? .... S: It entirely depends on conditions and accumulations how long the path will take. (Remember the Anatta-lakkhana sutta again). I can honestly say that I never think or concern myself with 'how long?'. I see such kind of thinking as a big hindrance, a clinging to 'me' again. It doesn't help at all. Metta, Sarah ====== #88456 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 12:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? sarahprocter... Hi Alex & all, --- On Sun, 27/7/08, Alex wrote: A:> Here is addition to the topic about Buddha's questionings that lead people to Arhatship. >Some people take Anattalakkhana- like teaching to show that by reasoning and without meditating, one can reach Arhatship. .... S: If by this you mean that they assume that reasoning, intellectual understanding without bhavana, without the development of satipatthana or vipassana is sufficient for arahatship (or any attainment along the path), then I have yet to meet them here. From a discussion you're having with Tep, you referred to requiring 'some time in secluded retreat setting', 'generally speaking'. Tep replied that 'occasional selcusion is necessary. But anyone can have "personal retreat" at home too'. What about now, Alex? Can there be seclusion at this moment? If not at this moment, then when? Isn't that a 'putting off' of bhavana? What is seclusion in the ultimate sense according to the Buddha? You referred to the various 'meditation objects' that the Buddha taught Rahula. The first you mentioned were the elements. What are the elements, Alex? When can they be known? Are they atta to be controlled, or anatta, dependent on conditions? Thanks again for your good discussions and any other posts I've not yet replied to. Metta, Sarah ======== #88457 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 12:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana "signless" but also "arammana" christine_fo... Hello Scott, Connie, Sarah, all, Thank you so much for your replies ~ I'll think them over and bring back any questions. Sarah: Oh no! I didn't see your note about possibly meeting in Sydney ~ I would definitely have tried to make it - it feels such a long time since I've seen you all. metta Chris ~ The trouble is that you think you have time ~ #88458 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 12:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? - THERE IS SUCH A METHOD!!! sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- On Sat, 26/7/08, Alex wrote: A:> As I understand it, the awareness must be ultra sharp. Before "greed" arises, what exact steps are present? Can you name and spot a dozen of subtle actions that happen (even during a second) that cause greed/anger/ delusion to arise? Can you see them? .... S: Sorry Alex, but I think you're barking up the wrong tree here. Perhaps I should say, the wrong trees. .... A: >For example in a long retreat that I had, sometimes I noticed a "machine gun like" broken movements of the foot. Can one notice the same with mind states? .... S: Again, the wrong tree. This is not the understanding of namas and rupas. ..... A:> Super mindfulness is required for that, and long retreats may be required for most of us, as ordinary mindfulness is too blunt and slow. .... S: Again, I don't believe this has anything to do with the development of satipatthana or sati or any kind. You added an interesting quote for discussion another time (MN 64). Again we have to consider what the seclusion is, the ultimate viveka that leads to and accompanies the attaining of arahatship. Metta, Sarah ========= ===== Furthermore === The typical anatta teaching: Is "X" permanent or impermanent? Here we have anicca sanna or perhaps udaybbaya nana. Is "X" pleasure or stress? Here we have dukkha sanna. Perhaps knowledge of fearfulness, misery & disgust. Seeing X, a monk becomes revulsed (nibbida), disspasioned (viraga) and liberated from (vimutti) form/feeling/ perc/vol/ consc . He knows, I am "liberated". Here we have final ~nanas. So as you see, a simple "anatta lakhanna" teaching may be a cryptic description of vipassana ~nanas (or call them as you will). Generally speaking, they may require quite some time in secluded retreat setting. === Another equally valid approach is in MN64. In the Jhana or immeadetely after it, with a hindrance free mind, bright, pliable and malleable one can see: "the bhikkhu secluding the mind thoroughly, by dispelling things of demerit, removes all bodily transgressions that bring remorse. Then secluding the mind, from sensual thoughts and thoughts of demerit, with thoughts and discursive thoughts and with joy and pleasantness born of seclusion abides in the first jhana. Established in it he reflects all things that matter, all feelings, all perceptive things, all intentions, all conscious signs are impermanent, unpleasant, an illness, an abscess, an arrow, a misfortune, an ailment, foreign, destined for destruction, is void, and devoid of a self. Then he turns the mind to the deathless element: This is peaceful, this is exalted, such as the appeasement of all determinations, the giving up of all endearments, the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation and extinction*1) . With that mind he comes to the destruction of desires. If he does not destroy desires on account of greed and interest for those same things. He arises spontaneously, with the destruction of the five lower bonds, of the sensual world, not to proceed. ânanda, this too is a method for overcoming the five lower bonds of the sensual world. " http://www.mettanet .org/tipitaka/ 2Sutta-Pitaka/ 2Majjhima- Nikaya/Majjhima2/ 064-maha- malunkhyaputta- e1.html ========= Notice how impermanence, stressfulness, not self is seen. After or during JHANA. Appeasement of all determinations and such may be another word for sankharaupekkha nana. The "he reflects all things that matter, all feelings, all perceptive things, all intentions, all conscious signs are impermanent, unpleasant, an illness, an abscess, an arrow, a misfortune, an ailment, foreign, destined for destruction, is void, and devoid of a self." sounds pretty nana-like to me. Best wishes, Alex #88459 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Channa took his life faultlessly sarahprocter... Hi Alex (Herman & all), --- On Fri, 25/7/08, Alex wrote: >> S: Yes, he developed all insights and became an arahat in those >brief moments after cutting his throat: > > B.Bodhi quotes the commentary notes to this sutta: > > "MA: He cut his throat, and just at that moment the fear of death > descended on him and the sign of future rebirth appeared. >Recognising > that he was still an ordinary person, >>>> A:> How could he be an ordinary person if his discription of Knowledge was of an Ariyan? ..... S: We can all repeat that all dhammas are dhammas are anatta. Does a description make an ariyan, let alone an arahat? .... A:> How could he not be an Arahant if a) Channa declared to be an Arahant b) Buddha approved the statement? ============ ========= ========= ========= ========= ========= Channa: Friend Sàriputta, it is not that I'm in want of suitable nourishment, or suitable medical requisites, or a suitable attendant, yet my duties by the Teacher are done long ago, with pleasure and not with displeasure. Channa: Friend Sàriputta, for a disciple who has done his duties by the Teacher pleasantly, there is nothing wrong if he takes a weapon to end life, remember it as that.û ======== S: Firstly, anyone can be misguided. Various friends from time to time declare or hint here of various attainemnts, such as being a sotapanna or reaching all jhanas. Does it mean it's necessarily true? The Buddha made it clear that Channa died 'faultlessly', i.e as an arahat. The attainment was after Channa's words and the taking up of the knife. This is why the other bhikkhus didn't know until the Buddha told them. All misunderstandings of the path, all attachments and ignorance were eradicated in those last moments of life. .... A:> here Channa declares his Arahatship to Sariputta. The terrible punch line is that Sariputta (not only time) fails to see that Channa is an Arahant and answers in a way that an Arahant would do (total disenchantment with 18 elements). .... S: Sariputta knew that Channa was misguided and hadn't attained to any enlightenment when Channa spoke to him, so he gave him the best guidance - not about trees and jhanas, but about sense objects and so on appearing right then and there as anatta. .... A:> Buddha: "Sàriputta, wasn't the faultlessness of the bhikkhu Channa declared in your presence?" http://www.mettanet .org/tipitaka/ 2Sutta-Pitaka/ 2Majjhima- Nikaya/Majjhima3/ 144-channovada- e.html Here the Buddha is telling Sariputta that Ven. Channa was faultless WHILE SARIPUTTA SEEN CHANNA (in other words Ven. Channa was Arahat even while being alive and seeing Ven. Sariputta). .... S: I understand the Buddha to have been referring to the faultlessness of Channa just before his death. The Buddha had spoken of this in Sariputta's presence. [note: I don't have the sutta or my texts handy, so this is just my recollection of it]. .... A: >he was aroused and developed > insight. Comprehending the formations, he attained arahantship just > before he expired." ... S: Yes, 'just before he expired'. .... A:> Admit it, the MN144 tells in straitforward manner that Ven. Channa a) Declared his blamelesness (Arhatship). b) Buddha approved it. c) But Sariputta couldn't see it. "Bhikkhu Channa took his life faultlessly" - MN144 .... S: You're saying that Channa was overwhelmed by his suffering and took his life as an arahat. You're saying that Sariputta tried to dissuade him from this and failed to appreciate not only his great wisdom, but the fact that he was acting as an arahat. I'm saying (with the support of the commentaries) that Channa took his life out of ignorance, attachment and aversion as a worldling. After conversing with Sariputta and the other elder, there were the right conditions for all insights and stages of enlightenment to occur and for him to become an arahat after using the knife. The intoxications disappeared and sanity prevauiled. The Buddha informed the bhikkhus of this as there was nothing to show of it by way of outer appearance. Metta, Sarah ======= #88460 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:17 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. jonoabb Hi KenH and Andrew I mentioned in an earlier post that I amy come in on any discussion between the two of you, and here I am. Just a couple of points. > I don't think any of us disapproves of the word "santati > (continuity)." It refers to the way one citta follows on from > another, doesn't it? It doesn't mean "persisting" or "permanent" in > any way. Speaking from memory, I think santati can refer to either of the following: (a) the way one citta follows on from another (as mentioned above); (b) the appearance of continuity due to our inability to perceive rise and fall of dhammas. In the latter case, it connotes a wrong perception of reality. So it depends on the context. > I think 'stream of consciousness' means the same thing (at > least when Jon uses it). Yes, "stream of consciousness" refers to successive moments of consciousness that are related to each other by contiguity condition. In the texts the term "stream" (sota) is found in the expression "sota bhavanga" (stream of bhavanga consciousness). > > We are constantly told to "understand the present realities". >> Wouldn't it be good to know if that is a reference to a plurality or >> singularity of realities? DSG 101! > > > KH: I have no doubt that it refers to the present realities. > (Strictly speaking, it refers to *one* of the present realities). > And that is the case no matter what plurality (concept) we might have > in mind. Whether we have in mind the concept of spinning on the wheel > of samsara or just the concept of walking to the shop, there are > always, ultimately, only the presently arisen dhammas. Yes, and according to the orthodox commentarial position only one of these presently arisen dhammas can be object of awareness/insight at a time. Jon #88461 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:19 am Subject: Re: Just studying... jonoabb Hi Alex (and Sukin) > Many other traditions say this. Just read the Bhagavat Gita, The > Bible, Quran, Talmud, Torah, Zohar, Talmud Eser Sfirot, and > everything will follow. BULL. But no-one here is saying that just reading the texts is sufficient. For a start, it is not the *activity of reading texts* that is being referred to, but the *fact of hearing the teachings*, and in particular of hearing them explained in a way that is appropriate to one's level of understanding. Secondly, it is not a matter of just hearing, but also of considering (reflexively, and at length) what has been heard and understood, and relating that to the present-moment experience. Do you not recognise this kind of hearing and considering as part of your own development of understanding? > "read with intention and the Ohr Makif from Ein Sof will drop toward > Malhut and open the spiritual vision in thee" ... I've heard it > before... Please consider the difference between this "read with intention" statement and what I've said above. Jon #88462 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:20 am Subject: Re: kayagatasati jonoabb Hi Alex > 580-583. Bhikkhus, when mindfulness of the body is developed and made > much, it conduces to realizing the fruits of the entry into the stream > of the Teaching, fruits of returning once, fruits of not returning, and > fruits of worthiness > > 607. Bhikkhus, those that have not practised mindfulness of the body, > have not practised deathlessness and they that have practised > mindfulness of the body, have practised deathlessness. Thanks for the sutta quotes. As I've indicated in an earlier post, the importance of awareness of/insight into rupas is not in dispute. > Also I suggest you re-read MN119 > > "Monks, for one in whom mindfulness immersed in the body is cultivated, > developed, pursued, handed the reins and taken as a basis, given a > grounding, steadied, consolidated, & well-undertaken, these ten > benefits can be expected." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.119.than.html Again, not in dispute. > Of course some people may need 3 other satipatthanas, or those 3 other > satipatthanas are something that can be developed even if one's primary > focus is kayagatasati. You seem to be suggesting here that for some people insight may be developed and enlightenment attained without the other 3 foundations of satipatthana as object. I doubt that this is correct. From memory (no access to internet as I write) MN 119 goes on to explain how kayagatasati is to be developed so as to bring the benefits in question. Does it not mention the other 3 satipatthanas or 4 khandhas in that context? Jon #88463 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:31 am Subject: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati jonoabb Hi Howard (and Tep) > What I think is the case is the following: The folks that I jokingly > call "non-volitionists" seem to me to think that exercise of volition requires > and always involves the sense or idea of a self or agent who is engaged in > willing, and, they thus object when anyone speaks of an activity being carried > out intentionally. Never been said (I think you misunderstand)! What has been said is that when it comes to any kind of *deliberate practice for the (present) arising of insight*, whether that be in the nature of sitting, walking, studying or doing things in a particular way, there is bound to be a view of self. The reason for this is simple: something is being undertaken for the purpose of having more insight, i.e., for "me"! Insight is not something that can be "actioned". It is an understanding or realisation, and it accrues at its own (slow) pace. > I, of course, do agree with them that most mental states of worldlings > and even of ariyans who are not yet arahants, and not just states involving > intention, are polluted by sense-of-self and, for worldlings, outright > atta-belief. That is the unfortunate position that we find ourselves in. But I think > that to run from engaging in useful intentional actions due to conflating > willing with belief in an actor is a darn shame. (What saves folks from doing > this when actually living instead of just engaging in theoretical opining are > the requisites of life that are rather uncompromising.) A question for you. Given that, as you say above, most mental states are polluted by sense-of-self and atta-belief, then when a person engages in a form of deliberate practice such as you advocate, what will determine at which moments during that practice the arising mental states are kusala and at which moments akusala (other than dumb luck ;-))? Jon #88464 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What is a question? jonoabb Hi Alex > > Well everyone has some degree of temporary detachment. > > When? And is it enough? Look, if you can become a sotopanna and then > an Arahant with "access" concentration path moment, then GOOD FOR > YOU. I will not argue against that. In case you missed it in my earlier post, we are not talking about any individual here (least of all about me), but about the meaning of the teachings given by the Buddha. The question we are discussing is *whether the path to enlightenment lies in the development of more and more of the temporary kind of kusala, or in the development of insight into the true nature of dhammas*. Do you have any further comments/sutta quotes on that particular point? > Sariputta needed all 9 meditation levels to become an Arahant, so did > MahaMoggallana - they couldn't follow totally "dry" path. If you can > become an Arahant without rupa jhanas and aruppa attainments > (including nirodha samapatti) AND Buddha's personal guidance - GOOD > FOR YOU! I bet you'd be teaching them, if you could. Well the path that involves enlightenment based on jhana (as for the Buddha and his great disciples) is a higher attainment than that of the dry insight attainer. The idea that Sariputta "needed all 9 meditation levels to become an Arahant" does not accord with the traditional view that he spent many lifetimes developing the perfections necessary to fulfil the vow made to become a chief disciple. > Who am I to suggest anything to you? Well I appreciate your keen interest in the teachings, and enjoy discussing things with you (even though it seems we rarely agree ;-)) > > But as I said in my earlier post, it is the development of insight > >into the >true nature of things, rather than the development of more > > Where did I say "samatha only" ? Even anapanasati is satipatthana > practice capable to bring one to all 9 meditation levels and > paths/fruits. I agree that what is being described in the Anapanasati Sutta is the development of both samatha and vipassana, to the stage of enlightenment based on jhana (as in the case of Ven. Sariputta). But this sutta does not say anywhere (or does it?) that a certain level of samatha is a prerequisite to the development of vipassana. > > Yes, but frequent mention of a given set of circumstances does not > > make a general rule out of those circumstances. > > Jon, when something is repeated with such frequency, I'd take that > over some vague & rare sentence (which could have been slipped in or > mistranslated by compilers of the canon). I'd also take that above The frequency is not that great, taking the sutta pitaka overall. And you are relying solely on an inference (an inference not found stated in the ancient texts) rather than on express words of the Buddha. Please consider the possibility of being led by your own innate views in coming to the conclusions you do. > I'd also take that above > what some modern non-Arahant teacher says. I have not made any reference to modern teachers, so no more red herrings of this kind, please Alex ;-)). There is more of your post to reply to, but this much only for now. Phew!! Jon #88465 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:38 am Subject: Re: Retreats (was, response to hate mail etc) jonoabb Hi Alex > Where did the Buddha say: "Read Abhidhamma pitaka and live the lay > life that you always wanted? No need to strive in the forest, caves, > empty houses and so on. Relax, doing is like for them, ignoramuses. > Here is TV remote, don't develop attabhava by engaging in like heavy > work" I haven't said any of that, so I'm not going to bite here ;-)) > Why did He often praise going forth as a monk, and not just that. > Being a reclusive monk aloof from other monks? I think if one looks closely at the texts, it was not going forth and living the life of a reclusive monk *per se* that was praised by the Buddha, but doing so perfectly and purely. Thus, it was praised only for those (very few now, but more in those days) who are sufficiently accomplished to achieve that. > > But "many cases" do not make it a requirement laid down by the > Buddha or even a general rule. > > If you can achieve nanas and Jhanas at home, GOOD FOR YOU! I can't > argue with that. Again, not about me (or anyone in particular), but about the teachings as we have them today. It's a question of what the Buddha actually said (expressly or impliedly) in the suttas. It seems to me that you are attributing a particular aspect of doctrine to the Buddha on the basis of a number of suttas that describe a similar set of circumstances (but which do not contain any express or implied statement of the matter of doctrine). > Sariputta needed 9 meditation levels + Buddha's occasional personal > guidance to become an Arahant. That is considering the fact that he > became a sotopanna when he heard a line of Dhamma. > MN111, MN74 > > MahaMoggallana needed 9 meditation levels + other things + almost > constant help from the Buddha himself. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn40/sn40.009.wlsh.html Sariputta and MahaMoggallana would not be the great disciples they were unless their attainment of enlightenment was based on high levels of jhana. > If you can beat them while cooking at home, I can't argue with that. An intriguing thought, but nothing to do with anything I've said in our discussion so far ;-)). Jon #88466 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:41 am Subject: Of Mice and Men (Re: [dsg] A question on contiguity) jonoabb Hi Herman > > It would help if you could give an example of what you mean by "the > > consciousness that experiences consciousness". > > Well, it is actually you who posits such a thing, not me. You talk > about seeing-consciousness and hearing-consciousness etc in the > context of things that can be known. My assumption was that therefore > there must be a consciousness that knowns these different > consciousnesses. But you don't mention such a thing. I will rephrase > my question. What knows seeing-consciousness, hearing-consciousness > etc? Thanks for explaining your comments further. According to what I understand (i.e., intellectually, from my reading of the texts), seeing consciousness or hearing consciousness may be the object of consciousness accompanied by panna of the level of satipatthana (being a moment of consciousness immediately subsequent to the moment of seeing or hearing consciousness). Jon #88467 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 4:13 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma, Logic, Anatta jonoabb Hi Herman > > So whether we are travelling, at work, on the computer at home, or > > whatever, there are basically the same (relatively few) dhammas > > arising and falling away. > > > > And it is these dhammas that are to be known as they truly are, not > > the conventional circumstances. > > The universals of the suttas are limited to anicca, dukkha and anatta, > and liberating insight consists of an understanding that whatever > arises is anicca, dukkha and anatta. I think you'll find that mention in the suttas of the 3 characteristics is usually, if not invariably, tied to dhammas in general or to a particular dhamma or set of dhammas. So the "whatever arises" in your statement above needs to be defined and not left at large. > The belief that whatever arises is an instance of one of the > universals as specified by and limited to the makita of the Abhidhamma > is a latterday (read commentarial) development, and irrelevant to the > development of insight, as is the belief that these universals need to > be known. Well our discussion so far has proceeded on the basis of the suttas and I've not made any mention of Abhidhamma or the commentaries. So we don't need to pursue this line. > As BB points out in his intro to CMA: > > The phrase in the Dhammasangani, "or whatever other (unmentioned) > conditionally arisen immaterial phenomena there are on that occasion," > apparently envisages an open-ended universe of mental factors, which > the Commentaries delimit by specifying the "or-whatever states" > (yevapanaka dhamma). The view that it is an "open-ended universe of mental factors" that is envisaged by the passage from the Dhammasangani is BB's own and not supported by any of the ancient texts, as far as I know. It is an inference he draws, but not the only inference open on the wording. Jon #88468 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 1:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Each presently arisen state upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin - In a message dated 7/28/2008 3:13:12 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sukinder@... writes: Hi Howard, ============ > Sukin, as will not surprise you, my perspective differs from yours > significantly on numerous aspects of the Dhamma. But that is not at all why I'm > writing you now. I'm writing with regard to what I see as standing out in the > following post of yours - namely the magnificent honesty expressed in it! It's > not less than wonderful, IMO, and I salute you for it. :-) Well done!! Thank you and my salute to you for expressing yourself. But the day your perspective has changed to one which I agree with, that will be the day that I will actually celebrate! :-) ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm, yes. I imagine that many religionists think the same way - wanting others to "see the light," i.e., to see things their way. ;-) ----------------------------------------------------- Metta, Sukin ============================ With metta, Howard #88469 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 1:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati upasaka_howard Hi, Jon (and Tep) - In a message dated 7/28/2008 6:32:04 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Howard (and Tep) > What I think is the case is the following: The folks that I jokingly > call "non-volitionists" seem to me to think that exercise of volition requires > and always involves the sense or idea of a self or agent who is engaged in > willing, and, they thus object when anyone speaks of an activity being carried > out intentionally. Never been said (I think you misunderstand)! What has been said is that when it comes to any kind of *deliberate practice for the (present) arising of insight*, whether that be in the nature of sitting, walking, studying or doing things in a particular way, there is bound to be a view of self. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Oh, my! That is just *entirely* different (not)! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------- The reason for this is simple: something is being undertaken for the purpose of having more insight, i.e., for "me"! ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Oh, Jon, that is SO silly. Where will wisdom arise, Jon? Not in a stream of namas? Jon, as I already said, and as is well accepted, we are beset by sense of self. That is our condition, and it permeates all aspects of our functioning, not just willing. That is where we are, Jon. Were it not so, the task would already have been done. ------------------------------------------------------- Insight is not something that can be "actioned". It is an understanding or realisation, and it accrues at its own (slow) pace. -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: But not at random. and the Buddha taught specific training to cultivate the mind, leading to wisdom. ------------------------------------------------------ > I, of course, do agree with them that most mental states of worldlings > and even of ariyans who are not yet arahants, and not just states involving > intention, are polluted by sense-of-self and, for worldlings, outright > atta-belief. That is the unfortunate position that we find ourselves in. But I think > that to run from engaging in useful intentional actions due to conflating > willing with belief in an actor is a darn shame. (What saves folks from doing > this when actually living instead of just engaging in theoretical opining are > the requisites of life that are rather uncompromising.) A question for you. Given that, as you say above, most mental states are polluted by sense-of-self and atta-belief, then when a person engages in a form of deliberate practice such as you advocate, what will determine at which moments during that practice the arising mental states are kusala and at which moments akusala (other than dumb luck ;-))? ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I have confidence that the practices advocated by the Buddha, not by me, will, in their time, do the job. My own experience has given me that confidence. ----------------------------------------------------- Jon ============================ With metta, Howard /Entrances to holiness are everywhere. The possibility of ascent is all the time, even at unlikely times and through unlikely places. There is no place without the Presence/ (From Mishkan T'filah, the new Reform prayerbook) #88470 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 7:49 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. scottduncan2 Dear Ken, Thanks for the reply (I'm going to try the exercise with the 'all' and the 'copy' when I send this post. If I'm sent to some alternative Bridge-Universe as a result, I'll not rest until I get back and sand the wax off of your favourite surfboard!) K: "I try to empathise with people who want to construct such a bridge. But why not just come back to the present moment? Having come back to the present moment, where is the need for bridging with the conventional? Nowhere! (At least, nowhere that I can see.)" Scott: I'm wanting to understand the process whereby the present moment, which eludes experience due to undeveloped pa~n~naa, comes to seem as it does. Ignorance, for one, seems to construct the bridge, functioning in a way opposite to that in which pa~n~naa is said to function. Except that it arises with much more frequency, I think. Dhammasa"nga.ni (pp. 94-95): "What on that occasion is dullness (moho)? The lack of knowledge (a~n~na.na.m), of vision (adassana.m), which there is on that occasion; the lack of co-ordination (anabhisamayo), of judgment (ananubodho), of enlightenment (asambodho), of penetration (apa.tivedho); the inability to comprehend (asa.mgaahanaa), to grasp thoroughly (apariyogaahanaa); the inability to compare (apaccavekkhanaa), to consider (asamapekkhanaa), to demonstrate (apaccakkhakama.m); the folly, the childishness, the lack of intelligence; the dullness that is vagueness, obfuscation, ignorance, the Flood of ignorance, the Bond of ignorance, the bias of ignorance, the obsession of ignorance, the barrier of ignorance; the dullness that is the root of badness (akusalamuula.m) - this is the dullness that there then is." Scott: So, in a way, I guess I'm contemplating the function of avijjaa - the dhamma which, in the moment and with repeated arising, creates the perceptions of 'the conventional world'. I don't find this sort of contemplation to be anything other than complimentary to a coming back to the present moment. Why not, until the present moment becomes known? K: "...note the difference between 'conception' when it means 'to conceive [a view about]' and 'conception' when it simply means 'to conceptualise [a concept of]." Scott: In Atthasaalinii (pp. 451-452): "In 'ignorant average man,' 'ignorant' should be known as 'owing to the absence of access to the Scriptures, and of the higher attainment of the Path and Fruition.' For to whomsoever, owing to the absences of learning by heart, catechism thereon and deduction therefrom regarding the aggregates, elements, sense-organs, the causal mode, the application of mindfulness, etc., there is no attainment of that learning which represses opinionativeness, nor any access, owing to the non-attainment of what should be attained by conduct, such a person, from the absence of such access and such attainment, should be known as 'ignorant': - One of the 'manyfolk' is he who brings about A multiplicity of things, 'mid manyfolk engulfed. "For he who is ignorant is called ['average' or] 'common' for such reasons as the production of corruptions, many and of various sorts, as has been said: 'He produces many corruption: they have many views of individuality unremoved; they look to the face of many teachers; they have not got clear of all tendencies; they construct many and various complexities; they are borne along by many and various floods; they are anxious with many and various anxieties; they burn with many and various heart burnings; with this manifold five desires of sense they are enamoured, swallowed up, cleaving to, attached to, hung up on them, hanging from them, obstructed by them; by the various five hindrances they are enwrapped, muffled up, stifled, closed in, covered up, cramped; or from being engulfed among persons, passing the bounds of calculation, of low practises [or principles] turned away from the Ariyan Law - such are 'common.'" Sincerely, Scott. Reply | Forward | Messages in this Topic (78) #88471 From: mlnease Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just studying... m_nease Hi Jon and Sukin, jonoabb wrote: > Secondly, it is not a matter of just hearing, but also of considering > (reflexively, and at length) what has been heard and understood, and > relating that to the present-moment experience. Just an afterthought--it seems to me that reading suttas (or any other texts or anything else at all, for that matter) with wrong view is far more dangerous than not reading them at all. mike Reply | Forward | Messages in this Topic (55) #88472 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? dhammanusarin Dear Sarah (Alex, Howard), - The first and the later versions are very much the same. That shows how consistent a person you are! >Sarah: As the Buddha stressed, it is a very subtle teaching, very hard to see. However, if there is not a beginning now of understanding such dhammas as they appear (one at a time), there will be no development at all. T: Yes, no development without understanding and no understanding without development. The first understanding(pa~n~naa) of the dhammas (ideas, phenomena, realities) is sutamaya~naana. But this ~naana is not found in the uninstructed worldlings. See DSG #86750 too. "There is the case, monks, where an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person â€" 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 â€" 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. [Repeat for water, fire, ..., the sees, the heard, the sensed, the cognized, .., the All, ..., Unbinding(nibbana)] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.001.than.html Patisambhidamagga, I, 2 : How is it that knowledge of the ideas that one has heard are to be directly known is suta-maya-nana? One idea(dhamma) to be directly known: All beings are maintained by nutriment. Two ideas to be directly known: the formed and unformed. Three ideas to be directly known: sense-desire element, material element, and immaterial element. Four ideas to be directly known: the four noble truths. Five ideas to be directly known: five bases for deliverance. Six ideas to be directly known: the six unsurpassables. Seven ideas to be directly known: seven grounds for commendation (i.e. the reasons why the Arahant abandons rebirth). Eight ideas to be directly known: eight bases of mastery. Nine ideas to be directly known: nine successive abidings. Ten ideas to be directly known: ten grounds for decay. Regards, Tep === Reply | Forward | Messages in this Topic (20) #88473 From: mlnease Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 12:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. m_nease Hi Scott (and Ken), Scott Duncan wrote: > "For he who is ignorant is called ['average' or] 'common' for such > reasons as the production of corruptions, many and of various sorts, > as has been said: 'He produces many corruption: they have many views > of individuality unremoved; they look to the face of many teachers; > they have not got clear of all tendencies; they construct many and > various complexities; they are borne along by many and various floods; > they are anxious with many and various anxieties; they burn with many > and various heart burnings; with this manifold five desires of sense > they are enamoured, swallowed up, cleaving to, attached to, hung up on > them, hanging from them, obstructed by them; by the various five > hindrances they are enwrapped, muffled up, stifled, closed in, covered > up, cramped; or from being engulfed among persons, passing the bounds > of calculation, of low practises [or principles] turned away from the > Ariyan Law - such are 'common.'" Hmph. I resemble that. mike Reply | Forward | Messages in this Topic (78) #88474 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 1:28 pm Subject: Re: kayagatasati dhammanusarin Dear Jon and Howard, - Your conversation is always good to read and think about. > >Jon: What has been said is that when it comes to any kind of *deliberate practice for the (present) arising of insight*, whether that be in the nature of sitting, walking, studying or doing things in a particular way, there is bound to be a view of self. The reason for this is simple: something is being undertaken for the purpose of having more insight, i.e., for "me"! >Howard: Oh, Jon, that is SO silly. Where will wisdom arise, Jon? Not in a stream of namas? Jon, as I already said, and as is well accepted, we are beset by sense of self. That is our condition, and it permeates all aspects of our functioning, not just willing. That is where we are, Jon. Were it not so, the task would already have been done. ------------------------------------------------------- Tep: Conceit(mana) is also a sense of self; it is completely abandoned only in the arahants. Jon, does this fact imply that insights do not arise in the lower ariyans since they are still possessed of conceit? Self-identification views(sakkaya ditthi) are completely abandoned by the sotapannas. Jon, does this fact imply that insights do not arise in the instructed worldings who are possessed of sakkaya ditthi? ========== > >Jon: Insight is not something that can be "actioned". It is an understanding or realisation, and it accrues at its own (slow) pace. -------------------------------------------------------- >Howard: But not at random. and the Buddha taught specific training to cultivate the mind, leading to wisdom. ------------------------------------------------------ Tep: Insight is a conditioned dhamma, and therefore it grows because of nutriment. "The knowledge and vision of things as they really are, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for the knowledge and vision of things as they really are? 'Concentration' should be the reply." [SN 12.23: Upanisa Sutta] Tep: Stronger and persistent nutriments increase its growth and plentifulness. It does not accrue at its own pace. See right effort in DN 22. ============ > >Jon: A question for you. Given that, as you say above, most mental states are polluted by sense-of-self and atta-belief, then when a person engages in a form of deliberate practice such as you advocate, what will determine at which moments during that practice the arising mental states are kusala and at which moments akusala (other than dumb luck ;-))? ------------------------------------------------------- >Howard: I have confidence that the practices advocated by the Buddha, not by me, will, in their time, do the job. My own experience has given me that confidence. ----------------------------------------------------- Tep: That's a tough question, Jon. Howard's reply is based on his conviction in the Buddha and his own experience. I respect that. However, the question deserves more considering. The arising mental states are wholesome when there are only renunciation, non-aversion, and harmlessness. This is known as right resolve (or 'right thought' : samma sankappa). The arising mental states are unwholesome when there is any of the three opposites, namely, sensuous thought, ill-will, and harmful thought. The akusala vitakka ceases in the first jhana. The kusala vitakka ceases in the second jhana. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.078.than.html Thank you both. Tep === #88475 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:04 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. scottduncan2 Dear Mike, M: "Hmph. I resemble that.' Scott: Aye, that's two of us. Sincerely, Scott. #88476 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/7/28 kenhowardau : > Hi Scott (and Sarah), > > Thanks for your thoughts on bridging the conventional and the > ultimate. As you say, it would depend on time and (as your quote > says): "time is only a concept derived from this or that phenomenon." > > I try to empathise with people who want to construct such a bridge. > But why not just come back to the present moment? Having come back to > the present moment, where is the need for bridging with the > conventional? Nowhere! (At least, nowhere that I can see.) > I must have misunderstood something. I thought that recently Scott, Nina and Sarah were agreeing that the closest it is possible to get to a present moment is a nimitta. It seems to me that nimitta is not only a bridge to the conventional, it IS conventional. Back to the pundits. Cheers Herman #88477 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 7:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/7/27 Scott Duncan : > Dear Andrew, > > Since one's conception of the 'conventional world' is based on > perception - rooted in ignorance - then we can at least start to think > about how ideas of patterns based on that which is seen or heard, > etc., (ruupa) might come to mind. I'd say that, in relation to the > ignorance-based perception of ruupa - which appears to exist over time > (when, as we know, it also arises and falls away, according to its own > rate of persistence and decay) - certain views arise regarding patterns. > Why are your or anyone else's conceptions and ruminations of the "ultimate world" not rooted in the same ignorance that you apply to perception? And if ruupas arise and fall according to their own rate of persistence, as you say, how does that not imply existence over time? Cheers Herman #88478 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 8:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? egberdina Hi Sarah, > > Can there be seclusion at this moment? No, there can be no seclusion while going about the activities of daily life. Because seclusion involves the not attending to the senses. To do so in a shared place involving other beings would be at least negligent, and possibly quite a danger to the welfare of yourself and others. And anyway, of what value could momentary seclusion be if it is followed by extended periods of satisfying whatever craving comes along? > If not at this moment, then when? When the circumstances have been made right ie not in any situation where there are expectations as to behavior. Isn't that a 'putting off' of bhavana? Yes. >What is seclusion in the ultimate sense according to the Buddha? According to the Buddha it is at the foot of trees and in empty houses. It was the prototype of all commenators, Maha Kaccana, who first got away with changing the meaning of what the Buddha taught. He suggested that the following: "Having left home to roam without abode, In the village the sage is intimate with none; Rid of sensual pleasures, without preference, He would not engage people in dispute." actually meant: "The property of form, householder, is the home of consciousness. When consciousness is in bondage through passion to the property of form, it is said to be living at home. The property of feeling... perception... fabrication is the home of consciousness. When consciousness is in bondage through passion to the property of fabrication, it is said to be dwelling at home. blah blah blah as found in http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.003.than.html Cheers Herman #88479 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 8:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? dhammanusarin Hi, Herman, - "The property of form, householder, is the home of consciousness." What does 'property of form' mean? The term 'property' that appears in other suttas is the rendition for 'dhatu'. I am not sure if 'dhatu' makes sense in the above quote. Thanks. Tep === #88480 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 8:57 pm Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. kenhowardau Hi Herman, I owe you a reply. I was half-way through trying to answer one of your curly questions when I thought, "Herman refuses to answer my simple question (with a straight yes or no) so why am I bothering with this one?" So I will skip to your current [implied] question: -------------- H: > I must have misunderstood something. I thought that recently Scott, Nina and Sarah were agreeing that the closest it is possible to get to a present moment is a nimitta. It seems to me that nimitta is not only a bridge to the conventional, it IS conventional. Back to the pundits. -------------- Leaving aside the Dhamma for the moment let me ask: If there were no hippopotamuses there could be no harm done to a hippopotamus, could there? Similarly, if there were no sentient beings of *any* kind there could be no harm done to anyone. There could be no need for anything to be done. There could be no need to build a bridge (for example). Could there? Ken H (I'll be glad to get back to the Dhamma when we've settled this question.) :-) #88481 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 9:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. egberdina Hi Ken, 2008/7/29 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman, > > Leaving aside the Dhamma for the moment let me ask: If there were no > hippopotamuses there could be no harm done to a hippopotamus, could > there? Agreed. >Similarly, if there were no sentient beings of *any* kind > there could be no harm done to anyone.> Agreed. There could be no need for > anything to be done. I agree that nothing could be done in the absence of sentient beings, because typically it is sentient beings who do [stuff]. And I agree that there could be no need(s), because it is sentient beings that have need(s). There could be no need to build a bridge (for > example). Could there? No, there couldn't be a need to build a bridge. Hope that is clear :-) Herman #88482 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 9:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? egberdina Hi Tep, 2008/7/29 Tep : > Hi, Herman, - > > "The property of form, householder, is the home of consciousness." > > What does 'property of form' mean? I think the whole transformation from the straightforward Sn 844 to the convuluted SN22.3 is quite incongruous, so in answer to your question: I don't know :-) > > The term 'property' that appears in other suttas is the rendition > for 'dhatu'. I am not sure if 'dhatu' makes sense in the above quote. > > Cheers Herman #88483 From: Ajahn Jose Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 10:35 pm Subject: Fw: Re: monk who took his own life ajahnjose Dear Sarah, thank you again, I go to the hospital morning and afternoo foran injection of morfine for the pain. Thursdays I do chimoterapy. Metta. Ajahn Jose signature Venerable Yanatharo, Ajahn Jose --- On Tue, 7/29/08, sarah abbott wrote: From: sarah abbott Subject: Re: monk who took his own life To: ajahnjose@... Date: Tuesday, July 29, 2008, 3:05 PM Dear Ajahn Jose, We're so sorry to hear about the spread of your cancer and the pain you experience. We hope you have the right medicine/pain-killers. Life is dukkha and we all feel very tired of sickness at times, but taking your life is not an escape from it. Perhaps you would kindly send your message below to DSG, so that others can discuss and consider further as well. Metta, Sarah --- On Tue, 29/7/08, Ajahn Jose wrote: > From: Ajahn Jose > Subject: monk who took his own life > To: sarahprocterabbott@... > Date: Tuesday, 29 July, 2008, 8:52 AM > My Dear Sarah, thank you for explaining with such details > about the Monk who took his life and what the Buddha said. > My cancer is now all over my kidney and lungs and the pain > is becoming horrible, soon when I am at peace in my mind > will terminate my life. I am very tired of my sickness. > Always with my kind regards. Ajahn Jose > signature > Venerable Yanatharo, Ajahn Jose #88484 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Jul 28, 2008 10:53 pm Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. kenhowardau Hi Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > . . . > I agree that nothing could be done in the absence of sentient beings, > because typically it is sentient beings who do [stuff]. And I agree > that there could be no need(s), because it is sentient beings that > have need(s). > > > There could be no need to build a bridge (for > > example). Could there? > > No, there couldn't be a need to build a bridge. > > Hope that is clear :-) > Excellent, thank you for your agreement, I couldn't have asked for more. Now, according to the Dhamma, the world is exactly like that. There are no sentient beings, only dhammas. Are you still with me? Ken H #88485 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 12:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) sarahprocter... Hi Tep & all, --- On Tue, 22/7/08, Tep wrote: >T: I do not understand what "concentration at *the intensity level* of jhana" means, Howard. I just wish they could cite someone's real experience ("attainment" of that kind of concentration) , or at least refer to specific passages in the Abhidhamma Pitaka or Suttanta Pitaka as a valid support for that theory. ..... S: This is from an old message of Jon's (#3539): J:>The passage that follows is directly from the book (CMA Ch. I, Guide to ##30-31). The numbers in square brackets are markers to my own comments/summary at the end. =============================== All meditators reach the supramundane paths and fruits through the development of wisdom (panna), insight into the three characteristics of impermanence, suffering, and non-self. [1] However, they differ among themselves in the degree of their development of concentration (samadhi). Those who develop insight without a basis of jhana are called practitioners of bare insight (sukkhavipassaka). [2] When they reach the path and fruit, their path and fruition cittas occur at a level corresponding to the first jhana. [3] Those who develop insight on the basis of jhana attain a path and fruit which corresponds to the level of jhana they had attained before reaching the path. ... For bare insight meditator and jhana meditator alike, all path and fruition cittas are considered types of jhana consciousness. They are so considered because they occur in the mode of closely contemplating their object with full absorption, like the mundane jhanas, and because they possess the jhana factors with an intensity corresponding to their counterparts in the mundane jhanas. [4] The supramundane jhanas of the paths and fruits differ from the mundane jhanas in several important respects. [5] First, whereas the mundane jhanas take as their object some concept, such as the sign of the kasina, the supramundane jhanas take as their object Nibbana, the unconditioned reality. [5.1] Second, whereas the mundane jhanas merely suppress the defilements while leaving their underlying seeds intact, the supramundane jhanas of the path eradicate defilements so that they can never again arise. [5.2] Third, while the mundane jhanas lead to rebirth in the fine material world and thus sustain existence in the round of rebirths, the jhanas of the path cut off the fetters binding one to the cycle and thus issue in liberation from the round of birth and death. [5.3] Finally, whereas the role of wisdom in the mundane jhanas is subordinate to that of concentration, in the supramundane jhanas wisdom and concentration are well balanced, with concentration fixing the mind on the unconditioned element and wisdom fathoming the deep significance of the Four Noble Truths. [5.4] =================================== Notes: 1. It is the development of understanding of the characteristics of reality that leads to the attainment of the path/enlightenment/8-fold path citta (magga citta). 2. Development of concentration to the level of jhana is not necessary for attaining magga citta. 3. However, even for the sukkhavipassaka the concentration accompanying the moment of path citta 'corresponds to' the first level of jhana. 4. The concentration accompanying magga citta is said to 'correspond to' jhana because the magga citta experiences its object with same full absorption and intensity of other factors as the jhana citta. 5. There are, however, 4 important differences between jhana citta and the path citta 5.1. The object of jhana citta is a concept , while the object of the moment of path citta is Nibbana. 5.2. Jhana cittas merely suppress kilesa, while magga citta eradicates kilesa. 5.3. Jhana cittas are a condition for future rebirth, whereas magga cittas result in liberation from the cycle of birth and death. 5.4. The primary attribute of a moment of jhana citta is the degree of concentration on the object at that moment, whereas the attribute of a moment of magga citta is the wisdom that pierces the Truths.< ***** S: I think we have to read references to jhana carefully in the suttas. Often it refers to arammanupani-jhana, mundane jhana. Often too, it refers to lakkhanupani-jhana, supramundane jhana at moments of enlightenment. There have been many references and quotes on these before (U.P. 'Jhana- 2 kinds'). Metta, Sarah ======== #88486 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 12:57 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. kenhowardau Hi Scott, ----- S: > Thanks for the reply (I'm going to try the exercise with the 'all' and the 'copy' when I send this post. If I'm sent to some alternative Bridge-Universe as a result, ----- Ha, I actually laughed out loud when I read that! A genuine LOL! :-) ----------------------- S: > I'll not rest until I get back and sand the wax off of your favourite surfboard!) ------------------------ Now that's just not funny! :-) ------------------------------------ K: "I try to empathise with people who want to construct such a bridge. But why not just come back to the present moment? Having come back to the present moment, where is the need for bridging with the conventional? Nowhere! (At least, nowhere that I can see.)" Scott: I'm wanting to understand the process whereby the present moment, which eludes experience due to undeveloped pa~n~naa, comes to seem as it does. Ignorance, for one, seems to construct the bridge, functioning in a way opposite to that in which pa~n~naa is said to function. ------------------------------------- This is fine, Scott, but I want to be clear; have we changed the subject? I was talking about Andrew's bridge. As I understood him, Andrew was saying, "It is all very well to understand Abhidhamma, but there are also certain conventional activities that the Buddha taught us to carry out. We are to understand that there are only impersonal, uncontrollable, dhammas *and* at the same time (in a bridging fashion) we are to do certain things in the conventional sense of "to do." I hope I have expressed that correctly. I think the conventional things Andrew had in mind were to give alms, to pay respect and to attend Dhamma discussions. All in the conventional sense (of creating an outward appearance regardless of what the motive might be)! I have always maintained those were activities we performed in the course of our daily of lives - without any pretence at control over the kusala or akusala nature of our motives and without any pretence we were practising what the Buddha taught (satipatthana). After saying all those things to Herman (about no sentient beings and no need to worry about anything) why would I then try to do something? Why would I try to effect a change in ultimate reality? Anyway, that is by the bye. You were saying: ----------------------------------------------- > Except that it arises with much more frequency, I think. Dhammasa"nga.ni (pp. 94-95): "What on that occasion is dullness (moho)? The lack of knowledge (a~n~na.na.m), of vision Scott: So, in a way, I guess I'm contemplating the function of avijjaa - the dhamma which, in the moment and with repeated arising, creates the perceptions of 'the conventional world'. I don't find this sort of contemplation to be anything other than complimentary to a coming back to the present moment. Why not, until the present moment becomes known? ----------------------------------------------- It's part of your Dhamma studies, isn't it? It is something you do in the normal course of daily life (i.e., without any ideas of influencing the flow of conditioned dhammas). (Conditioned dhammas do flow on regardless!)) ------------------------------ K: "...note the difference between 'conception' when it means 'to conceive [a view about]' and 'conception' when it simply means 'to conceptualise [a concept of]." Scott: In Atthasaalinii (pp. 451-452): "In 'ignorant average man,' 'ignorant' should be known as 'owing to the absence of access to the Scriptures, turned away from the ------------------------------- Yes, that's an excellent quote, thanks, but what is your point? Are you agreeing there can be conceptualising without ignorance and/or wrong view? Sorry for needing everything to be spelt out for me. :-) KenH #88487 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Silabatta paramasa sarahprocter... Hi Alex & all, --- On Mon, 28/7/08, Alex wrote: >S: Whatever way is gone, it's conditioned that way already. >>> A:> Can you please quote the suttas of Buddha saying that? .... S: There are only dhammas, Alex - Conditioned dhammas whichever way is turned: As Ven Assaji said: "Of those things that arise from a cause, The Tathagata has told the cause, And also what their cessation is: This is the doctrine of the Great Recluse." ..... A:> I'll start first: ============ ========= ========= ========= ========= ========= >But when — by following a life of !!!precept & practice!!!, a life, a holy life that is followed as of essential worth — one's unskillful mental qualities decline while one's skillful mental qualities increase: that sort of precept & practice, life, holy life that is followed as of essential worth is fruitful." That is what Ven. Ananda said, and the Teacher approved. Then Ven. Ananda, [realizing,] "The Teacher approves of me," got up from his seat and, having bowed down to the Blessed One and circumambulating him, left. http://www.accessto insight.org/ tipitaka/ an/an03/an03. 078.than. html ============ ========= ========= ========= ========= ========= ========= = ..... S: Isn't it true? When there is the development of kusala - dana, sila and bhavana, the unwholesome states decline and the wholesome ones increase. The holy life is followed. Do you see any conflict between this and all the teachings on conditioned dhammas, D.O. and so on? After listening to Assaji's verse, did Sariputta have any idea left that his self should do anything? .... A:> "'This body comes into being through craving. And yet it is by relying on craving that craving is to be abandoned.' .... S: Again, isn't it true that without past craving, there would not have been this life? Isn't it also true that without understanding craving when it arises now, it can never be abandoned. Metta, Sarah ========== #88488 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, (Alex & all), --- On Mon, 28/7/08, kenhowardau wrote: PS: Recently, you and Sarah have lost work before posting due to your internet connections dropping out. Here is a simple trick I have been meaning to share with you, and everyone. Make a habit of *always* - religiously, ritualistically - before pressing the "send" or "preview" buttons, selecting 'all' and copying. Then, if something goes wrong, you can simply go back to the "reply" stage and post your *saved* work into a new window. Too easy? :-) .... S: Yes, this sounds like a useful rite and ritual and I will try to follow it slavishly. Still, those pesky conditions you know - I said I'd follow it to myself half an hour ago and have since sent several messages, forgetting it everytime. This time I WILL REMEMBER, I WILL REMEMBER, I WILL REMEMBER.... Metta, Sarah p.s I think you made some excellent comments about "'association with the wise', listening (etc)" as NOT things to do, "as if the Buddha gave conventional instructions to be "carried out." " As you went on to say and explain clearly, "Everything - including 'association with the wise' 'listening' and 'considering' - must be understood in terms of conditioned dhammas. "Right understanding of conditioned dhammas is all that is needed." There, Alex, read that and the original post a 1000 times (let's break the rules here and give to you as a ritual!!) or in response to any other messages of yours I have yet to reply to:-)) Metta, Sarah p.s Alex, pls don't take it seriously when we're just kidding around.... ======== #88489 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? .. You May Disagree Again ... sarahprocter... Hi Tep & all, Thank you for kindly going to the trouble to reply to both versions of my response:-). As you say, consistent....(even if boringly so:-)). ... --- On Mon, 28/7/08, Tep wrote: >[Question 1] >T: I agree with you about the gradual growth of understanding of "present dhammas appearing", given there are supporting conditions for the growth. Yet, I do believe there is much more to practice (patipada) beyond observing/consideri ng/reflecting on the realities here and now. MN 70 is a great sutta that explains the what, why and how of the Buddhist practice/training for reaching the goal (ËœDestroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being"). "Monks, I do not say that the attainment of gnosis is all at once. Rather, the attainment of gnosis is after gradual training, gradual action, gradual practice. <.....> .... S: Yes, agreed and always a good sutta. (Anything else to discuss on it, or are we through with Qu 1?) ...... [Question 2] >T: The essence of the Teachings is in having the realities (the 'All') comprehended or "fully understood". ... S: Yes, agreed. .... [Question 3] >T: The third question aims at assessing the effectiveness of Khun Sujin's "method" that you briefly described in your answer to Question 2, namely, "Hearing/studying and carefully considering such realities as now." .... S: I don't see this as "Khun Sujin's "method" " or anyone else's. I see it as the Buddha's teaching as indicated in the sutta in the subject heading, MN70 which you refer to above and throughout the Tipitaka and Theravada texts. Only through pariyatti can there be patipatti and pativedha as discussed so often. .... >T: ....Nobody would want to practice Satipatthana, if the Buddha did not make such a clear statement about how long it would take to reach the goal of the practice. ... S: OK, if 7 years is the longest time, why are we not all arahats? Planning on time-frames for outcomes particularly misses the point about conditioned dhammas. Even amongst the Buddha's disciples, we can see how different accumulations and conditions were. I think the attachment to results and time-frames is a huge hindrance to the gradual development as outlined in the sutta you quoted above. It's almost a recipe for wrong practice and fantasies about attainments or despair if and when they clearly haven't come about. I know we disagree here, Tep. That's fine. I appreciate your honest sharing of your opinion always. Metta, Sarah ====== #88490 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 12:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Sarah) - In a message dated 7/28/2008 11:21:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Sarah, > > Can there be seclusion at this moment? No, there can be no seclusion while going about the activities of daily life. Because seclusion involves the not attending to the senses. To do so in a shared place involving other beings would be at least negligent, and possibly quite a danger to the welfare of yourself and others. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not 100% in agreement with you on this, Herman. It depends on what those "activities" consist of. If one is engrossed in a task of building something or programming or lecturing or doing surgery or working on a tax statement or such, there is likely to be little or no bhavana underway. But, when just walking somewhere, or eating, or sitting and doing nothing special, there can be a mindful process of attention underway to whatever arises - bodily sensations, odors, sights, sounds, tastes, and even feeling, emotions, and thinking (provided the mindfulness is strong enough not to get caught in these), and that is a degree of internal seclusion. Of course, the process of bhavana will be more effective the greater one's mindfulness is, and that is supported by a physical environment relatively sparse in distractions - hence the usefulness of physical seclusion (a cave, the root of a tree, a quiet room, etc.). Likewise, it is supported by a mental environment relatively sparse in distractions - hence the usefulness of well-established sila and of a simplicity in one's lifestyle. ------------------------------------------------------ And anyway, of what value could momentary seclusion be if it is followed by extended periods of satisfying whatever craving comes along? > If not at this moment, then when? When the circumstances have been made right ie not in any situation where there are expectations as to behavior. Isn't that a 'putting off' of bhavana? Yes. --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: It is good to optimize conditions for cultivation, as possible. But to whatever extent one can, why not engage in practice at all times? (In that regard, see the signature statement at the end of this post.) By keeping practice in mind, it can become a habit for the mind to frequently become aware of not being mindful when that is the case and immediately returning to"being present." Frequent intentional attending closely to what is going on at the moment cultivates the *habit* of mindfulness. A good basis is attending to bodily sensations and postures, for these are always available and are "grounding". ------------------------------------------------------------- >What is seclusion in the ultimate sense according to the Buddha? According to the Buddha it is at the foot of trees and in empty houses. -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, the physical seclusion that is supportive of internal seclusion. --------------------------------------------------------------- It was the prototype of all commenators, Maha Kaccana, who first got away with changing the meaning of what the Buddha taught. He suggested that the following: "Having left home to roam without abode, In the village the sage is intimate with none; Rid of sensual pleasures, without preference, He would not engage people in dispute." actually meant: "The property of form, householder, is the home of consciousness. When consciousness is in bondage through passion to the property of form, it is said to be living at home. The property of feeling... perception... fabrication is the home of consciousness. When consciousness is in bondage through passion to the property of fabrication, it is said to be dwelling at home. blah blah blah as found in http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.003.than.html --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: LOLOL! Well, that is hysterically funny if it is meant as a literal explication of what the Buddha meant. If, OTOH, it corresponds to what in Judaism is called a "midrash," then that isn't so bad. (A midrash is a commentarial story that uses the original teaching as a jumping-off point to teach a further lesson.) BTW, that commentary isn't all that different from what Buddhadasa called the use of "Dhammic language." Again, though, if the commentary was put forward as explaining what the Buddha actually meant, then I agree that it is absurd. ------------------------------------------------------------ Cheers Herman =============================== With metta, Howard /Entrances to holiness are everywhere. The possibility of ascent is all the time, even at unlikely times and through unlikely places. There is no place without the Presence/ (From Mishkan T'filah, the new Reform prayerbook) #88491 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:42 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Each presently arisen state jonoabb Hi Herman > You have allowed for the following possibilities in understanding of dhammas: > > Understanding of one dhamma in one moment > Understanding of one dhamma in many moments I would put it this way. I have allowed for the possibility of understanding of one dhamma in one moment, followed by, in the next moment, either (a) understanding of the same kind of dhamma, or (b) understanding of a different kind of dhamma. > What is missing, and that is what I was pointing out in my post, are > the following possibilities: > > Understanding of many dhammas in one moment > Understanding of many dhammas in many moments I think the 2 possibilities I mention just above cover all the possibilities allowed for in the teachings. > What I am saying is that a pattern consists of many dhammas over time > and/or space, and that you cannot just define patterns away. I'm still not sure what you have in mind by "pattern". So an example or two would sure help the discussion. Jon #88492 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What is a question? jonoabb Hi Herman > It would be useful for the discussion if would share with us under > what circumstances, in your view, the formation of a general rule from > specific examples is warranted. Well I didn't express that view i.e., that a general (doctrinal) rule could be formed from specific situations described in the texts. In fact, I questioned Alex's doing that. In short, I don't have a ready answer to your request. Sorry! Jon #88493 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What is a question? jonoabb Hi Herman > > I think you are using "intentions" here in the conventional sense of > > intending to do as preparatory to the actual doing. > > I'm not sure about that. I recall citta being referred to as a > forerunner to all action. Is that a mistranslation in your view? Sorry, but I'm not following you. I agree that citta is referred to as the forerunner to all action. But we were talking about your statement that intentions have no consequences, only actions do. I took you to mean "intentions" in the sense of "intention to do", as opposed to the actual doing. If you meant something else, then I've misunderstood. > Also, > some versions of DO have intention as the second link in a chain of > becoming that counts twelve links. Quite preparatory, wouldn't you > say? I don't see any connection to our discussion, I'm afraid. > People have multiple, and often conflicting motivations in any > situation. That is because people have multiple, and often conflicting > goals. If you watch other people, or yourself, going about their/ your > daily life, you will soon notice a constant re-evaluation of > their/your actions in terms of achieving their/your current number one > goal, and a constant re-prioritising of what their/your number one > goal is. I don't take issue with what you say here, but I question it's relevance to the development of the path. Also it doesn't explain my query on your earlier statement. You said that actions can be evaluated, because they have consequences in terms of causing harm or benefit. What do you mean by harm or benefit? Harm or benefit in the conventional sense are not always apparent at the time of the action. In fact, what seems like harm at the time may be perceived as benefit later, and vice versa. Hence the question in my previous post, "How are the consequences to be known?" Also, I'd be interested to know how you'd evaluate the following (conventionally "neutral") actions in terms of harm/benefit: - brushing one's teeth - eating breakfast - having a conversation with another person > What are you doing right now? What on earth for? Is it working? :-) Yes, but the answers to these questions are going to be strongly affected by subjective considerations. Am I pressing pieces of plastic with my fingers, or am I engaged in debate on the meaning of life?;-)) And whichever it is, is this really part of the path to enlightenment? Jon #88494 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:57 am Subject: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati jonoabb Hi Howard > The reason for this is simple: something is being undertaken for the > purpose of having more insight, i.e., for "me"! > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Oh, Jon, that is SO silly. Where will wisdom arise, Jon? Not in a stream > of namas? My point was not the view of self involved in the "me", but the expectation of gain [for oneself]. > Jon, as I already said, and as is well accepted, we are beset by sense > of self. That is our condition, and it permeates all aspects of our > functioning, not just willing. That is where we are, Jon. Were it not so, the task > would already have been done. > ------------------------------------------------------- I agree that, speaking generally (and conventionally), we are beset by a sense of self that permeates all aspects of our functioning, and that that is what "we" are. However, we also know from a study of the teachings that on a moment- to-moment basis the picture is somewhat different. The mental factors being referred to when speaking of a "sense of self" (i.e., wrong view and conceit) are factors that arise only with akusala consciousness, and so are not present at moments of consciousness that are kusala or vipaka. Furthermore, those mental factors are not necessarily present with all akusala consciousness either. For example, the attachment when tasting pleasant food may well not involve any sense-of-self. Herman's young baby probably has little or no sense-of-self actually arising. As far as kusala is concerned, everyone has accumulated tendencies for kusala of different kinds (including panna) in the past, and these will manifest given the right conditions. But if those right conditions (or one's idea of them) are pursued with a (manifesting) sense-of-self, then the result will be more sense-of-self and other akusala, not the kusala being pursued. > Insight is not something that can be "actioned". It is an > understanding or realisation, and it accrues at its own (slow) pace. > -------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > But not at random. and the Buddha taught specific training to cultivate > the mind, leading to wisdom. > ------------------------------------------------------ As you are fond of mentioning, the Buddha's teaching can be described as a teaching of this-that conditionality. Bearing that in mind, does it really make sense that actions invested with a (presently manifesting) sense-of-self ("this") could lead to the arising of kusala as part of the development of insight ("that")? > Howard: > I have confidence that the practices advocated by the Buddha, not by me, > will, in their time, do the job. Yes, we all have that confidence. And if you're referring to this/ that conditionality, I fully agree, and especially with the "in due time" part of it. The accretion of understanding is something that happens in its own good time. But if most mental states are polluted by sense-of-self and atta- belief, then so will be any supposed "practice" of guarding the sense- doors, exerting effort to stop akusala, or whatever else one may undertake. Where then is the condition for the arising of kusala? > My own experience has given me that > confidence. I suppose everyone is convinced of the correctness of their present form of "practice" (if they weren't they'd soon change it ;-)). But you bring up an interesting topic here. Without wanting to get personal (i.e., not asking you to say anything about your own "practice" or personal circumstances), what would you say are the indicators of the correct development of insight as taught by the Buddha? Jon #88495 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:57 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Just studying... jonoabb Hi Mike > Just an afterthought--it seems to me that reading suttas (or any other > texts or anything else at all, for that matter) with wrong view is far > more dangerous than not reading them at all. Doing anything with wrong view--and that would include reading the texts with the idea that doing so was the "practice" recommended by the Buddha--accumulates more wrong view. This is to be distinguished from (the general situation of) being a person with wrong view who reads the suttas, because in that situation it is not necessarily so that the reading is motivated (or accompanied) by wrong view. Difficult to generalise further, I think, because so many variables. Jon #88496 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:59 am Subject: Re: kayagatasati jonoabb Hi Tep > Tep: Conceit(mana) is also a sense of self; it is completely > abandoned only in the arahants. Jon, does this fact imply that > insights do not arise in the lower ariyans since they are still > possessed of conceit? Not at all. It is clearly stated in the Satipatthana Sutta that consciousness accompanied by various kinds of akusala may be the object of awareness. I've not ever heard it suggested that persons still having akusala cannot develop insight. Would this not make the development of insight impossible for all? > Self-identification views(sakkaya ditthi) are completely abandoned by > the sotapannas. Jon, does this fact imply that insights do not arise > in the instructed worldings who are possessed of sakkaya ditthi? Same answer as for the previous question. > Tep: Insight is a conditioned dhamma, and therefore it grows because > of nutriment. > > "The knowledge and vision of things as they really are, monks, also > has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting > condition. And what is the supporting condition for the knowledge and > vision of things as they really are? 'Concentration' should be the > reply." [SN 12.23: Upanisa Sutta] > > Tep: Stronger and persistent nutriments increase its growth and > plentifulness. It does not accrue at its own pace. See right effort > in DN 22. Concentration is a "supporting condition", but this doesn't mean that more and more of it gives faster growth ;-)) (like water for plants, perhaps?) > The arising mental states are wholesome when there are only > renunciation, non-aversion, and harmlessness. This is known as right > resolve (or 'right thought' : samma sankappa). > The arising mental states are unwholesome when there is any of the > three opposites, namely, sensuous thought, ill-will, and harmful > thought. > The akusala vitakka ceases in the first jhana. The kusala vitakka > ceases in the second jhana. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.078.than.html What you say is of course correct. But my question to Howard was as to what determines whether it is the wholesome roots (alobha, adosa and amoha) or the unwholesome roots (lobha, dosa and moha) that arise. > Thank you both. And to you, Tep. Jon #88497 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:10 am Subject: Re: Just studying... philofillet Hi Mike and all Checking in from my brother's place in Toronto to say... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, mlnease wrote: > > Hi Jon and Sukin, > > jonoabb wrote: > > > Secondly, it is not a matter of just hearing, but also of considering > > (reflexively, and at length) what has been heard and understood, and > > relating that to the p > > Just an afterthought--it seems to me that reading suttas (or any other > texts or anything else at all, for that matter) with wrong view is far > more dangerous than not reading them at all. ....that this seems like a very odd statement. It is paramount to saying that the Buddha's teaching is inevitably unable to lead people (sic) to right view, gradually. Of course we have wrong view we come across the teaching.So it is more dangerous to study suttas than to have not come across the Buddha's teaching at all? How very wrong, Mike! Once I get down to the summer place won't have internet so will spare you these interjections, but have to say....huh? where did this idea come from. Fortunately I have never heard it from anyone other than from a student of a.s. metta, phil #88498 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 8:05 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. scottduncan2 Dear Ken, K: "...I was talking about Andrew's bridge. As I understood him, Andrew was saying, 'It is all very well to understand Abhidhamma, but there are also certain conventional activities that the Buddha taught us to carry out. We are to understand that there are only impersonal, uncontrollable, dhammas *and* at the same time (in a bridging fashion) we are to do certain things in the conventional sense of 'to do.' I hope I have expressed that correctly." Scott: I was more or less taking off from Andrew's point, not fully following it yet, but going off on my own tangent. I'm thinking about the dhammas which contribute to the illusory conceptualisation of a conventional world. These can be known as well. Rather than a consideration of 'doing', I'm considering perception and apperception - the whole process whereby a world of people and trees and things is taken to be what it is. This would also consist of dhammas arising and falling away due to conditions. The 'bridge' I was thinking of, as I said, is a theoretical understanding of that which builds this whole thing we call the world. It is completely reasonable, I think, to learn the ways in which the world comes to be perceived as 'world' - as conventional. I think it is useful to consider the ways in which the moment - a stand alone reality - appears as a seamlessly flowing experience with apparently coherent and organised wholes. I think that a tree is a tree, and that a tree is a concept, and that a conceptual tree is a function of apperception rooted in ignorance. I think that seeing is naama, colour is ruupa, and that many processes involving the coordination of many dhammas are conditioned to 'create' a 'tree' - or a world for that matter. I still see a 'tree' but have a theoretical understanding that this 'tree' naama. The ruupa that naama contorts 'into' tree has a separate reality. Seeing is, theoretically, one moment and a series of moments linked by conditions. K: "I think the conventional things...were to give alms, to pay respect and to attend Dhamma discussions....I have always maintained those were activities we performed in the course of our daily of lives - without any pretence at control over the kusala or akusala nature of our motives and without any pretence we were practising what the Buddha taught (satipatthana)." Scott: I figure, until pa~n~naa is developed to a high enough degree, it is impossible to know by ordinary introspection (i.e. thinking about it) whether an act that appears to be kusala is actually kusala. Such a differentiation is the purview of pa~n~naa. If it seems that I have an impulse to do something that seems kind, for example, I'll find that it is done sometimes. Was it truly kusala? Often this is not clear. K: "It's part of your Dhamma studies, isn't it? It is something you do in the normal course of daily life..." Scott: Yes, true. I don't consider the time spent studying Dhamma to be 'practise' or anything. But at times I'm totally in to it. I mean sometimes I pick up the suttas or Dispeller of Delusion or whatever and read and sometimes I pick up a guitar. And it doesn't matter what is being done because, theoretically, any dhamma can become an object of pa~n~naa (or, say, satipa.t.thaana). The question of 'no control' has never included the idea that there can be 'no kusala'. It just means that one has to get with the program. There will only ever be the kusala that there can be, and this includes the fact that this kusala develops and conditions the arising of kusala again (when it doesn't condition the arising of akusala, that is). K: "Yes, that's an excellent quote, thanks, but what is your point? Are you agreeing there can be conceptualising without ignorance and/or wrong view?" Scott: There must the thinking that is kusala. Vitakka and vicaara can accompany either kusala or akusala citta, as far as I understand. So, for now and as a work in progress, I'll say 'yes, there can be conceptualising without ignorance and/or wrong view'. How can there not be? There can be kusala thinking. The thoughts can also be rooted in right view. Sincerely, Scott. #88499 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 7/29/2008 7:57:29 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Howard > The reason for this is simple: something is being undertaken for the > purpose of having more insight, i.e., for "me"! > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Oh, Jon, that is SO silly. Where will wisdom arise, Jon? Not in a stream > of namas? My point was not the view of self involved in the "me", but the expectation of gain [for oneself]. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Ah, so you don't *want* to be awakened and freed of suffering! Gosh, I do. ;-) BTW, I recall from my reading that young Prince Gotama also wanted that - very much, in fact, even to the extent of giving up a "rather pleasant" lifestyle! Now, that was an atta-oriented motivation, Jon. Lucky for us he had it! ------------------------------------------- > Jon, as I already said, and as is well accepted, we are beset by sense > of self. That is our condition, and it permeates all aspects of our > functioning, not just willing. That is where we are, Jon. Were it not so, the task > would already have been done. > ------------------------------------------------------- I agree that, speaking generally (and conventionally), we are beset by a sense of self that permeates all aspects of our functioning, and that that is what "we" are. However, we also know from a study of the teachings that on a moment- to-moment basis the picture is somewhat different. The mental factors being referred to when speaking of a "sense of self" (i.e., wrong view and conceit) are factors that arise only with akusala consciousness, and so are not present at moments of consciousness that are kusala or vipaka. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: So what? --------------------------------------------------- Furthermore, those mental factors are not necessarily present with all akusala consciousness either. For example, the attachment when tasting pleasant food may well not involve any sense-of-self. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Really! You're sure about that? ---------------------------------------------------- Herman's young baby probably has little or no sense-of-self actually arising. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I very strongly disagree. No IDEA of self and no active belief in it, but the craving is most assuredly self-expression. ---------------------------------------------------- As far as kusala is concerned, everyone has accumulated tendencies for kusala of different kinds (including panna) in the past, and these will manifest given the right conditions. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: So, everyone has just as good a chance for movement towards awakening as anyone else, independent of actions (except for reading & thinking about Dhamma, of course)! Jon, I consider that a ludicrous position. I think that were the Buddha to read this, he would wonder why he had wasted 45 good years! ------------------------------------------------- But if those right conditions (or one's idea of them) are pursued with a (manifesting) sense-of-self, then the result will be more sense-of-self and other akusala, not the kusala being pursued. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: But we DO begin mired in sense of self. That's the way it goes! Without bootstrapping, there will be no treading the path. In that regard, please read AN 4.159. --------------------------------------------------- > Insight is not something that can be "actioned". It is an > understanding or realisation, and it accrues at its own (slow) pace. > -------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > But not at random. and the Buddha taught specific training to cultivate > the mind, leading to wisdom. > ------------------------------------------------------ As you are fond of mentioning, the Buddha's teaching can be described as a teaching of this-that conditionality. Bearing that in mind, does it really make sense that actions invested with a (presently manifesting) sense-of-self ("this") could lead to the arising of kusala as part of the development of insight ("that")? --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Huh? --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I have confidence that the practices advocated by the Buddha, not by me, > will, in their time, do the job. Yes, we all have that confidence. And if you're referring to this/ that conditionality, I fully agree, and especially with the "in due time" part of it. The accretion of understanding is something that happens in its own good time. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Let me make myself clear: I'm referring to all the oft repeated, very conventional activities that the Buddha urged his followers to engage in! What they consist of, they consist of. ------------------------------------------------- But if most mental states are polluted by sense-of-self and atta- belief, then so will be any supposed "practice" of guarding the sense- doors, exerting effort to stop akusala, or whatever else one may undertake. Where then is the condition for the arising of kusala? ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Doing what the Buddha said to do works. It's that simple. We do NOT start at the goal, but very far from it. Again, please read AN 4.159. ------------------------------------------------- > My own experience has given me that > confidence. I suppose everyone is convinced of the correctness of their present form of "practice" (if they weren't they'd soon change it ;-)). But you bring up an interesting topic here. Without wanting to get personal (i.e., not asking you to say anything about your own "practice" or personal circumstances), what would you say are the indicators of the correct development of insight as taught by the Buddha? --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I wouldn't say. ------------------------------------------------ Jon ========================= With metta, Howard /Suppose there were a river, flowing down from the mountains — going far, its current swift, carrying everything with it — and a man would open channels leading away from it on both sides, so that the current in the middle of the river would be dispersed, diffused, & dissipated; it wouldn't go far, its current wouldn't be swift, and it wouldn't carry everything with it. In the same way, when a seeker has not abandoned these five obstacles, hindrances that overwhelm awareness and weaken discernment, i.e., sensual desire, ill will, sloth & torpor, restlessness & anxiety, and sceptical doubt, when s/he is without strength and too weak in discernment to understand what is for one's own benefit, to understand what is for the benefit of others, to understand what is for the benefit of both, then to realize a superior human state, a truly noble distinction in knowledge & vision: that is impossible/ (From the Avarana Sutta, Anguttara Nikaya) #88500 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 9:42 am Subject: Re: Bhikkhu Dhammadharo szmicio Dear Sarah(Sukin) Sarah, thanks. > >Sarah it is very important what you write about venerable Dhammadharo. > I dont know why but i like him very much. hHe was really great Dhamma > teacher. If you have any materials about him please share with me. > ... > S: Sukin and I were discussing and arranging off-list to send you a >copy of a Phra Dhammadharo c.d. Please share any extracts you find >helpful. What do u mean saying copy of Phra Dhammadharo cd? p.s Sukin, I've just received A. Sujin book. Thank you very much. #88501 From: mlnease Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 11:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just studying... m_nease Hi Jon, jonoabb wrote: > Doing anything with wrong view--and that would include reading the > texts with the idea that doing so was the "practice" recommended by > the Buddha--accumulates more wrong view. > > This is to be distinguished from (the general situation of) being a > person with wrong view who reads the suttas, because in that > situation it is not necessarily so that the reading is motivated (or > accompanied) by wrong view. > > Difficult to generalise further, I think, because so many variables. Youre right, I really hadn't thought this through. Of course moments of wrong view, right view and moments without either could arise countless times in the time it would take to read anything. Thanks for the correction. mike #88502 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 2:43 pm Subject: Re: kayagatasati dhammanusarin Hi Jon and Howard (Alex, Herman), - Can misunderstanding be avoidable? > > >Jon to Howard (in #88463): Never been said (I think you misunderstand)! What has been said is that when it comes to, whether that be in the nature of sitting, walking, studying or doing things in a particular way, there is bound to be a view of self. The reason for this is simple: something is being undertaken for the purpose of having more insight, i.e., for "me"! > >Howard(#88469): Oh, Jon, that is SO silly. Where will wisdom arise, Jon? Not in a stream of namas? Jon, as I already said, and as is well accepted, we are beset by sense of self. That is our condition, and it permeates all aspects of our functioning, not just willing. That is where we are, Jon. Were it not so, the task would already have been done. ------------------------------------------------------- > >Tep(# 88474): Conceit(mana) is also a sense of self; it is completely abandoned only in the arahants. Jon, does this fact imply that insights do not arise in the lower ariyans since they are still possessed of conceit? >Jon: Not at all. It is clearly stated in the Satipatthana Sutta that consciousness accompanied by various kinds of akusala may be the object of awareness. I've not ever heard it suggested that persons still having akusala cannot develop insight. Would this not make the development of insight impossible for all? ........................................ T: If you do not think, or believe, that akusala, such as conceit and a view of self, can deter the arising of an insight, then there should be nothing wrong with the "sitting, walking, studying or doing things in a particular way for the purpose of having more insight". ........................................ > >Tep: Stronger and persistent nutriments increase its growth and plentifulness. It does not accrue at its own pace. See right effort in DN 22. >Jon: Concentration is a "supporting condition", but this doesn't mean that more and more of it gives faster growth ;-)) (like water for plants, perhaps?) T: Water as nutriment for plants' growth, as well as concentration as nutriment for insight development, has to be balanced with other supporting conditions in order that faster growth can be expected. >Jon: But my question to Howard was as to what determines whether it is the wholesome roots (alobha, adosa and amoha) or the unwholesome roots (lobha, dosa and moha) that arise. So, How can misunderstanding be avoided? ;-) Tep === #88503 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 2:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? dhammanusarin Hi Herman, - You wrote : >Hi Tep, > ... 2008/7/29 Tep : > Hi, Herman, - > > "The property of form, householder, is the home of consciousness." > > What does 'property of form' mean? I think the whole transformation from the straightforward Sn 844 to the convuluted SN22.3 is quite incongruous, so in answer to your question: I don't know :-) > > The term 'property' that appears in other suttas is the rendition > for 'dhatu'. I am not sure if 'dhatu' makes sense in the above quote. > > Cheers Herman ================= T: Maybe I should look at the original Pali word for 'property'. Thank you anyway. :-) Tep === #88504 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 2:51 pm Subject: 5 Hindrances truth_aerator Hi Sarah, Tep, and all. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: If by this you mean that they assume that reasoning, >intellectual understanding without bhavana, without the development >of satipatthana or vipassana is sufficient for arahatship (or any >attainment along the path), then I have yet to meet them here. > Ok, can you please describe the non-just intellectual- approach that you use? > > What about now, Alex? Can there be seclusion at this moment? >> Yes, but too many distractions, and the kilesas are strong. Retreat setting is generally much more helpful. No books, no internet, no endless chores, etc. Hindrances have more material causes at home and this is what the Buddha has said about hindrances: "Sensual desire is an obstacle, a hindrance that overwhelms awareness and weakens discernment. Ill will... Sloth & drowsiness... Restlessness & anxiety... Uncertainty is an obstacle, a hindrance that overwhelms awareness and weakens discernment. These are the five obstacles, hindrances that overwhelm awareness and weaken discernment. And when a monk has not abandoned these five obstacles, hindrances that overwhelm awareness and weaken discernment, when he is without strength and weak in discernment: for him to understand what is for his own benefit, to understand what is for the benefit of others, to understand what is for the benefit of both, to realize a superior human state, a truly noble distinction in knowledge & vision: that is impossible. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.051.than.html And somewhere in AN book of 9's it is said that one needs to remove 5 hindrances first, although even the above sutta says that it is impossible to realize "noble distinction" without putting 5 hindrances off. Question: How is that specifically achieved? =========== 10. Ditthadhammanibbanasuttam - Extinction in this very life 005.10. Friend, it is said, `extinction in this very life' how far is it extinction in this very life as told by The Blessed One? ßHere, friend, the bhikkhu secluding the mind from sensual desires ... re ... abides in the first higher state of the mind [alex: Jhana]. Friend, mastering this is extinction in this very life, said The Blessed One. Again, friend, the bhikkhu overcoming thoughts and discursive thoughts ... re ... abides in the second higher state of the mind ... third higher state of the mind, ... fourth higher state of the mind Friend, mastering this is extinction in this very life, said The Blessed One. Again, friend, the bhikkhu overcoming all perceptions of matter and all perceptions of anger, not attending to various perceptions, with space is boundless abides in the sphere of space. Friend, mastering this is extinction in this very life, said The Blessed One ... re ... Again, friend, the bhikkhu overcoming all the sphere of neither perceptions nor non-perceptions abides in the cessation of perceptions and feelings. Friend, mastering, this is extinction in this very life, said The Blessed One.û http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara6/09-navakanipata/005-samannavaggo-e.html I personally hope that it is possible today and for us to do that. >> Are they atta to be controlled, or anatta, dependent on conditions? Everything is anatta, including formal meditation (which I do daily). However just because things are anatta, it doesn't mean that one takes it with an apathetic fatalistic attitude. Conceit, if aimed at becoming an Arahant is GOOD as one of the suttas with Ananda has said. Best wishes, Alex #88505 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 3:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Silabatta paramasa truth_aerator Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex & all, > > --- On Mon, 28/7/08, Alex wrote: > >S: Whatever way is gone, it's conditioned that way already. > >>> > > A:> Can you please quote the suttas of Buddha saying that? > .... > S: There are only dhammas, Alex - Conditioned dhammas whichever way >is turned: > > As Ven Assaji said: > > "Of those things that arise from a cause, > The Tathagata has told the cause, > And also what their cessation is: > This is the doctrine of the Great Recluse." > ..... > ============ ========= ========= ========= ========= ========= > ..... > S: Isn't it true? When there is the development of kusala - dana, >sila and bhavana, the unwholesome states decline and the wholesome >ones increase. The holy life is followed. I believe that for most people if they don't actively produce right effort and such, the defilements rush in. Thus if one doesn't do kusala, akusala is being done automatically. Of course there are exceptions, some people are "God's angel bunnies" and can't do any evil, they are rare and isn't exactly me. > Do you see any conflict between this and all the teachings on >conditioned dhammas, D.O. and so on? After listening to Assaji's >verse, did Sariputta have any idea left that his self should do >anything? He did go to seclusion and developed 9 meditation levels. Also I suggest you read MahaMoggallana's struggle. He was constantly helped by the Buddha, especially in his struggle with drowsiness. None of those hints were "it is just dhammas man, stop egotistically striving". Not that it is incorrect, just inappriate prior to Arhatship. ============================================ "Well then, Moggallana, whatever perception you have in mind when drowsiness descends on you, don't attend to that perception, don't pursue it. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness. "But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then recall to your awareness the Dhamma as you have heard & memorized it, re-examine it & ponder it over in your mind. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness. "But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then repeat aloud in detail the Dhamma as you have heard & memorized it. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness. "But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then pull both your earlobes and rub your limbs with your hands. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness. "But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then get up from your seat and, after washing your eyes out with water, look around in all directions and upward to the major stars & constellations. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness. "But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then attend to the perception of light, resolve on the perception of daytime, [dwelling] by night as by day, and by day as by night. By means of an awareness thus open & unhampered, develop a brightened mind. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness. "But if by doing this you don't shake off your drowsiness, then — percipient of what lies in front & behind — set a distance to meditate walking back & forth, your senses inwardly immersed, your mind not straying outwards. It's possible that by doing this you will shake off your drowsiness. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an07/an07.058.than.html Please cut out the "I can't do anything". A process can unbind in a certain way, where Jhanas (and such) are just another events. Regarding Ariyas, unless one is Arahant (Mission Accomplished) conceit CAN ARISE. Anagamis have conceit and stream enterers haven't yet destroyed lobha, dosa & subtle avijja. > .... > > A:> "'This body comes into being through craving. And yet it is by > relying on craving that craving is to be abandoned.' > .... > S: Again, isn't it true that without past craving, there would not have been this life? Isn't it also true that without understanding craving when it arises now, it can never be abandoned. > A healthy conceit is important. Without it there wouldn't be a drive strong enough to become an Arahant in less than 7 lives. Please don't run off the discussion somewhere else. Best wishes, Alex #88506 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 3:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? - THERE IS SUCH A METHOD!!! truth_aerator Dear Sarah and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > --- On Sat, 26/7/08, Alex wrote: > A:> As I understand it, the awareness must be ultra sharp. >Before "greed" > arises, what exact steps are present? Can you name and spot a dozen > of subtle actions that happen (even during a second) that cause > greed/anger/ delusion to arise? > > Can you see them? > .... > S: Sorry Alex, but I think you're barking up the wrong tree here. >Perhaps I should say, the wrong trees. > .... > A: >For example in a long retreat that I had, sometimes I noticed > a "machine gun like" broken movements of the foot. Can one notice > the same with mind states? > .... > S: Again, the wrong tree. This is not the understanding of namas >and rupas. > ..... > A:> Super mindfulness is required for that, and long retreats may be > required for most of us, as ordinary mindfulness is too blunt and > slow. > .... > S: Again, I don't believe this has anything to do with the >development of satipatthana or sati or any kind. > So if it is not about seeing these states to arise, then all you do is simply read about them? I might as well read Talmud and simply believe in what is written there... Same believability and usefulness... Reading the menu, or even eating the menu, will not satisfy one's hunger! ======================================== 5. Sanditthikadhammasuttam - The Teaching is here and now 005.05. ßFriend, it is said `the Teaching is here and now' How is the Teaching here and now as told by The Blessed One?û ßHere, friend, the bhikkhu secluding the mind from sensual desires ... re ... abides in the first higher state of the mind. Friend, mastering this much, it is said, the Teaching is here and now by The Blessed One. Again, friend, the bhikkhu overcoming thoughts and discursive thoughts ... re ... abides in the second higher state of the mind ... third higher state of the mind, ... fourth higher state of the mind Friend, mastering this much, it is said the Teaching is here and now by Blessed One. Again, friend, the bhikkhu overcoming all perceptions of matter and all perceptions of anger, not attending to various perceptions, with space is boundless abides in the sphere of space. Friend, mastering this much, it is said the Teaching is here and now by The Blessed One ... re ... Again, friend, the bhikkhu overcoming all the sphere of neither perceptions nor non-perceptions abides in the cessation of perceptions and feelings. Friend, without a mastery, for this much, it is said, the Teaching is here and now, by The Blessed One.û http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara6/09-navakanipata/005-samannavaggo-e.html ========= What does it mean to be liberated by WISDOM? What sort of wisdom? -------------Paññavimutti Sutta---------------------------- "Furthermore, with the complete transcending of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, he enters & remains in the cessation of perception & feeling. And as he sees with discernment, the mental fermentations go to their total end. And he knows it through discernment. It is to this extent that one is described by the Blessed One as released through discernment without a sequel." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.044.than.html ================ Best wishes, Alex #88507 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 3:28 pm Subject: Re: Just studying... truth_aerator Dear Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex (and Sukin) > > But no-one here is saying that just reading the texts is sufficient. You also have said that one needs to consider them. This is good, but it isn't the only thing. When there are hindrances, even the best and most true stuff doesn't have any imprint of intense value. Meditation and sila helps one to keep the hindrances that weaken and obstruct wisdom, knocked out long enough for wisdom to eventually uproot them for good. > For a start, it is not the *activity of reading texts* that is >being referred to, but the *fact of hearing the teachings*, and in > particular of hearing them explained in a way that is appropriate >to one's level of understanding. The above is no different from method of other traditions/religions. > > Secondly, it is not a matter of just hearing, but also of >considering (reflexively, and at length) what has been heard and >understood, and relating that to the present-moment experience. > The proximate cause of "seeing things as they are" isn't considering. It is samadhi. If for someone a momentary split second enhanced path moment kusala citta is enough. GOOD. I am not "Ugghatitannu" or "Vipancitannu" induvidial. Ven. Sariputta and Ven. MahaMoggallana weren't such also. They had to go through intense retreat. > Do you not recognise this kind of hearing and considering as part >of your own development of understanding? Yes on sutta/citta maya panna level. Good, but not enough even for such Giants as Ven. Sariputta and Ven. MahaMoggallana. Best wishes, Alex #88508 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 3:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Channa took his life faultlessly truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex (Herman & all), > ..... > S: We can all repeat that all dhammas are dhammas are anatta. Does a description make an ariyan, let alone an arahat? > .... Exactly. Following sila-samadhi-panna stages is crucial, rather than to try to, in delusion, to jump at the panna part before building up the foundation of sila-samadhi. Skipping stages is like trying to bench 300 pounds when one can't bench 200 pounds, and without any spotters! > ======== > S: Firstly, anyone can be misguided. >>> Ven. Channa was speaking a stock phrase declaring Arhatship. The Buddha has said that Channa Various friends from time to time declare or hint here of various attainemnts, such as being a sotapanna or reaching all jhanas. Does it mean it's necessarily true? > > The Buddha made it clear that Channa died 'faultlessly', i.e as an arahat. The attainment was after Channa's words and the taking up of the knife. This is why the other bhikkhus didn't know until the Buddha told them. All misunderstandings of the path, all attachments and ignorance were eradicated in those last moments of life. > .... > A:> here Channa declares his Arahatship to Sariputta. The terrible punch > line is that Sariputta (not only time) fails to see that Channa is an > Arahant and answers in a way that an Arahant would do (total > disenchantment with 18 elements). > .... > S: Sariputta knew that Channa was misguided and hadn't attained to any enlightenment when Channa spoke to him, so he gave him the best guidance - not about trees and jhanas, but about sense objects and so on appearing right then and there as anatta. > .... > > A:> Buddha: "Sàriputta, wasn't the faultlessness of the bhikkhu Channa > declared in your presence?" > http://www.mettanet .org/tipitaka/ 2Sutta-Pitaka/ 2Majjhima- > Nikaya/Majjhima3/ 144-channovada- e.html > > Here the Buddha is telling Sariputta that Ven. Channa was faultless > WHILE SARIPUTTA SEEN CHANNA (in other words Ven. Channa was Arahat > even while being alive and seeing Ven. Sariputta). > .... > S: I understand the Buddha to have been referring to the faultlessness of Channa just before his death. The Buddha had spoken of this in Sariputta's presence. [note: I don't have the sutta or my texts handy, so this is just my recollection of it]. > .... ===================================================== ßSàriputta, wasn't the faultlessness of the bhikkhu Channa declared in your presence?û - Here the Buddha has said that Bhikkhu Channa was an Arahant , ie faultless WHILE CHANNA WAS ALIVE. ========================================= ßVenerable sir, in Pabbajira, the village of the Vajjã's, the families of venerable Channa's friends, well-wishers and earlier relations live.û - Here Sariputta is saying that "it appears that he was too close or interested in lay families"/ ========================== ßSàriputta, there may be the families of venerable Channa's friends, well-wishers and earlier relatives, I say, there is no fault to that extent. Sàriputta, if someone gives up this body and seizes another, I say it is a fault. In the bhikkhu that fault is not apparent. Bhikkhu Channa took his life faultlessly.û -MN144 http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima- Nikaya/Majjhima3/144-channovada-e.html -Here The Buddha is explaining that even though it appears that Ven. Channa was close (in body) he wasn't close in mind. Furthermore if Channa was a worldling and took his own life, how can that act be faultless? At that moment it isn't. But because this act wasn't done out of greed/anger/delusion it wasnt. > .... > S: You're saying that Channa was overwhelmed by his suffering and >took his life as an arahat. The sutta tells that. >You're saying that Sariputta tried to dissuade him from this and >failed to appreciate not only his great wisdom, but the fact that he >was acting as an arahat. > ================================================== I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Savatthi, in Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. At that time Ven. Sariputta was with a variety of approaches instructing, urging, rousing, and encouraging Ven. Bhaddiya the Dwarf with Dhamma-talk to an even greater extent, as he thought that Bhaddiya was still just a learner. The Blessed One saw that Ven. Sariputta was with a variety of approaches instructing, urging, rousing, and encouraging Ven. Bhaddiya the Dwarf with Dhamma-talk to an even greater extent, as he thought that Bhaddiya was still just a learner. Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed: He has broken the cycle, attained freedom from desire. The dried-up stream no longer flows. The cycle, broken, no longer turns. This, just this, is the end of stress. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.7.02.than.html ------- Best wishes, Alex #88509 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 3:46 pm Subject: Re: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) dhammanusarin Hi Sarah (Alex, Jon), - Thank you for responding to my following comment. >In a message to Howard: I do not understand what "concentration at *the intensity level* of jhana" means, Howard. I just wish they could cite someone's real experience ("attainment" of that kind of concentration) , or at least refer to specific passages in the Abhidhamma Pitaka or Suttanta Pitaka as a valid support for that theory. T: And your reply is based on Jon's message #3539 (when he was seven years younger). If I am not mistaken, I think only his Comment 4 and Comment 5-4 are about "concentration at *the intensity level* of jhana", although there is no explanation. CMA: For bare insight meditator and jhana meditator alike, all path and fruition cittas are considered types of jhana consciousness. They are so considered because they occur in the mode of closely contemplating their object with full absorption, like the mundane jhanas, and because they possess the jhana factors with an intensity corresponding to their counterparts in the mundane jhanas. [4] Jon's 4 : The concentration accompanying magga citta is said to 'correspond to' jhana because the magga citta experiences its object with same full absorption and intensity of other factors as the jhana citta. CMA : Finally, whereas the role of wisdom in the mundane jhanas is subordinate to that of concentration, in the supramundane jhanas wisdom and concentration are well balanced, with concentration fixing the mind on the unconditioned element and wisdom fathoming the deep significance of the Four Noble Truths. [5.4] Jon's 5.4 : The primary attribute of a moment of jhana citta is the degree of concentration on the object at that moment, whereas the attribute of a moment of magga citta is the wisdom that pierces the Truths. ***** T: After reading the above, because of confusion I end up with more question and no answer. Since I have no idea whether or not the CMA commentators have jhana experience, or whether they know what the "concentration at *the intensity level* of jhana" means, I would be happier if you could directly find the explanation from the Abhidhamma Pitaka or Suttanta Pitaka. ................................... S: I think we have to read references to jhana carefully in the suttas. Often it refers to arammanupani-jhana, mundane jhana. Often too, it refers to lakkhanupani-jhana, supramundane jhana at moments of enlightenment. There have been many references and quotes on these before (U.P. 'Jhana- 2 kinds'). T: Although I have studied 70 -80% of the suttas over the last 20 years, but I must confess that I have not seen before even one sutta about 'arammanupani-jhana, or 'lakkhanupani-jhana'. In your opinion what is the best way to carefully read the references to jhana in the suttas? A few examples taken from the suttas will be helpful. Thanks. Tep === #88510 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 3:52 pm Subject: Authenticity truth_aerator Hi Sarah, Herman and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Sarah, > > > > > Can there be seclusion at this moment? > > No, there can be no seclusion while going about the activities of > daily life. Because seclusion involves the not attending to the > senses. To do so in a shared place involving other beings would be >at > least negligent, and possibly quite a danger to the welfare of > yourself and others. > Herman is very correct. Furthermore, in daily life there are too many distractions, which aren't present to such degree in the retreats. > And anyway, of what value could momentary seclusion be if it is > followed by extended periods of satisfying whatever craving comes > along? > Exactly. > It was the prototype of all commenators, Maha Kaccana, who first got > away with changing the meaning of what the Buddha taught. He >suggested that the following: > > "Having left home to roam without abode, > In the village the sage is intimate with none; > Rid of sensual pleasures, without preference, > He would not engage people in dispute." > > actually meant: > > "The property of form, householder, is the home of consciousness. >When > consciousness is in bondage through passion to the property of form, > it is said to be living at home. The property of feeling... > perception... fabrication is the home of consciousness. When > consciousness is in bondage through passion to the property of > fabrication, it is said to be dwelling at home. blah blah blah as > found in > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.003.than.html > > Cheers > > > Herman Even during Buddha's life there were schisms (ex the one done by Devadatta) and rogue monks such as Arittha & Sati. Some monks could have been gravely mistaken in interpreting the Buddha's teaching, even if they were well wishing and trully trying to help. Whenever Buddhaghosa is saying "these aren't my commentaries, they are from ancient elders" - I wonder if it ever will be possible to know about who exactly were those elders, and did they say the right thing? ================= 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). ========================================= Should we take much later commentators (like Buddhaghosa) as "The Authority" of Buddhism or Buddha himself? Best wishes, Alex #88511 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:26 pm Subject: Re: kayagatasati - Warrior Attitude truth_aerator Hi Tep, Sukinder, Jon, and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > So, How can misunderstanding be avoided? ;-) Read the earliest Suttas. I beleive that we should stick as close to the suttas as possible and don't slander the Tathagata by reinterpreting them. Regarding "action" and "not doing" there is another good sutta. Notice the graphic descriptions that suggest that sort of attitude needed, at least in some cases (here it is about celibacy) ================================================================ [5] "Then there is the case of the monk who can handle the cloud of dust, the top of the enemy's banner, the tumult, & hand-to-hand combat. On winning the battle, victorious in battle, he comes out at the very head of the battle. What is victory in the battle for him? There is the case of the monk who has gone to the wilderness, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty dwelling. A woman approaches him and sits down right next to him, lies down right next to him, throws herself all over him. When she sits down right next to him, lies down right next to him, and throws herself all over him, he extricates himself, frees himself, and goes off where he will. "He resorts to a secluded dwelling place: the wilderness, the foot of a tree, a mountain, a glen, a hillside cave, a charnel ground, a forest grove, the open air, a haystack. Having gone to the wilderness, the foot of a tree, or an empty building, he sits down, crosses his legs, holds his body erect, and brings mindfulness to the fore. "Abandoning covetousness with regard to the world, he dwells with an awareness devoid of covetousness. He cleanses his mind of covetousness. Abandoning ill will & anger, he dwells with an awareness devoid of ill will, sympathetic with the welfare of all living beings. He cleanses his mind of ill will & anger. Abandoning sloth & drowsiness, he dwells with an awareness devoid of sloth & drowsiness, mindful, alert, percipient of light. He cleanses his mind of sloth & drowsiness. Abandoning restlessness & anxiety, he dwells undisturbed, his mind inwardly stilled. He cleanses his mind of restlessness & anxiety. Abandoning uncertainty, he dwells having crossed over uncertainty, with no perplexity with regard to skillful mental qualities. He cleanses his mind of uncertainty. "Having abandoned these five hindrances, corruptions of awareness that weaken discernment, then — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful [mental] qualities — he enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of concentration, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. With the fading of rapture, he remains in equanimity, is mindful & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. "With his mind thus concentrated, purified, & bright, unblemished, free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, & attained to imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to the knowledge of the ending of the mental fermentations. He discerns, as it has come to be, that 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the way leading to the cessation of stress... These are mental fermentations... This is the origination of fermentations... This is the cessation of fermentations... This is the way leading to the cessation of fermentations.' His heart, thus knowing, thus seeing, is released from the fermentation of sensuality, the fermentation of becoming, the fermentation of ignorance. With release, there is the knowledge, 'Released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.' "This, for him, is victory in the battle. This individual, I tell you, is like the warrior who can handle the cloud of dust, the top of the enemy's banner, the tumult, & hand-to-hand combat. On winning the battle, victorious in battle, he comes out at the very head of the battle. Some individuals are like this. This is the fifth type of warrior-like individual who can be found existing among the monks. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.075.than.html ======= Notice fairly engaging words that Buddha has described a monk who is like a warrior who can handle "hand-to-hand combat. On winning the battle, victorious in battle, he comes out at the very head of the battle. Some individuals are like this. " THIS INDUVIDIAL BECOMES AN ARAHANT MONK. Best wishes, Alex #88512 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:32 pm Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. truth_aerator Hi Pakudha Kaccayana, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Leaving aside the Dhamma for the moment let me ask: If there were >no hippopotamuses there could be no harm done to a hippopotamus, >could there? The evil intention and that evil view IS. No Ken = No suffering for Ken. Would you go and test it out by jumping under a train? Why not? >Similarly, if there were no sentient beings of *any* kind > there could be no harm done to anyone. There could be no need for > anything to be done. There could be no need to build a bridge (for > example). Could there? > > Ken H Buddha DID forbid killing, stealing and such. What you are saying is "'And among them there is no killer nor one who causes killing, no hearer nor one who causes hearing, no cognizer nor one who causes cognition. When one cuts off [another person's] head, there is no one taking anyone's life. It is simply between the seven substances that the sword passes.' - is Pakudha Kaccayana view. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.02.0.than.html Morally reprehensive, first-class-strait-to-hell view. Please renounce it at once! Best wishes, Alex #88513 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:40 pm Subject: Buddha awakened to jhana - SN2.7 truth_aerator Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Tep > > Concentration is a "supporting condition", but this doesn't mean that > more and more of it gives faster growth ;-)) (like water for plants, > perhaps?) Sariputta had to go through 9 Jhanas, so did MahaMoggallana and Buddha himself. Do you think you need less "water" than them? ============================================================== "having understood the reward of the cessation of perception & feeling, I familiarized myself with it. My heart leaped up at the cessation of perception & feeling, grew confident, steadfast, & firm, seeing it as peace. With the complete transcending of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, I entered & remained in the cessation of perception & feeling. And as I saw with discernment, the mental fermentations went to their total end. "Ananda, as long as I had not attained & emerged from these nine step- by-step dwelling-attainments in forward & backward order in this way, I did not claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & priests, its royalty & common people. But as soon as I had attained & emerged from these nine step-by-step dwelling- attainments in forward & backward order in this way, then I did claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & priests, its royalty & common people. Knowledge & vision arose in me: 'My release is unshakable. This is the last birth. There is now no further becoming.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.041.than.html "Then 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. Even this much is described by the Blessed One as the attaining of an opening in a confining place, without a sequel." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.042.than.html Best wishes, Alex #88514 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:47 pm Subject: Ksanikavada, not in the suttas. truth_aerator Hi Scott, Herman and all --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > And if ruupas arise and fall according to their own rate of > persistence, as you say, how does that not imply existence over time? > > Cheers > > Herman "It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to hold to the body composed of he four great elements, rather than the mind, as the self. Why is that? Because this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more. But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another. Just as a monkey, swinging through a forest wilderness, grabs a branch. Letting go of it, it grabs another branch. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. In the same way, what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.061.than.html The body seems to last "for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more." . No mention of the radical momentariness of later commentarial literature (even in the canonical literature there isn't ksanikavada mentioned, it was drawn out by commentators). Best wishes, Alex #88515 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What is a question? truth_aerator Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > Hi Alex > > In case you missed it in my earlier post, we are not talking about > any individual here (least of all about me), but about the meaning >of the teachings given by the Buddha. Did the Buddha keep abstaining from using personal pronounds, and names? Such and such, here and there, etc? Check out the beginning of Anapanasati sutta and many other suttas as well. > The question we are discussing is *whether the path to >enlightenment > lies in the development of more and more of the temporary kind of > kusala, or in the development of insight into the true nature of > dhammas*. > > Do you have any further comments/sutta quotes on that particular > point? I do. MN64 is an example where Jhana is used as a basis of insight. --- MN70 ------------- "But as for monks in higher training, who have not yet reached their hearts' goal, who still aspire for the unexcelled freedom from bondage: I say of them that they have a task to do with heedfulness. Why is that? [I think:] 'Perhaps these venerable ones, when making use of suitable resting places, associating with admirable friends, balancing their [mental] faculties,3 will reach & remain in the supreme goal of the holy life for which clansmen rightly go forth from home into homelessness, knowing & realizing it for themselves in the here & now.' Envisioning this fruit of heedfulness for these monks, I say that they have a task to do with heedfulness. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.070.than.html Please cut out the "path moment only" interpretation as it is clearly inconsistent with the suttas. > The idea that Sariputta "needed all 9 meditation levels to become an Arahant" does not accord with the traditional view that he spent many lifetimes developing the perfections necessary to fulfil the vow made to become a chief disciple. > 1st) Give me a sutta in the 4 Nikayas that says that. Please do. :) 2nd) If HE, with such huge accumulations HAD to go through 9 meditation levels in order to realize Arhatship, then what about us, who have even more work to do? Best Wishes, Alex #88516 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 5:21 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? .. You May Disagree Again ... dhammanusarin Hi Sarah (Alex, Howard), - It looks like we are once again near the end of the diverging conversation. >S: Anything else to discuss on it, or are we through with Qu 1? T: Yes, fortunately we are through. :-) ............................. [I mentioned that "Hearing/studying and carefully considering such realities as now." was Khun Sujin's method.] >S: I don't see this as "Khun Sujin's "method" or anyone else's. I see it as the Buddha's teaching as indicated in the sutta in the subject heading, MN70 which you refer to above and throughout the Tipitaka and Theravada texts. T: That is because we have different views. ............................ [Tep: Nobody would want to practice Satipatthana, if the Buddha did not make such a clear statement about how long (7 days to 7 years) it would take to reach the goal of the practice.] S: OK, if 7 years is the longest time, why are we not all arahats? Planning on time-frames for outcomes particularly misses the point about conditioned dhammas. Even amongst the Buddha's disciples, we can see how different accumulations and conditions were. I think the attachment to results and time-frames is a huge hindrance to the gradual development as outlined in the sutta you quoted above. It's almost a recipe for wrong practice and fantasies about attainments or despair if and when they clearly haven't come about. I know we disagree here, Tep. That's fine. I appreciate your honest sharing of your opinion always. T: Interesting question : "why are we not all arahats?" Simple answer, though; it is because we are not yet good enough. The Buddha was wise to give such an assurance to His disciples so that they would have the motivation to practice with all their effort in order to reach arahantship in the present life. They were enecouraged because they knew it was possible. Accumulations(aayuhanaa) is only found in the Patisambhidamagga. For example : 'accumulating [kamma] as a meaning of origin is to be directly known' [Ptsm, I, 34]. It is strange that I can find only one sutta, MN 12, that mentions "accumulation". However, the meaning of accumulation here is different from what you talk about. MN 12: "Such was my coarseness, Sariputta, that just as the bole of a tinduka tree, accumulating over the years, cakes and flakes off, so too, dust and dirt, accumulating over the years, caked off my body and flaked off. It never occurred to me: 'Oh, let me rub this dust and dirt off with my hand, or let another rub this dust and dirt off with his hand' â€" it never occurred to me thus. Such was my coarseness." The sutta MN 70 is a great one; it makes clear about the "seven individuals" who are real, not fantasies. The "task" and "goal" of the Holy Life for each of these individuals are stated clearly. It is pointless to think that the hindrances will overwhelm those earnest practitioners who clearly know what they are doing. The Mahasatipatthana Sutta, DN 22, makes clear about the urgency of the path practice to attain arahantship, or anagamiship, in 7 days up to 7 years. I have no idea whom you are accusing of as being attached to "results and time-frames". What is your basis for assuming that wrong practice and fantasies about the path attainments will follow those who have clear goal with no confusion as to when the task will be well done, given that the Teachings have been rightly understood, earnestly and rightly practiced? You are right that having a disagreement is fine. But an opinionated accusation (based on the extreme view, 'Only this right') is not. Peace, Tep === #88517 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 5:43 pm Subject: Re: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? .. You May Disagree Again ... dhammanusarin Hi Sarah and all, - I found one error. Please correct it as follows. With error: But an opinionated accusation (based on the extreme view, 'Only this right') is not. Corrected: But an opinionated accusation (based on the extreme view, 'Only this is right') is not. Thanks. Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > > Hi Sarah (Alex, Howard), - > > It looks like we are once again near the end of the diverging > conversation. > > #88518 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 6:02 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? .. You May Disagree Again ... truth_aerator Hi Tep, Sarah and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > S: OK, if 7 years is the longest time, why are we not all arahats? >> Incorrect practice maybe? Lack of effort Atapi?? Not overcoming "Vineyya loke abhijjhadomanassam." ? Guess what, if hindrances aren't overcome, doing satipatthana even for 7 billion aeons won't work. The hindrances prevent one to see things as they are, the twist and pervert the results. There is a sutta in AN book of 9's that says that after 5 hindrances are overcame, then develop 4 sattipatthanas. For the lucky ones who may need only "access" or "momentary" concentration - good for you. Generally speaking the hindrances are terminated in a good, strong Jhana. > Planning on time-frames for outcomes particularly misses the point > about conditioned dhammas. Even amongst the Buddha's disciples, we > can see how different accumulations and conditions were. I think the > attachment to results and time-frames is a huge hindrance to the > gradual development as outlined in the sutta you quoted above. It is through craving/conceit that craving/conceit (Arhatship) can be reached. Consider the "attachment to the result (Arhatship)" as a self-terminating skillful mean - like a raft to cross from this shore to another. >It's almost a recipe for wrong practice and fantasies about >attainments or despair if and when they clearly haven't come about. >I know we disagree here, Tep. I consider it to be a disbelief and lack of faith to say "don't expect too much" - not to mention hindering the awesome power and might of Buddha-Dhamma. =================================================== "His heart, thus knowing, thus seeing, is released from the fermentation of sensuality, the fermentation of becoming, the fermentation of ignorance. With release, there is the knowledge, 'Released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.' "This, for him, is victory in the battle. This individual, I tell you, is like the warrior who can handle the cloud of dust, the top of the enemy's banner, the tumult, & hand-to-hand combat. On winning the battle, victorious in battle, he comes out at the very head of the battle. Some individuals are like this. This is the fifth type of warrior-like individual who can be found existing among the monks. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.075.than.html There is the case where an individual doesn't indulge in sensual passions and doesn't do evil deeds. Even though it may be with pain, even though it may be with sorrow, even though he may be crying, his face in tears, he lives the holy life that is perfect & pure. This is called the individual who goes against the flow. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.005.than.html Notice how an arahant monk is described. As a very tough monk, not a sissy who is afraid of exertion (and doesn't win the fight)! Lots knock out defilements before they knock us out! NO RETREAT, NO SURRENDER!!!! May this quote install some good conditions for strong energy in all of us! Best wishes, Alex #88519 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 6:10 pm Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi KenH and Andrew > > I mentioned in an earlier post that I may come in on any discussion > between the two of you, and here I am. > > Just a couple of points. > > > I don't think any of us disapproves of the word "santati > > (continuity)." It refers to the way one citta follows on from > > another, doesn't it? It doesn't mean "persisting" or "permanent" in > > any way. > > Speaking from memory, I think santati can refer to either of the > following: > (a) the way one citta follows on from another (as mentioned above); > (b) the appearance of continuity due to our inability to perceive > rise and fall of dhammas. > > In the latter case, it connotes a wrong perception of reality. > > So it depends on the context. > > Thanks, Jon, "due to our inability to perceive rise and fall of dhammas" is a useful way of putting it. I'll try to remember that. I think Andrew had a third definition of santati, which he thought was contained somewhere in the texts. It related to a kind of bridge that linked the world of persisting things with the world of momentary dhammas. It made both worlds available (or efficacious) for Dhamma practice. When someone like me is heard ranting about no-hippopotamuses alarm bells might well go off. We can't blame Andrew for that. Let's hope he returns when he feels so inclined, and tries to talk some sense into me. :-) Ken H #88520 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 2:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Warrior Attitude upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Tep. Sukin, and Jon) - In a message dated 7/29/2008 7:26:39 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth _aerator@... writes: Read the earliest Suttas. I beleive that we should stick as close to the suttas as possible and don't slander the Tathagata by reinterpreting them. ================================ Hmm, not quite so cut & dried a matter, I think. There is the problem of *understanding* a sutta. A given sutta is not always unambiguous, not always perfectly clear. In attempting to understand the meaning, one is interpreting it. That cannot be construed as RE-interpreting it, I believe. And sometimes we do need help and suggestions in trying to grasp the meaning, and that is where commentaries, ancient and modern, come in. With metta, Howard #88521 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:09 pm Subject: Re: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? .. You May Disagree Again ... dhammanusarin Hi Alex and all, - Thank you again for the endless flow of sutta discussion. >Alex: There is a sutta in AN book of 9's that says that after 5 hindrances are overcame, then develop 4 sattipatthanas. T: Another sutta in MN group, MN 151: The Purity of Alms Food (at mettanet.org) also states that for a "bhikkhu who desires to abide in voidance most of the time", the five hindrances are to be dispelled prior to Satipatthana contemplation/reflection. http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima- Nikaya/Majjhima3/151-pindapataparisuddhi-e.html Tep === #88522 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 3:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Warrior Attitude upasaka_howard Hi again, Alex - In a message dated 7/29/2008 9:55:05 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Hi, Alex (and Tep. Sukin, and Jon) - In a message dated 7/29/2008 7:26:39 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth _aerator@... writes: Read the earliest Suttas. I beleive that we should stick as close to the suttas as possible and don't slander the Tathagata by reinterpreting them. ================================ Hmm, not quite so cut & dried a matter, I think. There is the problem of *understanding* a sutta. A given sutta is not always unambiguous, not always perfectly clear. In attempting to understand the meaning, one is interpreting it. That cannot be construed as RE-interpreting it, I believe. And sometimes we do need help and suggestions in trying to grasp the meaning, and that is where commentaries, ancient and modern, come in. With metta, Howard ================================ Just a bit more. Sometimes a sutta seems perfectly clear! Then one should not strain for other readings just to make it fit one's preconceived views. That *would* be presumptuous, I believe. On the other hand, even when the meaning does seem quite clear, we should leave our mind open to the possibility that "I could be wrong." With metta, Howard #88523 From: "connie" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:18 pm Subject: Re: Commentary (part 1)[dsg] Sangiitisutta Corner DN 33 1.8, 1.81, 1.8.2 nichiconn Dear Friends, > (9) 'Which one thing is to be thoroughly learnt? All beings are > maintained by nutriment *(as Sutta 33, verse 1.8(1)).* ------ Nina: This reminds us not to just quickly read this over. ------ A couple of Bhikkhu Bodhi's notes from Nidaanavagga of SN: p.772 n161 Spk: Edible food should be considered as similar to son's flesh by way of the ninefold repulsiveness: the repulsiveness of having to go out for it, of having to seek it, of eating it, of the bodily secretions, of the receptacle for the food (ie, the stomach), of digestion and indigestion, of smearing, and of excretion. (For details see Vism 342-46; Ppn 11:5-26; there ten aspects are mentioned, the additional one being "fruit," ie, the repulsive parts of the body produced by food). A bhikkhu should use his almsfood in the way the couple eat their son's flesh: without greed and desire, without pickiness, without gorging themselves, without selfishness, without delusion about what they are eating, without longing to eat such food again, without hoarding, without pride, without disdain, and without quarreling. p.772 n162 Spk: When the nutriment edible food is fully understood: It is fully understood by these three kinds of full understanding: (i) the full understanding of the known (~naatapari~n~naa); (ii) the full understanding by scrutinization (tiira.na-p.); and (iii) the full understanding as abandonment (pahaana-p.) Therein, (i) a bhikkhu understand: "This nutriment edible food is 'form with nutritive essence as the eigth' (see n.18) together with its base. This impinges on the tongue-sensitivity, which is dependent on the four great elements. Thus nutriment, tongue-sensitivity, and the four elements - these things are the form aggregate. The contact pentad (contact, feeling, perception, volition, consciousness) arisen in one who discerns this - these are the four mental aggregates. All these five aggregates are, in brief, name-and-form." Next he searches out the conditions for these phenomena and sees dependent origination in direct and reverse order. By thus seeing name-and-form with its conditions as it actually is, the nutriment of edible food is fully understood by the full understanding of the known. (ii) Next he ascribes the three characteristics to that same name-and-form and explores it by way of the seven contemplations (of impermanence, suffering, nonself, revulsion, dispassion, cessation, and relinquishment - see Vism 607; Ppn 20:4). Thus it is fully understood by the full understanding by scrutinization. (iii) It is fully understood by the full understanding as abandonment when it is fully understood by the path of non-returning, which cuts off desire and lust for that same name-and-form. <..cut..> peace, connie #88524 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:23 pm Subject: Re: Just studying... rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi Mike and all > > Checking in from my brother's place in Toronto to say... > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, mlnease wrote: > > > > Hi Jon and Sukin, > > > > jonoabb wrote: > > > > > Secondly, it is not a matter of just hearing, but also of > considering > > > (reflexively, and at length) what has been heard and understood, and > > > relating that to the p > > > > Just an afterthought--it seems to me that reading suttas (or any > other > > texts or anything else at all, for that matter) with wrong view is > far > > more dangerous than not reading them at all. > > > ....that this seems like a very odd statement. It is paramount to > saying that the Buddha's teaching is inevitably unable to lead people > (sic) to right view, gradually. Of course we have wrong view we come > across the teaching.So it is more dangerous to study suttas than to > have not come across the Buddha's teaching at all? How very wrong, > Mike! Once I get down to the summer place won't have internet so will > spare you these interjections, but have to say....huh? where did this > idea come from. Fortunately I have never heard it from anyone other > than from a student of a.s. > > metta, > > phil Dear Phil The Commentary to Dhammasangani (the Atthasalini) says that those who study Suttanta wrongly may come to wrongview. This is because the suttas use conventional language (he, she, I, person etc). (So the Abhidhamma is a protection against reading Suttas through the lens of selfview). If one then propagates this wrong understanding of Dhamma then it can damage the triple gem.This is possibly what Mike was suggesting. Robert #88525 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:33 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Warrior Attitude dhammanusarin Hi Howard (Alex, Jon, Sukin) - Earlier Alex wrote: "Read the earliest Suttas. I beleive that we should stick as close to the suttas as possible and don't slander the Tathagata by reinterpreting them." ================================ >Howard: Hmm, not quite so cut & dried a matter, I think. There is the problem of *understanding* a sutta. A given sutta is not always unambiguous, not always perfectly clear. In attempting to understand the meaning, one is interpreting it. That cannot be construed as RE-interpreting it, I believe. And sometimes we do need help and suggestions in trying to grasp the meaning, and that is where commentaries, ancient and modern, come in. ................................ T: I partially agree that studying and understanding the Buddha's Teachings in some of the suttas is not "quite so cut & dried a matter" as you said, because it is hard to cut through. My "knife" does not seem to be sharp enough for some DN and MN suttas. But, getting "help and suggestions" from non-ariyans can often make my studying-and-understanding task even more difficult. Too much information can be misleading and confusing. That is why Alex's suggestion makes sense, given that you also practice according to the Dhamma along with the study. Tep === #88526 From: "connie" Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 8:55 pm Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. nichiconn Dear KenH, KenH: Collations of things are called "mere" because they are not real. ----------------------- c: That's 'collocation', I think; like "location" for ruupa is kalaapa & for cetasika is citta. Our space/time continuum - di.t.thi having something to do with 'warp'..? snipping Expositor, p,.84, ...inasmuch as this work 'consciousness' ... arranges itself in a series (cinoti, or, its own series or continuity) by way of apperception in a process of thought. And the resultant is also termed 'consciousness' because it is accumulated (cito) by kamma and the corruptions. ... >> --------------------------------- I think I see what that means. Don't ask me though. :-) Ken H ================== connie: yeah, the raft lashing (or brick-laying) thing - 'work' IS 'kamma', isn't it? Javana, impulsion, running thru, carrying on; I left out "apperception" - and if i ask "what's that?"... ok if the rhethorical rule exceptional case applies. Summary/Topics of Abhidhamma, p.128: the occurrence of impulsion is like the time when he is eating it {the mango} p.129: << What does this simile show? That the function of the object is just to make impact with the sense organ; that of adverting is just to direct [the mind] towards the objective field; that of eye-consciousness is merely seeing; and those of receiving, etc., are merely accepting, etc.; but it is the function of impulsion alone to enjoy the taste of the object, while that of retention is enjoying just what has been enjoyed by that [impulsion]. In this way it is shown how each of these dhammas has a distinct function, and thus one would understand that when consciousness is operating, it operates by virtue of the fixed order of consciousness, like the fixed order of the seasons and seeds, without there being anyone issuing orders saying, 'You are adverting and come immediately after existence-continuum; you are, say, seeing, or whatever, and come immediately after adverting. >> and here's a little pattern recognition rule: p.131: << when impulsion arises, it does so only when [the object] has a duration of seven consciousness moments [remaining];>> but no, speaking of Abhidhamma - not just first but always! and now? Expositor pp57-8: << In the triplet of 'leading to accumulation', 'accumulation' means 'that which is accumulated by kamma and corruptions. It is a name for the processes of rebirth and decease. 'Leading to accumulation' are 'those causes which by being accomplished go to, or lead a man, in whom they arise, to that round of rebirth.' It is a name for co-intoxicant moral or immoral states. Nibbaana being free from 'cumulation,' which is another word for 'accumulation,' is called 'dispersion.' 'Leading to dispersion' is 'going towards that dispersion which he has made his object.' It is a name for the Ariyan Paths. >> Accumulating (the arrangement for result?). BB, at the end of SN p.498 n654 note on < Dismantling (apacaya) > says "See too MN III 288, 30." as far as rafts go, you know what they say about crossing bridges (rope swings or whatevers) before their time: that tittha.m can mean crossing-point << in that it is here that they thereby cross over (taranti) the flood of sa.msaara, (meaning) the path to nibbaana; but in the present case it is a viewpoint consisting of (wrong) view as held by those resorting to (wrong) view by way of the perversions consisting of distorted (perceptions and so on) that is implied by tittha.m (outlook) >> Ud-a on 4th sutta of the Blind from Birth chapter, where << it is insight that is here implied by "vision" (cakkhu). Similarly, "Do not know what is to their benefit" and so on was said. >> peace, connie #88527 From: Sukinder Date: Tue Jul 29, 2008 10:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just studying... sukinderpal Hi Phil, (Mike and Jon), Being one of those students of A. Sujin who have had the kind of thought, I hope you don’t mind my making some comments. As you may have read in one of my recent posts statements to the effect, that if one read the Suttas and goes away without seeing the importance of paying attention to and understanding present moment experiences, but instead read into them prescriptions of behavior with aim for results over time, then imo, suttamayapanna has not arisen. Also since the Abhidhamma and commentaries are very helpful in getting one to understand anatta and conditionality better and better, those who dismiss them and read only the Suttas, they are likely reading with ‘self view’. ============= Mike: > Just an afterthought--it seems to me that reading suttas (or any other > texts or anything else at all, for that matter) with wrong view is far > more dangerous than not reading them at all. Phil: ....that this seems like a very odd statement. It is paramount to saying that the Buddha's teaching is inevitably unable to lead people (sic) to right view, gradually. Of course we have wrong view we come across the teaching.So it is more dangerous to study suttas than to have not come across the Buddha's teaching at all? How very wrong, Mike! Once I get down to the summer place won't have internet so will spare you these interjections, but have to say....huh? where did this idea come from. Fortunately I have never heard it from anyone other than from a student of a.s. Sukin: You will agree that what distinguishes the Buddha’s teachings from all the rest is the fact of “Right View”. It follows then that the Teachings are the Teachings only when read / heard / referred to with Right Understanding, otherwise they are at best just another set of teachings about wholesome vs. unwholesome behavior / deeds. In which case the Buddha and his Dhamma may as well not be referred to at all! Last Saturday, Robert brought along his girlfriend Junko to the discussions. At one point Robert tried to explain to her about how understanding paramattha dhammas can lead to one’s life being with less clinging and aversion. At that point it struck, and reminded me of you, that if one were to approach the Dhamma with an idea of wanting one’s life to be with less akusala but without seeing the danger of ignorance, this is not an ideal approach. Unless we appreciate the danger of ignorance, I doubt that Right View will arise enough to be encouraged further. True, we have all accumulated some right view from past lives and this will arise from time to time when reading the Suttas. The problem is that we have accumulated much more wrong view and this likely arises much more including when reading the Suttas. So much so that the occasional right view has no effect, the wrong view heavily outweighs and determines what follows. And when one next reads the anything, chances are wrong view, fueled by attachment and clinging, lead as well as follow and one is caught in a vicious circle. Indeed seeing the danger of ignorance *is* an expression of right view. But even this must refer to the present moment; otherwise it remains an abstraction while ‘self view’ continues to do its own thing, for e.g. what goes on in the name of Jhana, retreats etc. So it seems to me that not only is there misunderstanding of the Buddha’s Path and therefore one fails to receive any benefit that the Teachings are meant to provide, but also since one also mistakes what is not the path to be so, even while wanting to develop other forms of kusala, the prospect of this is also reduced. Why? Because there is much confusion and one is neither here nor there. People who follow other religions can practice dana, sila and samatha bhavana by accumulations without any thought about this leading to the development of panna. The doubts about the Path which invariably arise for those who are engaged in wrong practice while thinking otherwise, does not arise for them. Of course they will have much wrong view also, but at least they are spared having to interpret the Dhamma. This latter can be grave kamma especially when taking into account the clinging with which one then propagates the wrong interpretation to others. You’ll probably think that it is I who is generating wrong kamma, however I hope you will also now understanding why I think the way I do about this. ;-) Metta, Sukin #88528 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/7/29 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman, > > > Excellent, thank you for your agreement, I couldn't have asked for > more. > > Now, according to the Dhamma, the world is exactly like that. There > are no sentient beings, only dhammas. > > Are you still with me? > I am not being evasive in saying the following, but I am with you only to the extent that I fully understand what you are saying. I am not with you insofar as what you are saying is false. If there are only dhammas according to your Dhamma, what do you suppose the Pathana is harping on about? Cheers Herman PS A straight answer would be appreciated :-) #88529 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 5:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? dhammanusarin Dear Herman (Sarah, Alex, Howard), - I have found that the word "property" in SN 22.3 Halissakani Sutta, indeed is from the Pali 'dhatu'. The other rendition of dhatu is 'element' as seen at Mettanet.org. SN 22.3 : Haliddakani Sutta Thanissaro Bhikkhu's translation: "How is the detailed meaning of this, the Blessed One's brief statement, to be understood?" [Ven. Maha Kaccana:] "The property of form, householder, is the home of consciousness. When consciousness is in bondage through passion to the property of form, it is said to be living at home. The property of feeling... perception... fabrication is the home of consciousness. When consciousness is in bondage through passion to the property of fabrication, it is said to be dwelling at home. ...................................... SN 21. 1. 1. 1. Mettanet.org translation: Venerable sir, of this short exposition of the Blessed One how should we know the detailed meaning? 4-7. Householder, the material element is the habitation of consciousness and the greedy bond with the material element is the behavior of consciousness in that habitation. Householder, the feeling element is the habitation of consciousness and the greedy bond with the feeling element is the behavior of consciousness in that habitation. Householder, the perceiving element is the habitation of consciousness and the greedy bond with the perceiving element is the behavior of consciousness in that habitation. Householder, the intending element is the habitation of consciousness and the greedy bond with the intending element is the behavior of consciousness in that habitation. ..................... I just thought you might find it interesting too. I think I like the above Mettanet translation better. Tep === #88530 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Sarah and Alex) - In a message dated 7/30/2008 8:27:12 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, tepsastri@... writes: Dear Herman (Sarah, Alex, Howard), - I have found that the word "property" in SN 22.3 Halissakani Sutta, indeed is from the Pali 'dhatu'. The other rendition of dhatu is 'element' as seen at Mettanet.org. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: My first thought on this was "While I do view rupas as material qualities - hardness, warmth, etc (and even sights, sounds, odors, and flavors), I think that to translate 'dhatu' as 'property' is to impose a specific perspective that is not included in the meaning of 'dhatu' itself." But then I looked at the PTS entry, _http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.1:1:2677.pali.196331\ 3_ (http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.1:1:2677.pali.196331\ 3) , for 'dhatu', and from that it became clear that both 'property' and 'category' as well as 'element' would be okay translations. As regards 'property', particularly see "2. (a) natural condition, PROPERTY [emphasis mine], disposition; factor, item, principle, form." ------------------------------------------------------------ Tep ============================ With metta, Howard #88531 From: "pannabahulo" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:52 am Subject: Ajahn Jose pannabahulo Dear Dhamma friends, I know that many of you are very worried about Ajan Jose In Australia. I wrote the following e-mail yesterday and - this morning - received the reply which follows this letter. I will continue to keep in touch with him during his very painful crisis. Sarah suggested I post this so to put your minds at rest. With metta to you all. Pannabahulo -------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Ajahn Jose, You may not remember me but I am the English monk, in Thailand, who you wrote to - about 3 months ago - to offer your support for a posting I made on the Dhamma Study Group's website. Today I received a phone call from one of Ajahn Sujin's disciples to say that the cancer has now spread all over your body: And that you are receiving shots of morphine to help ease the suffering.But many of us are concerned that you have been, or are, contemplating suicide. With respect - but with so much metta and compassion - that is a most definite No, No, No! That is one course of action that will increase your suffering a million times. Such an act will not be an end to your suffering but the beginning of even more terrible torment. If your last conscious moment in this life is filled with so much suffering, what kind of rebirth are you going to experience? I have also spoken to my good friend the Ven Dhammanando (Phra Robert) who normally resides at Wat Benjamanophit in Bangkok. He has lent his computer to a friend and has come to Chiang Mai to spend the Vassa here. Unfortunately I am 60+km south of Chiang Mai city and he is almost as far away in the completely opposite direction from the city. Both of our current monasteries are far out in the wilds and so difficult to get too. Both of us know you must be going through an immense amount of suffering. And both of us really care for you and care about what is happening to you. The first thing that you must always keep in mind is that the first teaching of the Lord Buddha - and the teaching that is central to everything else - is that to have a mind and body IS to suffer. Our job is to go beyond suffering by letting go of it.Ajahn, if we add mental suffering to physical suffering then we more than double the suffering. It is precisely at such a point as where you are now, that the real Dhamma practise should be put into use. We know that this is incredibly difficult: Who knows what is in store for any of us? But it is precisely through being with your own suffering, by accepting it for what it is, that you can step right onto the path that leads solely to the end of all suffering. And it is precisely at a time like this that you can actually reach the final goal once and forever. Because the First Noble Truth is so clear now - at least it will become a Noble Truth if you can just be with it and understand that this is exactly the way that it is here in Samsara - that all the other 3 Noble Truths can be penetrated and fully realised. That is the key which unlocks the door to Magga Nana. Even better, it is the key which can bring you final release and thus Arahatta Magga. We all know that you are suffering tremendously; the Lord Buddha did also before his Parinibbana. Even a Buddha could not escape the suffering of the 5 khandas. But his suffering was physical; he did not add mental suffering to it. Welcome death when it comes Ajahn as a good friend. And if you handle your remaining time in this body with mindfulness, patience and wisdom, you will leave that body with a mass of accumulated merit. But suicide would mean you leave with so much akusala kamma that you are bound to suffer very much more in the future. Leaving this life with patience, calm and dignity will also inspire all those that are around you. That too will be a lot of kusala kamma for now and the future. The Ven Dhammanando has asked me to give you his phone number in case you would like to speak to him.I also give you my phone number so that you can call me anytime you need or want to; day or night. And I will leave my phone turned on 24 hours a day in case you need to call.Here are our phone numbers complete with country codes. Ven Dhammanando (Phra Robert) - phone number removed to protect security as this is a public posting. Ven Pannabahulo (Phra Alan) - phone number removed as above. Ajahn Jose, we are with you and our metta, thoughts and blessings are with you too.Please surrender completely and put your full trust in The Triple Gem. Then you will be absolutely safe. Be happy; be peaceful; and have your mind fixed on the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness. Dhamma will do the rest. Pannabahulo Bhikkhu (Phra Alan Cooper) "All things are not-self" -when one sees this with wisdom one turns away from suffering. This is the path to purification." (The Buddha) ------------------------------------------------------------------- Re: We are with you Wednesday, 30 July, 2008 6:48 AM From: This sender is DomainKeys verified "Ajahn Jose" Add sender to Contacts To: pannabahulo@... Dear Venerable, this morning I was getting ready to be taken to the Hospital for my morphine injection and while waiting I read your beautiful email. I am so gratefull for your kind metta and compassion. I will not let you or Robert down, and I will take as many pain killers as I can. Metta. Ajahn Jose signature Venerable Yanatharo, Ajahn Jose --------------------------------------------------------------------- #88532 From: Sukinder Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Just studying... sukinderpal Hi Howard (Alex at ps), Sorry for being late in responding. ========= > I know that you want me to find out for myself, however at this point in > time given that I am completely satisfied with the KS interpretation; > ============================== > Sukin, I think your approach would be somewhat appropriate provided that > the following also holds: > > 1) You have read the Buddha's teaching itself, most especially the > suttas, to see what it is that Khun Sujin (or anyone else) is interpreting, and > 2) You have read some additional interpretations as a basis for > comparison. Sukin: Yes I realize that the ideal situation would be that I am reading enough Suttas while studying what I’m doing now. But doing this to find out whose interpretation is right and whose isn’t? I don’t think so. How would I know? I think that it would require nothing less than vipassana nana on my part to really be sure, would it not? Until then, I believe that what I must rely on is the one interpretation which makes sense and who according to my perception consistently refers back to the Texts, all three baskets, without bias. A. Sujin does not ignore any part of the Tipitaka and regularly studies and cites from all three of them. I’ve never seen her conveniently dismiss or try to explain away any Sutta, and when she explains any one of them, it all makes sense. More importantly however, do you think that any of her student’s interest in the particular interpretation could be maintained for so long (in some cases such as Nina, this is 40+years), had the understanding not been ‘applied’ but remained theory only? But of course, the theory wasn’t without some level of understanding either; else the level of ‘application’ couldn’t have come about. Besides, would any of them be able to speak with such confidence against other interpretations yet maintaining faithfulness to the Texts as a whole? Of course there are only Dhammas and once we have arrived at this conclusion, everything else is meaningless babble anyway. Here is the solidness of A. Sujin’s interpretation of the Dhamma. How many teachers speak about the present moment with such conviction and who can argue? ============ > The reason I say only "SOMEWHAT appropriate" is that I believe that more > is required. What I believe is needed in addition is the following: > > 1) Training the mind in sila and samadhi to make it a fit instrument for > understanding reality, including a practice of ongoing mindfulness and > guarding the senses, and Sukin: Were you thinking about my inability to concentrate? ;-) ============ > 2) Paying attention to what the Buddha taught the Kalamas as follows: > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------\ ------------------- > "It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has > arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has > been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon > what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon > specious reasoning; nor upon a bias toward a notion that has been pondered over; > nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is > our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these > things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and > observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them. > > and > > "Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; > nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon > surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias > toward a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; > nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you > yourselves know: 'These things are good; these things are not blamable; these > things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to > benefit and happiness,' enter on and abide in them. Sukin: Thanks for posting this. Before when I read the Kalama Sutta, the different situations mentioned were more or less abstracted and therefore seen as things that I needed to be careful about. In which case some of the situations applied while others seemed not to. However now when I read it, what I see is that as a worldling, I have tendency to all of the above only greater or lesser degree. The “knowingâ€? here I interpret to be that of an Ariyan. So now instead of needing to be on the lookout, I see more the need to gradually and patiently develop understanding. Otherwise I think the ‘self’ comes in only to add fuel to the fire. Please don’t expect a quick response. I’ll be going away for a few days starting tomorrow. Metta, Sukin Ps: Alex, I’ll try to find time to send you a response to your post before I leave, otherwise please wait till next week. #88533 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 6:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Just studying... upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin - In a message dated 7/30/2008 12:35:33 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sukinder@... writes: Hi Howard (Alex at ps), Sorry for being late in responding. ========= > I know that you want me to find out for myself, however at this point in > time given that I am completely satisfied with the KS interpretation; > ============================== > Sukin, I think your approach would be somewhat appropriate provided that > the following also holds: > > 1) You have read the Buddha's teaching itself, most especially the > suttas, to see what it is that Khun Sujin (or anyone else) is interpreting, and > 2) You have read some additional interpretations as a basis for > comparison. Sukin: Yes I realize that the ideal situation would be that I am reading enough Suttas while studying what I’m doing now. But doing this to find out whose interpretation is right and whose isn’t? I don’t think so. How would I know? -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, not to be FLIPpant (LOL!), you could flip a coin - or, for more outcomes, roll some dice! More seriously, you need to use your own experience and best judgement, always keeping in mind, though, that you cold be mistaken, and this not clinging to your view. Right now, you ARE depending on commentaries or on Nina or on Khun Sujin, and it is YOUR JUDGEMENT to do so! It *always* comes down to one's own judgement. ----------------------------------------------- I think that it would require nothing less than vipassana nana on my part to really be sure, would it not? Until then, I believe that what I must rely on is the one interpretation which makes sense and who according to my perception consistently refers back to the Texts, all three baskets, without bias. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: So, it comes down to your judgement. --------------------------------------------- A. Sujin does not ignore any part of the Tipitaka and regularly studies and cites from all three of them. I’ve never seen her conveniently dismiss or try to explain away any Sutta, and when she explains any one of them, it all makes sense. More importantly however, do you think that any of her student’s interest in the particular interpretation could be maintained for so long (in some cases such as Nina, this is 40+years), had the understanding not been ‘applied’ but remained theory only? But of course, the theory wasn’t without some level of understanding either; else the level of ‘application’ couldn’t have come about. Besides, would any of them be able to speak with such confidence against other interpretations yet maintaining faithfulness to the Texts as a whole? Of course there are only Dhammas and once we have arrived at this conclusion, everything else is meaningless babble anyway. Here is the solidness of A. Sujin’s interpretation of the Dhamma. How many teachers speak about the present moment with such conviction and who can argue? ============ > The reason I say only "SOMEWHAT appropriate" is that I believe that more > is required. What I believe is needed in addition is the following: > > 1) Training the mind in sila and samadhi to make it a fit instrument for > understanding reality, including a practice of ongoing mindfulness and > guarding the senses, and Sukin: Were you thinking about my inability to concentrate? ;-) -------------------------------------------- Howard: No, actually I was not. I was being general. ---------------------------------------------- ============ > 2) Paying attention to what the Buddha taught the Kalamas as follows: > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------- > "It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has > arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has > been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon > what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon > specious reasoning; nor upon a bias toward a notion that has been pondered over; > nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is > our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these > things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and > observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them. > > and > > "Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; > nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon > surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias > toward a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; > nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you > yourselves know: 'These things are good; these things are not blamable; these > things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to > benefit and happiness,' enter on and abide in them. Sukin: Thanks for posting this. Before when I read the Kalama Sutta, the different situations mentioned were more or less abstracted and therefore seen as things that I needed to be careful about. In which case some of the situations applied while others seemed not to. However now when I read it, what I see is that as a worldling, I have tendency to all of the above only greater or lesser degree. The “knowingâ€? here I interpret to be that of an Ariyan. So now instead of needing to be on the lookout, I see more the need to gradually and patiently develop understanding. Otherwise I think the ‘self’ comes in only to add fuel to the fire. Please don’t expect a quick response. I’ll be going away for a few days starting tomorrow. Metta, Sukin Ps: Alex, I’ll try to find time to send you a response to your post before I leave, otherwise please wait till next week. ================================= Very pleasant talking with you, sukin! Have a good few days away. :-) With metta, Howard #88534 From: mlnease Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 11:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just studying... m_nease Hi Robert, Sukin and Phil, rjkjp1 wrote: > Dear Phil > The Commentary to Dhammasangani (the Atthasalini) says that those > who study Suttanta wrongly may come to wrongview. This is because > the suttas use conventional language (he, she, I, person etc). (So the > Abhidhamma is a protection against reading Suttas through the lens of > selfview). If one then propagates this wrong understanding of Dhamma > then it can damage the triple gem.This is possibly what Mike was > suggesting. Yes, this is what I was getting at (rather lamely, sorry). Is the following what you were thinking of? "The bhikkkhu, who is ill-trained in the sutta, gets a wrong idea, not knowing the meaning of such passages as, 'There are, bhikkhus, four persons(1) in the world,' concerning which it has been said, 'Owing to his wrong ideas,(2) he accuses us, harms himself and produces much demerit.' Consequently he arrives at wrong views." (1) One who lives for his own good, one who lives for the good of others, one who lives neither for his own nor others' good, one who lives both for his own and others' good. D.iii. 232; M.i. 341; A. ii. 205 This is said by the Buddha as a conventional truth. Not knowing it in the ultimate sense he gets the wrong idea. Discussed in Points of Controversy, p. 16.--Ed. (2) Or, 'owing to his wrong nature or conduct.' says the Saaratthadiipanii, which also reads duggahitena dhammena. Expositor Introductory Discourse, p. 31 Robert, if you were referring to a different passage and can pinpoint it in the Atthasalini, I'll type it out for the list. Phil, let me know if this is an adequate reply to your post. If not I'll respond more specifically to its (impersonal) points soon--thanks for your patience. mike #88535 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:11 pm Subject: Re: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? dhammanusarin Hi Howard (and Herman), - Concerning dhaatu and its redition as propert or element, you wrote : >Howard: My first thought on this was "While I do view rupas as material qualities - hardness, warmth, etc (and even sights, sounds, odors, and flavors), I think that to translate 'dhatu' as 'property' is to impose a specific perspective that is not included in the meaning of 'dhatu' itself." But then I looked at the PTS entry for 'dhatu', and from that it became clear that both 'property' and 'category' as well as 'element' would be okay translations. As regards 'property', particularly see "2. (a) natural condition, PROPERTY [emphasis mine], disposition; factor, item, principle, form." ------------------------------------------------------------ T: Following your suggestion, I visited the PTS Website and found some useful information about dhaatu that might be of interest to you too. The relation of dhaatu with the five aggregates is new to me. 1. A primary element, of which the usual set comprises the four paá¹, aapo, tejo, vaayo (earth, water, fire, wind), otherwise termed cattaaro mahaabhuutaa .. 2. (a) natural condition, property, disposition; factor, item, principle, form. In this meaning in var. combns & applications, esp. closely related to khandha. Thus mentioned with khandha & aayatana (sensory element & element of sense -- perception) as bodily or physical element, factor. Amata dhaatu = Nibbana Aruupa dhaatu = the element or sphere of the Incoporeal .. Akasa dhatu = the element of space .. Kaama dhaatu = the world of desire, that sphere of existence in which beings are still in the bonds of sensuality .. Kaaya dhaatu = the faculty of touch, sensibility .. Cakkhu dhaatu = the element of vision .. Best wishes, Tep === #88536 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:12 pm Subject: Buddha used Anapanasati SN 54.008 truth_aerator Dear Sukin, Tep, Jon, Sarah and all --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder wrote: > Sukin: Yes I realize that the ideal situation would be that I am >reading enough Suttas while studying what I’m doing now. But doing >this to find out whose interpretation is right and whose isn’t? I Suttas in general are the closest thing to what the Buddha has taught that we are left with. I believe that Buddha was the best teacher of Buddhism. Not some Tom, Dick or Harry. Why stick to anyone's (including mine of course) interpretation? Read the earliest thing. I strongly recommend everyone to "storm the suttas". Read DN, MN, SN, AN, & first 6 or so books of KN. As I've pointed out with Rahula's example, it is easy to get a wrong picture if one misses some sutta. Furthermore use the index in those books to search for certain keywords, ie: Panna, samadhi, dhamma-eye (stream entry), Jhana, Vipassana... >A. Sujin does not ignore any part of > the Tipitaka and regularly studies and cites from all three of >them. Even the Anapanasati suttas? "Monks, concentration through mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, great benefit. "I myself, monks, before my Awakening, when I was still an unawakened bodhisatta, often dwelt in this [meditative] dwelling. While I was dwelling in this [meditative] dwelling, neither my body nor my eyes were fatigued, and the mind — through lack of clinging/sustenance — was released from mental fermentations. "Thus, monks, if a monk should wish, 'May neither my body nor my eyes be fatigued, and may my mind — through lack of clinging/sustenance — be released from mental fermentations,' then he should attend closely to this very same concentration through mindfulness of in-&-out breathing. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn54/sn54.008.than.html THERE! Buddha has admitted the method He often used. > More importantly however, do you think that any of her student’s > interest in the particular interpretation could be maintained for >so long (in some cases such as Nina, this is 40+years), had the > understanding not been ‘applied’ but remained theory only? People may spend entire lifetime being Moslems, Xtians, Jews, Sikhs and so on. Best wishes, Alex #88537 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:26 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Just studying... truth_aerator Hello Mike and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, mlnease wrote: > Hi Robert, Sukin and Phil, > > rjkjp1 wrote: > > > Dear Phil > > The Commentary to Dhammasangani (the Atthasalini) says that those > > who study Suttanta wrongly may come to wrongview. This is because > > the suttas use conventional language (he, she, I, person etc). (So >the > > Abhidhamma is a protection against reading Suttas through the lens >of > > selfview). If one then propagates this wrong understanding of Dhamma > > then it can damage the triple gem. >>> Did the Buddha ever in the suttas have stated that? Please quote the suttas. Best wishes, Alex #88538 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - T: Following your suggestion, I visited the PTS Website and found some useful information about dhaatu that might be of interest to you too. The relation of dhaatu with the five aggregates is new to me. 1. A primary element, of which the usual set comprises the four paá¹­havii, aapo, tejo, vaayo (earth, water, fire, wind), otherwise termed cattaaro mahaabhuutaa .. 2. (a) natural condition, property, disposition; factor, item, principle, form. In this meaning in var. combns & applications, esp. closely related to khandha. Thus mentioned with khandha & aayatana (sensory element & element of sense -- perception) as bodily or physical element, factor. Amata dhaatu = Nibbana Aruupa dhaatu = the element or sphere of the Incoporeal .. Akasa dhatu = the element of space .. Kaama dhaatu = the world of desire, that sphere of existence in which beings are still in the bonds of sensuality .. Kaaya dhaatu = the faculty of touch, sensibility .. Cakkhu dhaatu = the element of vision .. Best wishes, Tep =============================== Thanks for providing this additional, useful information. Sometimes, for some entries, I've found the PTS site not all that helpful, but this is not one of those times! ;-) With metta, Howard #88539 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just studying... egberdina Hi Robert, 2008/7/30 rjkjp1 : > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" > wrote: > The Commentary to Dhammasangani (the Atthasalini) says that those > who study Suttanta wrongly may come to wrongview. This is because > the suttas use conventional language (he, she, I, person etc). (So the > Abhidhamma is a protection against reading Suttas through the lens of > selfview). If one then propagates this wrong understanding of Dhamma > then it can damage the triple gem.This is possibly what Mike was > suggesting. Does the commentary not warn against the dangers of reading the Abhidhamma with self view? or the commentaries? How utterly absurd. Cheers Herman #88540 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 3:19 pm Subject: Re: Buddha used Anapanasati SN 54.008 dhammanusarin Dear Alex (and Sukin), - Thank you for including me in your list of the discussion participants. With all due respect I think you might be making a mistake trying to convince Sukin to stop listening to his teacher and, instead, learn the Dhamma directly from the suttas like you have done. Sukin is a wise person who has an unshakable conviction in his teacher, whom he believes has right understanding of the Dhamma. >Sukin (#88532): A. Sujin does not ignore any part of the Tipitaka and regularly studies and cites from all three of them. I’ve never seen her conveniently dismiss or try to explain away any Sutta, and when she explains any one of them, it all makes sense. >Suk: More importantly however, do you think that any of her student’s interest in the particular interpretation could be maintained for so long (in some cases such as Nina, this is 40+years), had the understanding not been ‘applied’ but remained theory only? >Suk: Thanks for posting this [Kalama Sutta]. Before when I read the Kalama Sutta, the different situations mentioned were more or less abstracted and therefore seen as things that I needed to be careful about. In which case some of the situations applied while others seemed not to. However now when I read it, what I see is that as a worldling, I have tendency to all of the above only greater or lesser degree. The “knowingâ€? here I interpret to be that of an Ariyan. So now instead of needing to be on the lookout, I see more the need to gradually and patiently develop understanding. Otherwise I think the ‘self’ comes in only to add fuel to the fire. ........................... T: His explanation is clear and he is so polite! Although I do not buy his Self Demon theory, I do not have any doubt that our good friend Sukin sincerely believes in his teacher's knowledge and interpretation of the Buddha's Teachings (the Dhamma). Are you barking up a wrong tree? ;-) Regards, Tep === #88541 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 3:45 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? dhammanusarin Hi Howard, - >Howard: Thanks for providing this additional, useful information. Sometimes, for some entries, I've found the PTS site not all that helpful, but this is not one of those times! ;-) You're welcome and thank you, my friend. Tep === #88542 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:35 pm Subject: Re: Buddha used Anapanasati SN 54.008 truth_aerator Dear Tep, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > Dear Alex (and Sukin), - > > Thank you for including me in your list of the discussion > participants. With all due respect I think you might be making a > mistake trying to convince Sukin to stop listening to his teacher > and, instead, learn the Dhamma directly from the suttas like you >have > done. Sukin is a wise person who has an unshakable conviction in >his > teacher, whom he believes has right understanding of the Dhamma. > > ........................... > > T: His explanation is clear and he is so polite! Although I do not > buy his Self Demon theory, I do not have any doubt that our good > friend Sukin sincerely believes in his teacher's knowledge and > interpretation of the Buddha's Teachings (the Dhamma). Are you > barking up a wrong tree? ;-) > > > Regards, > > > Tep > === My replies aren't always aimed at Sukin. Hopefully others will check out the suttas themselves. It is the most direct line that we have. Hopefully, it will sow some good seeds. Best wishes, Alex #88543 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 5:08 pm Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. kenhowardau Hi Herman, You've answered my question and I'm grateful for that. If you don't want to see the void (anatta) I won't force you to. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi KenH, > > 2008/7/29 kenhowardau : > > Hi Herman, > > > > > > Excellent, thank you for your agreement, I couldn't have asked for > > more. > > > > Now, according to the Dhamma, the world is exactly like that. There > > are no sentient beings, only dhammas. > > > > Are you still with me? > > > > I am not being evasive in saying the following, but I am with you only > to the extent that I fully understand what you are saying. > > I am not with you insofar as what you are saying is false. > > If there are only dhammas according to your Dhamma, what do you > suppose the Pathana is harping on about? > > Cheers > > Herman > PS A straight answer would be appreciated :-) > First, I would need a straight question. :-) Ken H #88544 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 5:22 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Just studying... rjkjp1 --- Yes that is the exact quote I was thinking of. Thanks for finding it mike. Robert In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, mlnease wrote: > > Is the > following what you were thinking of? > > "The bhikkkhu, who is ill-trained in the sutta, gets a wrong idea, not > knowing the meaning of such passages as, 'There are, bhikkhus, four > persons(1) in the world,' concerning which it has been said, 'Owing to > his wrong ideas,(2) he accuses us, harms himself and produces much > demerit.' Consequently he arrives at wrong views." > > (1) One who lives for his own good, one who lives for the good of > others, one who lives neither for his own nor others' good, one who > lives both for his own and others' good. D.iii. 232; M.i. 341; A. ii. > 205 This is said by the Buddha as a conventional truth. Not knowing it > in the ultimate sense he gets the wrong idea. Discussed in Points of > Controversy, p. 16.--Ed. > > (2) Or, 'owing to his wrong nature or conduct.' says the > Saaratthadiipanii, which also reads duggahitena dhammena. > > Expositor > Introductory Discourse, p. 31 > > Robert, if you were referring to a different passage and can pinpoint it > in the Atthasalini, I'll type it out for the list. > > Phil, let me know if this is an adequate reply to your post. If not > I'll respond more specifically to its (impersonal) points soon--thanks > for your patience. > > mike > #88545 From: mlnease Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 5:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just studying... m_nease My pleasure, Rob--thank you for the reminder. mike rjkjp1 wrote: > > > --- > Yes that is the exact quote I was thinking of. Thanks for finding it mike. > Robert #88546 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 6:23 pm Subject: Re: Of Mice and Men (Re: [dsg] A question on contiguity) egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/7/28 jonoabb : > Hi Herman > > According to what I understand (i.e., intellectually, from my reading > of the texts), seeing consciousness or hearing consciousness may be > the object of consciousness accompanied by panna of the level of > satipatthana (being a moment of consciousness immediately subsequent > to the moment of seeing or hearing consciousness). > And what consciousness knows this consciousness accompanied by panna? Don't you see, Jon, the infinite regress that these particular texts rely on? Unless there is a consciousness that takes itself as object, the pursuit of consciousness of any kind as a reality to be known is a wild goose chase. Cheers Herman #88547 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/7/28 jonoabb : > Hi KenH and Andrew > > > Speaking from memory, I think santati can refer to either of the > following: > (a) the way one citta follows on from another (as mentioned above); > (b) the appearance of continuity due to our inability to perceive > rise and fall of dhammas. If we are unable to perceive rise and fall of dhammas, as you say here, what makes you believe it is otherwise? If you base your claim that it is otherwise on the authority of another, did they claim the ability to perceive the rise and fall of dhammas? And if they did claim that, did they also claim that it was useful to them in any way? Cheers Herman #88548 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:40 pm Subject: Re: Buddha used Anapanasati SN 54.008 dhammanusarin Hi Alex, - I could not tell that you also had a more general theme : > Alex: > My replies aren't always aimed at Sukin. Hopefully others will check > out the suttas themselves. It is the most direct line that we have. > > Hopefully, it will sow some good seeds. > May your hope turn to wishes, and may all of your wishes come true ! Tep === #88549 From: "connie" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:09 pm Subject: Ajahn Jose/pannabahulo nichiconn Best wishes, Sir. connie SN Bk2, 12. Nidaanasa.myutta, 22(2) The Ten Powers (2) exerpt: 'Willingly, let only my skin, sinews, and bones remain, and let the flesh and blood dry up in my body, but I will not relax my energy so long as I have not attained what can be attained by manly strength, by manly energy, by manly exertion.' "Bhikkhus, the lazy person dwells in suffering, soiled by evil unwholesome states, and great is the personal good that he neglects. But the energetic person dwells happily, secluded from evil unwholesome states, and great is the personal good that he achieves. It is not by the inferior that the supreme is attained; rather, it is by the supreme that the supreme is attained. Bhikkhus, this holy life is a beverage of cream; the Teacher is present. Therefore, bhikkhus, arouse your energy for the attainment of the as-yet-unattained, for the achievement of the as-yet-unachieved, for the realization of the as-yet-unrealized, [with the thought]: 'In such a way this going forth of ours will not be barren, but fruitful and fertil; and when we use the robes, almsfood, lodgings, and medicinal requisites [offered to us by others], these services they provide for us will be of great fruit and benfit to them.' Thus, bhikkhus, should you train yourselves. "Considering your own good, bhikkhus, it is enough to strive for the goal with diligence; considering the good of others, it is enough to strive for the goal with diligence; considering the good of both, it is enough to strive for the goal with diligence." #88550 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Fw: Re: monk who took his own life egberdina Hi Ajahn Jose, I am sorry to hear that your health is not improving. I had become aware of your situation from some news articles. It is good that you discuss your intentions with your friends. I hope you discuss them with your children as well. In the end, the decision is yours. If I recall correctly, you have previously been in the privileged position of being a doctor, so you are in a good position to understand what is happening to your body. You also will understand better than anyone else what works to ease your pain, and what doesn't. There is no benefit in discovering that some will blame you for what you intend. But neither is it brave or meritorious to allow yourself to be tortured to death. The Buddha said: if someone gives up this body and seizes another, I say it is a fault. Only you know your own mind. When you are truly at peace with what you propose to do, no blame will touch you. With Metta Herman #88551 From: Sukinder Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Just studying... sukinderpal Hi Alex, ============ > Sukin: I'm not sure what the point of your question is, but I'll ? >answer anyway. If what you are trying to determine is whether I've >read Suttas first-hand or heard interpretations (A. Sujin's and >others') / commentaries / Abhidhamma more, the answer is, reading >the Suttas >has been just a tiny fraction compared to these latter sources. > > As regards your suggestion of it being between `KS interpretation' >vs. `bare Sutta reading', doesn't it come down more to `KS >interpretation' vs. `Alex interpretation'? Alex: The issue is: KS interpretations vs what is said in the suttas. You seem to imply that KS knows more about Buddha's teaching, than Buddha himself. I have to give you the credit for honesty though. Sukin: It is like this from where I stand: You Alex, are trying to talk me into reading the Suttas and out of A. Sujin’s interpretation with *your* understanding. So far you have succeeded in proving neither the wrongness of A. Sujin’s statements nor that your own first hand reading of the Suttas produced positive fruit. It may be that you are speaking about what makes sense in general. But then consider also the following: The suggestion that the Sutta Pitaka has higher authority over other materials mean very little to me. I don’t go by such considerations but by the “understanding” that is conveyed. So far nothing quoted from other works, namely the Abhidhamma and commentaries has caused me to doubt that it says the same thing as the rest of the Tipitaka. Had A. Sujin and her students relied only on the Abhidhamma and commentaries and excluded the Suttas, I might have had reason to be suspicious and to want to then check with the Suttas. But this as you know, is not the case. If I were to begin reading the Suttas more, I would do this because I see the value of the Teachings and this will naturally be with *my present* level of understanding. However this understanding comes with it a deep appreciation for A. Sujin, since without her, my understanding of the Dhamma would have been different, which I think would not be much if not altogether wrong. So yes, I do respect her very much and since I often see her in person, it is easier for ‘respectful cittas’ to arise here than towards the Buddha himself, whom I never met and who can only be the object of my imagination (relatively speaking). Of course in this regard, were I to read the Suttas often, this being in many instances, description of what the Buddha did during his life, I would then have many, many of these same respectful cittas towards him also. However it still comes down to seeing the value of the Dhamma doesn’t it? And I know that A. Sujin is not the source of the Dhamma, so it is the Buddha who is the *real* Teacher. But because He himself is known only when the Dhamma is known, in the end you could say that my appreciation of and enthusiasm for the Dhamma is an expression of my respect for the Buddha and this includes each time that I see the value in A. Sujin’s interpretation. ;-) ========== Alex: Anyhow, please comment: DN#2 ...he seeks out a secluded dwelling: a forest, the shade of a tree, a mountain, a glen, a hillside cave, a charnel ground, a jungle grove, the open air, a heap of straw. After his meal, returning from his alms round, he sits down, crosses his legs, holds his body erect, and brings mindfulness to the fore. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.02.0.than.html Sukin: This is from the Samannaphala Sutta which as I recall talks about the life of the Bhikkhu and how superior this is to that of the lay life. What are you trying to tell me here? That one ordains in order to be able to meditate? And that since Bhikkhus meditate, this proves that ‘meditation’ is part of the Path? If this is so, I think that your reasoning is fueled by your own preference to meditation and has nothing to do with the reality of the situation. No, the situation of the Bhikkhu Sangha is not akin to that of a “retreat” which you so often like to compare with!! One ordains as a result of *understanding* firstly, about the dustiness of the lay life, being around people and other situations whereby tanha and dosa are likely to arise often. Secondly and more important, is that one knows oneself enough to see the accumulated inclination to live such a life, else one only *reacts* with ignorance. And this reaction invariably involving misjudgment is that which gives rise to such ideas as, ‘being given the opportunity to practice mindfulness and insight in a more conducive environment’, when the fact of the matter is that insight being about knowing conditioned realities, this can equally be developed in the situation of the lay life. On the other hand, given that the Path comes down to the development of Vipassana panna, if someone ordained with an intention to practice Jhana thinking this to be part of the Path or else having no idea about it, this again in wrong reason to ordain. Rather I think, the Patimokha provides hint as to the purpose for becoming a monk. The rules in there more than anything else, reflects where kilesas could possibly find expression and the solution would then be to develop mindfulness and understanding in all situations, and not just to go and meditate!! That said, there surely were and will be monks who have inclinations to Jhana. These would be those who would have had the wisdom to see the harm in sense contacts and also the value in developing insight. So for him besides developing understanding of the vipassana kind, the situation he finds himself in as a Bhikkhu may well also serve to provide opportunity to practice Jhana. And this is without doubt a good thing. ================= Alex: "And who is the individual who goes with the flow? There is the case where an individual indulges in sensual passions and does evil deeds. This is called the individual who goes with the flow. "And who is the individual who goes against the flow? There is the case where an individual doesn't indulge in sensual passions and doesn't do evil deeds. !!!****Even though it may be with pain, even though it may be with sorrow, even though he may be crying, his face in tears***!!!, he lives the holy life that is perfect & pure. This is called the individual who goes against the flow. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.005.than.html Sukin: Well, we are in the sensual realm and this is because of craving. Craving brought us here and craving is what drives us to carry on into the future. Seeing harm in craving in this realm would most easily be with reference to sense contacts. Any instance of such an understanding would be ‘going against the flow’. However the Buddha’s teachings does not stop there, he taught to see Dukkha in *all* conditioned existence and this can occur only with the arising of panna, which is the Middle Way. I think we should take care not to project the worldling’s conception of “effort” when reading such Suttas which is what you seem to often do. ============== Alex: "When anyone has developed & pursued mindfulness immersed in the body [see the entire sutta], then whichever of the six higher knowledges he turns his mind to know & realize, he can witness them for himself whenever there is an opening. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.119.than.html Sukin: Mindfulness of the body is one of the four Satipatthanas. Isn’t this what A. Sujin is encouraging all the time? Does she not say that it is only the practice of satipatthana which will lead to finally becoming enlightened? Am I missing something? Must go and pack my bags now. Metta, Sukin #88552 From: Ajahn Jose Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Fw: Re: monk who took his own life ajahnjose Dear Herman, Thank you very much for your email and support. Metta. Ajahn Jose signature Venerable Yanatharo, Ajahn Jose --- On Thu, 7/31/08, Herman Hofman wrote: <...> I am sorry to hear that your health is not improving. I had become aware of your situation from some news articles. It is good that you discuss your intentions with your friends. I hope you discuss them with your children as well. <....> #88553 From: Ajahn Jose Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ajahn Jose/pannabahulo ajahnjose Dear Connie, Thank you very much. I have found so many nice people lately that I want to be here for a long time and enjoy all of you. I will endure as much as possible, with morfine, Panadeine forthe, Endone and something I hate but it helps. Marijuana. Metta. Ajahn Jose signature Venerable Yanatharo, Ajahn Jose #88554 From: Rendal Mercer Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:34 pm Subject: Message from Ren renmercer Hello All, All dhamma, all dharma, all whole truth is the dhamma, is the truth. A Buddha is saying that attaching to even your own understanding is going to keep you in the never-ending wheel of birth, life, ilness, accident, old age and death and again, re-birth. The cycle is birth itself, is brahma, the creation. This is the cycle of what is called GOD. To become all caught up in understanding all the jargon and terminology used to feel close to such understandings is like seeing the finger pointing but not seeing the moon being pointed at. Sit, note what you are watching, seeing or paying attention to. Keep practising this technique, this is the only way, all ways' lead back to this way, this style, this path, this technique. Just go on noting what you see. "I am watching the trees, I am watching a street car, I am watching the rver, I am watching how I am riding my bike in heavy urban downtown street traffic. Watching because that's the way you train your mind. Just watch and you will be what is called buddha. Nothing special achievement, you can do it too if you just let go of your identification and belonging, basically your selfcherishing attitude is what stops you or anyone for that matter. Good fortune to you all, Ren #88555 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jul 30, 2008 11:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Each presently arisen state egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/7/29 jonoabb : > Hi Herman > > >> What is missing, and that is what I was pointing out in my post, are >> the following possibilities: >> >> Understanding of many dhammas in one moment >> Understanding of many dhammas in many moments > > I think the 2 possibilities I mention just above cover all the > possibilities allowed for in the teachings. > >> What I am saying is that a pattern consists of many dhammas over > time >> and/or space, and that you cannot just define patterns away. > > I'm still not sure what you have in mind by "pattern". So an example > or two would sure help the discussion. > The word "pattern" refers to any repeated sequence of events or objects. It is a well-known English word, and that is how I use, and no doubt you have often used it in that way as well. An example of a pattern would be the dissatisfaction that invariably follows when anyone who has not been a disciple of A Sujin tries to have a discussion with you :-) Cheers Herman #88556 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/7/31 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman, > > You've answered my question and I'm grateful for that. If you don't > want to see the void (anatta) I won't force you to. Your proposition that there are only dhammas denies DO, and whatever is written in the Patthana. That you deny the reality of conditionality is not a good reason to make out that it is I who doesn't want to see something. I would sooner think that, given that the Dhamma is all about conditionality, that you should consider broadening statements of your position into something like "there are only dhammas and conditions". Only a suggestion, of course. >> >> If there are only dhammas according to your Dhamma, what do you >> suppose the Pathana is harping on about? >> >> Cheers >> >> Herman >> PS A straight answer would be appreciated :-) >> > First, I would need a straight question. :-) > My straight question stands, still unanswered :-) Cheers Herman #88557 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. nilovg Dear Andrew, Op 26-jul-2008, om 1:10 heeft Andrew het volgende geschreven: > To me, "daily life" connotes the > conventional world of beings and doings - and the conventional > timeframe. > I do not feel that the ultimate teachings have, as one of their > purposes, the debunking of conventional truth. Some DSG members, it > seems to me, have set out to wage a war of ultimate reality versus > conventional reality. I am not in the least convinced that this is a > necessary or fruitful exercise. It may even be harmful. To begin > with, it drops "an act of dana" down into a void of meaninglessness. ------- N: During our trip I thought of your mail and discussed it with Lodewijk. We appreciate you and we were concerned about your leaving, talking about it: what can we do for Andrew. Sometimes a break is good and after that we will be very glad if you return. Lodewijk also thinks that we need both the suttanta method, conventional truth, and the Abhidhamma method, ultimate truth and that there is no contradiction. But I think that you agree with that. Lodewijk said that we need the Abhidhamma in order to understand our clinging to conventional truth. We were at a hotel at the river Meuse, and during a thunderstorm I read to Lodewijk from my Pilgrimage to Sri Lanka. At the following passage Lodewijk exclaimed: that is good for Andrew. I quote: An act of dana is very fruitful and even more fruitful when there is understanding of the different cittas that change very rapidly. It is important not just to understand the word anatta, but realize more deeply its meaning in being aware of nama and rupa. We come to understand that life truly is one moment of experiencing an object, and then gone immediately. This helps us not to be misled by the idea that a lasting self experiences a lasting world. When performing dana we may cling to an idea of "I am so good" or "I am better than others", and without the Abhidhamma we would be ignorant of the many different moments kusala and akusala. With the understanding of paramattha dhammas and awareness of them, kusala can be purer. Quote from my Conditions: < Concepts such as a person or a car are real in conventional sense, they are not real in the ultimate sense. If we only pay attention to concepts we tend to cling more and more to them. We may consider them the goal of our life. Time and again we are absorbed in our thoughts about people and things we perceive and we do not pay attention to the cittas which think at such moments, thus, we are ignorant about what is really going on. We may not realize that there is seeing- consciousness which experiences only what appears through the eyesense, visible object, and that there are other types of cittas which pay attention to shape and form and cling to concepts, ideas of persons and things which seem to last. We should not try to avoid thinking of concepts, they belong to daily life. We could not perform our tasks without thinking of concepts. However, when right understanding is being developed one comes to know that there is not a “self” who sees, recognizes, likes or dislikes. These are different moments of cittas which change all the time. One will come to know when the object of citta is visible object and when a concept. A concept does not have a characteristic which can be directly experienced. When we think of a person, we think of a “whole” which seems to last, but what we take for a person consists of many different elements which arise and fall away. Hardness may appear when we touch what we call a person. Hardness is an ultimate reality with its own unchangeable characteristic. Hardness is always hardness, it can be directly experienced. We can denote it with different names, but its characteristic remains the same. We cannot avoid thinking of “people”, that would be unnatural, but we should know that at some moments an ultimate reality such as hardness is experienced, and at other moments we think of a concept. The thinking itself is an ultimate reality with its own characteristic, and it can be known as it is: a conditioned reality which is not self. The arahat thinks about concepts but he does not cling, he thinks with kiriyacitta.> It is natureal to think of concepts, and as Scott also said, thinking is done with kusala citta or akusala citta. More understanding of different cittas helps us in our social life. It does not prevent us from being fully engaged in our social life. Hoping to meet you again, and meanwhile, have a good rest. Nina. #88558 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:48 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 2, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, Síla, morality, is another way of kusala the Buddha taught. Abstaining from ill deeds through body, speech and mind is kusala síla. Paying respect to those who deserve respect and helping others are included in síla as well. Especially during the sessions in Anurådhapura people asked many questions concerning the practice of síla. Someone who had a military profession asked whether it is akusala to follow up the order to kill. Khun Sujin asked him, “Did you want to kill, or did you have to kill?” There is a difference here. Killing is akusala kamma, an unwholesome deed, but there are many degrees of akusala kamma. When one wishes wholeheartedly to kill, the degree of akusala is higher than when one follows up orders. Those who have not attained enlightenment should not believe that they will never neglect the five precepts. The tendencies to all kinds of akusala are latent in us and when there is an opprtunity we may commit akusala kamma. Someone may for a long time not be in a situation that he would kill, but when he is in very difficult circumstances, does he know for sure that he will not kill? One may, for instance, kill insects because guests are coming to one’s house. A police officer asked whether he could do his duties with kusala citta. Khun Sujin said that in his profession there are many opportunities for helping: helping to keep order, helping people who are in trouble. A judge asked whether one commits akusala kamma when one has to condemn someone to death. There is the law one has to follow. While someone signs the verdict there may not be akusala kamma, but he is likely to have akusala citta at such a moment. One afternoon the judge and his family had come to meet Phra Dhammadhaara while we were sitting under a tree in the area of the “Mahå Vihara”, the Great Monastery, which is between the “Ruwanvelisåya”, the Great Stupa, and the Budhi Tree. We found this place where the dhamma was discussed in olden times very suitable for a conversation about the dhamma. Phra Dhammadhara spoke about the danger of ambitions in life. They may cause the arising of many akusala cittas and even akusala kamma, such as telling a lie in order to attain one’s goal. But the receiving of pleasant objects such as honour and esteem are the result of kusala kamma; they can never be the result of akusala kamma. Without right understanding we do not know when there is kusala citta and when akusala citta, and we do not know how to develop kusala. Thus we are enslaved to our many defilements. The judge gave some money to a porr woman who came around to our group. Khun Sujin said:”This moment of giving is condiitoned. If there were no condiitons for giving there could not be any giving.” It is useful to be reminded that there is no “self” who gives, that there is no person in the giving. At the moment of generosity there is only a citta that arises because of conditions. If there had not been giving in the past there could not be giving today. The citta that is generous arises and then falls away, it does not stay. However, that moment of generosity conditions generosity again, later on. Since each citta conditions the succeeding one, good and bad tendencies can be carried on from moment to moment, from life to life. ****** Nina. #88559 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 2:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. egberdina Hi Nina, 2008/7/31 Nina van Gorkom : > Dear Andrew, > Op 26-jul-2008, om 1:10 heeft Andrew het volgende geschreven: > > ------- > N: During our trip I thought of your mail and discussed it with > Lodewijk. We appreciate you and we were concerned about your leaving, > talking about it: what can we do for Andrew. The explicit assumption in your post is that you have the answers. Perhaps you could consider it differently, that you can do nothing for Andrew, but that Andrew could do a lot for you?? That would involve actually taking in what he says, and trying to understand it, and seeing whether it accords with the way things are, rather than dispensing rote recitations at the first sign of being challenged. Cheers Herman #88560 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:43 am Subject: Dhammas and Conditions (Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2.) upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 7/31/2008 3:08:27 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi KenH, 2008/7/31 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman, > > You've answered my question and I'm grateful for that. If you don't > want to see the void (anatta) I won't force you to. Your proposition that there are only dhammas denies DO, and whatever is written in the Patthana. That you deny the reality of conditionality is not a good reason to make out that it is I who doesn't want to see something. I would sooner think that, given that the Dhamma is all about conditionality, that you should consider broadening statements of your position into something like "there are only dhammas and conditions". Only a suggestion, of course. >> >> If there are only dhammas according to your Dhamma, what do you >> suppose the Pathana is harping on about? >> >> Cheers >> >> Herman >> PS A straight answer would be appreciated :-) >> > First, I would need a straight question. :-) > My straight question stands, still unanswered :-) Cheers Herman ================================== Conditionality is indeed the backbone of the Dhamma. But conditions, per se, are themselves just dhammas viewed in their role as engendering or being co-dependent with the arising of other dhammas, and do not form a separate category of phenomena. So, it isn't wrong to say that there are only dhammas. The thing that is important to see, I believe, is that dhammas aren't separate and self-existent, but are "phenomena in relation" and are aspects of a complex, integrated, relational net of conditions, each nothing in and of itself. Reality, as far as I'm concerned, is neither one nor many nor both nor neither, but is just "such," and is merely able to be pointed to, being beyond capture, by concept and language. With metta, Howard /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none — such a seeker gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta) #88561 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma, Logic, Anatta egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/7/26 jonoabb : > Hi Herman > >> It all depends on what self one assumes. > > Your reference here to the assumption of different selves is a new > one to me. I think you'll have to elaborate on it if I'm to respond > meaningfully. > If I am not mistaken, when you refer to "the teachings" you mean to include teachings about: a)pancadvarika citta vithi b)manodvarika citta vithi c)appana citta vithi d)nirodha samapatti And also: a)kama loka b)rupa loka c)arupa loka Until you claim otherwise, I will assume that neither A Sujin, Nina, you or Sarah, or anyone else who is a disciple of A Sujin, are a saint, or a non-returner, or have attained mastery of the jhanas of the formless planes, or have attained mastery of the jhanas of the form plane. In other words, I assume that core dsg members do nothing other than think, speak and form judgments about nibbana, jhanas and the sensed world from the vantage point of a very large, juicy, obese self. >> I always love the way you assume your myopic understanding to be > "the >> teachings". But as I said above, the present reality depends on what >> self one assumes. With the assuming of a gross self, travelling to >> Australia, going to work, eating, drinking and being merry are the >> order of the day. In the "lower" jhanas, the subtle self does not >> travel to Australia, but is variously the qualities of bliss, >> equanimity etc . In the higher jhanas, the immaterial self does not >> travel to Australia, is not blissful or equanimous, but approaches > as >> close as is possible to nothingness. Still, there is the assumption > of >> a self. > > I'd be interested to know where I can read more about these different > kinds of "self" and their relationship to the jhanas. > You will find, if you care to look, abundant references to jhanas in all the three baskets. If you care to look, these jhanas are recommended by the Buddha every turn of the way. That is not to say that they ARE the end, it only means that they are the means to the end. It is still a self, but only a thinner, leaner self that can actually get there. >> Let me reaffirm, the present reality is dependent on which self is > assumed. > > Still trying to get my head around this one. > If a fat self shares their intellectual understanding of leanness, should anyone take note? Cheers Herman #88562 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma, Logic, Anatta egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/7/28 jonoabb : > Hi Herman > >> >> The universals of the suttas are limited to anicca, dukkha and > anatta, >> and liberating insight consists of an understanding that whatever >> arises is anicca, dukkha and anatta. > > I think you'll find that mention in the suttas of the 3 > characteristics is usually, if not invariably, tied to dhammas in > general or to a particular dhamma or set of dhammas. > > So the "whatever arises" in your statement above needs to be defined > and not left at large. > Do you think the sabbe as in "sabbe sankhara anicca, sabbe sankhara dukkha, sabbe dhamma anatta" is imprecise? >> As BB points out in his intro to CMA: >> >> The phrase in the Dhammasangani, "or whatever other (unmentioned) >> conditionally arisen immaterial phenomena there are on that > occasion," >> apparently envisages an open-ended universe of mental factors, which >> the Commentaries delimit by specifying the "or-whatever states" >> (yevapanaka dhamma). > > The view that it is an "open-ended universe of mental factors" that > is envisaged by the passage from the Dhammasangani is BB's own and > not supported by any of the ancient texts, as far as I know. It is > an inference he draws, but not the only inference open on the wording. > I would think that reducing "all" to "all members of only this limited and fixed set that I have drawn up" would be the fearful act of a self unable to relinquish the idea of control. Cheers Herman #88563 From: "connie" Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 9:29 am Subject: Re: Ajahn Jose/pannabahulo nichiconn Venerable Yanatharo, Just reading before I go to work: BB SN p.569 "But, Saariputta, if they were to ask you: 'Friend Saariputta, how have you known, how have you seen, that delight in feelings no longer remains present in you?' - being asked thus, how would you answer?" "If they were to ask me this, venerable sir, I would answer thus: 'Friends, there are these three feelings. What three? Pleasant feeling, painful feeling, neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. These three feelings, friends, are impermanent; whatever is impermanent is suffering. When this was understood, delight in feelings no longer remained present in me.' Being asked thus, venerable sir, I would answer in such a way." "Good, good, Saariputta! This is another method of explaining in brief that same point: 'Whatever is felt is included within suffering.' But, Saariputta, if they were to ask you: 'Friend Saariputta, through what kind of deliverance have you declared final knowledge thus: "I understand: Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being"?' - being asked thus, how would you answer?" "If they were to ask me this, venerable sir, I would answer thus: 'Friends, through an internal deliverance, through the destruction of all clinging, I dwell mindfully in such a way that the taints do not flow within me and I do not despise myself.' Being asked thus, venerable sir, I would answer in such a way." "Good, good, Saariputta! This is another method of explaining in brief that same point: 'I have no perplexity in regard to the taints spoken of by the Ascetic; I do not doubt that they have been abandoned by me.'" peace, connie #88564 From: "pannabahulo" Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 1:23 pm Subject: confessions of a bhikkhu pannabahulo Dear Dhamma friends, As many of you know already, I gave up posting on this website some time ago. My reasons for that decision were as follows: · Whenever I made a posting I came to be able to easily predict what the response would be. There would be a very narrow, ridged viewpoint which would repeatedly show itself when almost any question was asked or any differing point of view offered. In a word, or phrase, 'Dogmatism rules OK!' Whatever happened to the Kalama Sutta? · The website was so often a battle field for long established personality clashes which guised themselves under the appearance of Dhamma discussions. · I also felt that whatever I said, tried to express or attempted to bounce around some unreconciled conflicts in my own thinking and understanding hoping for discussion and feedback - resulted in my being lectured at, and given again, the party line. · Finally, because I am a bhikkhu, I would be told what a monk should think; what it was appropriate for a monk to say; and how shocked, surprised, and let down my critics felt as I am a representative of the Buddha's Sangha and so cannot speak about what I perceive as truth. Today I looked at this website for the first time in quite a while. Yesterday, Sarah asked me to post a copy of a letter I had sent to Ajahn Jose and his subsequent reply. I learnt that many people were concerned about him and so thought doing that might put people somewhat more at ease. I typed my name in the 'Search box' and my heart immediately became heavy once more. I found a letter beginning with this: " 'Willingly, let only my skin, sinews, and bones remain, and let the flesh and blood dry up in my body, but I will not relax my energy so long as I have not attained what can be attained by manly strength, by manly energy, by manly exertion.' "Bhikkhus, the lazy person dwells in suffering, soiled by evil unwholesome states, and great is the personal good that he neglects....... And ending thus: "Considering your own good, bhikkhus, it is enough to strive for the goal with diligence; considering the good of others, it is enough to strive for the goal with diligence; considering the good of both, it is enough to strive for the goal with diligence." In other words, nothing has changed in the interim period. Once again a very sick monk is being told what he should/ ought/ must do. Oh, how easy it is to come up with quotes like that. But is the writer living the homeless life? Is the writer riddled with cancer and in excruciating pain? Does the writer also follow the admonitions given? Is the writer ready to let the "flesh and blood dry up in (their) body"? I suspect not. Why not offer some loving kindness to one who is suffering so much? Why not make use of a quote that is positively inspiring and hopeful? "Let him live in love. Let his work be well done. Then in a fullness of joy he will see the end of suffering." (Dhammapada. ' The Monk' verse 376). Over the past few months I have been reflecting on the kind of Theravada position which seems to permeate - Thailand and Burma. It is a miserable space where lay-people, monks and nuns walk around with long faces and indulge in sorrow and suffering. Unlike the Buddha, who spent his life teaching people how to come out of suffering, somehow they've missed the point. How can the Dhamma spread if that is the advertisement? Who would willingly tread a joyless path? The Dhamma is about the end of suffering. It is not about how best to increase suffering. It is not about austerity practices and self flagellation. The idea that there is only one correct method or approach to real happiness is completely inconsistent with the Buddha's final words that we should strive with diligence to work out our own salvation for ourselves. The Ven Rahula wrote ('What the Buddha taught'): "The Buddha was not a computing machine giving answers to whatever questions were put to him by anyone at all, without any consideration. He was a practical teacher, full of compassion and wisdom. He did not answer questions to show his knowledge and intelligence, but to help the questioner on the way to realisation. He always spoke to people bearing in mind their standard of development, their tendencies, their mental make up, their character, their capacity to understand a particular question." (p 63) In short, different things work for different people. I believe that the Theravada school has lost it's heart base - if it ever had one. I blame this on the emphasis placed on two texts which - I am sure - were not the direct teachings of the Buddha. These are the 'Abhidhamma Pitika' and the "Vishuddhi Magga." Both of these are cold, clinical, analytical works - completely out of step with the language of the Suttas. Loving kindness, compassion and sympathetic joy are replaced by dry, heartless analytical lists and pseudo scientific explanations. Sri Lanka is a very long way from the Ganges Basin where the Buddha spent 45 years teaching and helping everyone he could. How many hundred years passed before the Dhamma finally reached Sri Lanka? How much had been changed by the 'Chinese Whispers' phenomenon? What exactly were the sources that the Ven Buddhagosa worked from? What was his own personal agenda? How well did he really understand Sinhalese? The Buddha who reached out to help a mass murderer, a psychotic woman and countless others living in their personal hells - is replaced by an endless set of lists, impersonal classifications and very thick book that reads like a voice without a heart. Ajahn Jose has suffered so much already; he doesn't need talk about his flesh and blood drying up and his failure to live out his life like that. He needs TLC (Tender loving care; he needs to know that he has friends who sincerely wish to support him as best they can. My friend James - who no longer posts on this site - added this in an e-mail yesterday: "BTW, I read an e-mail mass circulated that he didn't really sell marijuana, that he was framed by some prostitutes. Hmmm...Very seedy indeed. I hope that things work out for him and that he finds peace in his final moments." I also believe that is a real possibility. From my understanding Ajahn Jose is financially secure. He doesn't need to make money. I find it difficult to imagine him selling a small amount of cannabis to make $10 which he doesn't need. (I hope that James will forgive me for using that part of his personal letter to me). Now I need to give a quick explanation of why I say that the Theravada school, in general, has lost its heart base. The one. two or three individuals I have met who have clearly made real progress on the path to enlightenment - one or two perhaps already home and dry - share one thing in common; they are happy people. They have a spontaneous sense of humour and a very positive approach to all that they do. They are also full of loving kindness; respect people's differences; and understand other's strengths and weaknesses. They are also very humble. I recently read an interview by the Ven Bhikkhu Bodhi - a monk of 30+ years standing and the best known, and most learn-ed, Western Bhikkhu in the world. I quote: "Throughout my life as a monk I have made extensive use of these four (protective) meditation subjects. I have also done occasional extended retreats at hermitages in Sri Lanka and elsewhere. Regretfully, though, because of my poor merits and the debilitating headache condition, I have not reached any attainments worthy of a true practitioner". This is written with candid honesty and great humility. Let us remember what we really are. Chimpanzees and humans have 99% identical DNA. In this Abhidhamma based version of Theravada animals are viewed as something very low, stupid and merely potential sources of food. Yesterday, a friend of mine sent me this short 'You Tube' video clip to watch. I ask you all to watch this so as to be able to follow my point: http://videos.komando.com/2008/06/26/christian-the-lion/ As if this wasn't enough, I will close with a deeply personal experience which I will share with you all. Some six years ago my wife and I agreed to divorce. We hadn't been really happy; there were some problems; and we were living in a pressurised environment, in Brunei, where I then worked. At that time my wife, although Thai, had no interest in Dhamma, meditation or Buddhist teachings in general. Three months after our divorce - which left me heartbroken and depressed - I returned to Thailand to prepare for my second ordination. (I had spent over 2 years as a monk between 1995 - 97). Shortly after ordaining in 2003 my now ex-wife telephoned me and then came to visit me with her daughter by her previous marriage. On her return to her home village, some 700km away, she ordained as a MaeChee (Nun). However, my preceptor did not want her to stay in the same temple as me as he was concerned that I might be disturbed. She was then sent to a remote temple on the way to Chiang Rai that was without electricity and water had to be drawn from a well. Time passed and then my preceptor allowed her to stay at the same temple. She became my biggest supporter and was always called to interpret when monks or nuns didn't understand my bad Thai. I don't need to explain that nuns get a very hard time in Thai temples. Unlike monks, nuns are often required to work very hard. Two weeks of every month she had to work in the kitchens from 4am until 2pm. She would then meditate, listen to Dhamma talks and study Abhidhamma. In the national Abhidhamma exams she came top in the temple and 7th in the whole of Thailand. But after about two years the site of Thailand's international airport changed and her daughter was forced to buy a house near the new airport. In order to pay the mortgage and equip the house, her daughter began working flat out overtime; 18 hours per day being the norm. Because of this, my ex-wife was compelled to disrobe and take care of her daughter's house. Not long after, some people were about to board a flight to Kuwait when the Airport authorities would not allow them to take their dog aboard. Her daughter took the dog home and my ex-wife started to take care of it. It was a lovely Pekinese type dog with beautiful wide, sad eyes. But it soon became apparent that the dog was very sick. For more than a year my ex-wife was running back and forth to veterinary surgeons, feeding the poor animal medicines and injecting saline into his body each day. I saw that dog two or three times; I loved him because eye contact with him was like heart to heart understanding between two close friends. He died yesterday and my ex-wife is devastated. In a few days she will be on a meditation course. That will really help her. Even now, typing this, I am close to tears. "Ah" I can hear the voices saying. "That's what happens when one gets attached. If only you understood cetasikas and their true nature you would be equations. You feel that way because you don't have right view. Because you are a lazy bhikkhu you ' dwell in suffering, soiled by evil unwholesome states.' I am not a Buddha; nor an arahant. I am doing the best I can and that is all. But today, and also for Ajahn Jose, my heart really opened up. Perhaps for the very first time in my life. This is Dhamma. This is compassion and loving kindness. This is from the heart and not from some cold, analytical wall charts with cittas and cetasikas drawn in rows of coloured circles. This is precisely what the worlds of Buddhagosa and the serious stern faced Theravada lay and monastic followers have rejected. Wisdom comes from the heart and not from books; they have thrown out the baby with the bathwater. Thankfully, a few are still to be found. But a very few. But with a heart now opened, I am really not sure at all about what will happen next. But I have very strong faith in the real Dhamma. The Dhamma which is here and now and beyond the power of words. May the hearts of all beings open wide to the warmth of the rising Sun. With metta, Pannabahulo bhikkhu. #88565 From: Ajahn Jose Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 1:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 2, no 3. ajahnjose Dear Nina, An excellent answer by Ajahn Sujin and you. The point is, DID YOU HAVE THE INTENTION TO KILL? if you dont have the intention then is kusala sila. otherwise is Akusala. Metta. Ajahn Jose signature Venerable Yanatharo, Ajahn Jose --- On Thu, 7/31/08, Nina van Gorkom wrote: From: Nina van Gorkom Subject: [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 2, no 3. To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, July 31, 2008, 5:48 PM Dear friends, S�la, morality, is another way of kusala the Buddha taught. Abstaining from ill deeds through body, speech and mind is kusala s�la. Paying respect to those who deserve respect and helping others are included in s�la as well. Especially during the sessions in Anur�dhapura people asked many questions concerning the practice of s�la. Someone who had a military profession asked whether it is akusala to follow up the order to kill. Khun Sujin asked him, �Did you want to kill, or did you have to kill?� There is a difference here. Killing is akusala kamma, an unwholesome deed, but there are many degrees of akusala kamma. When one wishes wholeheartedly to kill, the degree of akusala is higher than when one follows up orders. Those who have not attained enlightenment should not believe that they will never neglect the five precepts. The tendencies to all kinds of akusala are latent in us and when there is an opprtunity we may commit akusala kamma. Someone may for a long time not be in a situation that he would kill, but when he is in very difficult circumstances, does he know for sure that he will not kill? One may, for instance, kill insects because guests are coming to one�s house. <....> #88567 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 2:41 pm Subject: Re: Ajahn Jose/pannabahulo dhammanusarin Hello Connie, - What do you understand the following Buddha's words to mean? 'Whatever is felt is included within suffering.' Will such understanding alone be sufficient for Stream Entry? Why or why not? Regards, Tep === #88568 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:48 pm Subject: Re: Ajahn Jose/pannabahulo kenhowardau Dear Ajahn Jose, I am so glad you took Connie's message in the spirit it was intended. The Buddha acted impeccably even in the most trying of circumstances. That was because there were conditions for impeccable action. And it is this *conditionality* that we are to understand. That is what the Dhamma is teaching us. My heart goes out to those who think the Dhamma is a set of instructions to be obeyed even when there are no conditions for obeying. To them, the words of the Buddha must sometimes seem insensitive or untimely. Inflicted by wrong view and ignorance of conditionality, those poor people are truly suffering. Best wishes, Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ajahn Jose wrote: > > Dear Connie, Thank you very much. I have found so many nice people lately that I want to be here for a long time and enjoy all of you. I will endure as much as possible, with morfine, Panadeine forthe, Endone and something I hate but it helps. Marijuana. Metta. Ajahn Jose > > signature > Venerable Yanatharo, Ajahn Jose > > --- On Thu, 7/31/08, connie wrote: > > From: connie > Subject: [dsg] Ajahn Jose/pannabahulo > To: "dsg" > Date: Thursday, July 31, 2008, 1:09 PM > > > > > > > Best wishes, Sir. > connie > > SN Bk2, 12. Nidaanasa.myutta, 22(2) The Ten Powers (2) exerpt: > > 'Willingly, let only my skin, sinews, and bones remain, and let the flesh and blood dry up in my body, but I will not relax my energy so long as I have not attained what can be attained by manly strength, by manly energy, by manly exertion.' > <....> > #88569 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:48 pm Subject: Re: Dhammas and Conditions (Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2.) egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/7/31 : > Hi, Herman - > > ================================== > Conditionality is indeed the backbone of the Dhamma. But conditions, per > se, are themselves just dhammas viewed in their role as engendering or being > co-dependent with the arising of other dhammas, and do not form a separate > category of phenomena. So, it isn't wrong to say that there are only dhammas. We understand this differently. Conditions, to me, are relations between dhammas, and are thereby differentiated from dhammas. > The thing that is important to see, I believe, is that dhammas aren't > separate and self-existent, but are "phenomena in relation" and are aspects of > a complex, integrated, relational net of conditions, each nothing in and of > itself. I agree with you. And from my perspective, this means that if one "knows" only dhammas, one fails to know conditionality. The knowing of a dhamma, as something with it's own nature, is a misperception. > Reality, as far as I'm concerned, is neither one nor many nor both nor > neither, but is just "such," and is merely able to be pointed to, being beyond > capture, by concept and language. Agreed. Cheers Herman #88570 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:07 pm Subject: Dhammas and Conditions (Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2.) dhammanusarin Hi Howard & Herman, - Let me jump in and quickly jump out ! >Howard: > The thing that is important to see, > I believe, is that dhammas aren't > separate and self-existent, but are "phenomena in relation" and > are aspects of a complex, integrated, relational net of > conditions, each nothing in and of itself. Herman: I agree with you. And from my perspective, this means that if one "knows" only dhammas, one fails to know conditionality. The knowing of a dhamma, as something with it's own nature, is a misperception. T: The seeing of each dhamma in the All as "separate" is right knowing of one who comprehends everything. SN 35.80: "There is the case, monk, where a monk has heard, 'All things are unworthy of attachment.' Having heard that all things are unworthy of attachment, he directly knows every thing. Directly knowing every thing, he comprehends every thing. Comprehending every thing, he sees all themes as something separate. ... And whatever arises in dependence on eye-contact â€" experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither-pleasure-nor-pain â€" that too he sees as something separate. ..." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.080.than.html#n-3 What do you think "separate" here means? Tep === #88571 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Authenticity egberdina Hi Alex, 2008/7/30 Alex : > Hi Sarah, Herman and all, > > > Even during Buddha's life there were schisms (ex the one done by > Devadatta) and rogue monks such as Arittha & Sati. > > Some monks could have been gravely mistaken in interpreting the > Buddha's teaching, even if they were well wishing and trully trying > to help. Whenever Buddhaghosa is saying "these aren't my > commentaries, they are from ancient elders" - I wonder if it ever > will be possible to know about who exactly were those elders, and did > they say the right thing? > > > ================= > 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). > ========================================= > > Should we take much later commentators (like Buddhaghosa) as "The > Authority" of Buddhism or Buddha himself? > I agree with your reservations about commentators. Here is yet another marvelous feat of changing the meaning of the Buddha's words that is found in the suttas, and again it is Maha Kaccana who knows better than the Buddha. He changes the folllowing from SN4:25 "Having conquered the army of the pleasant and agreeable, Meditating alone I discovered bliss — The attainment of the goal, the peace of the heart. Therefore I do not make friends with people, Nor does intimacy with anyone flourish for me." into Sister, certain recluses and Brahmins concluded that the perception of the sign of earth was the highest. Sister, the highest of the perception of the sign of earth was realized by The Blessed One, for crushing down enjoyment, for defeating the dangers, for defeating refuges and to crush down the knowledge and vision of the path and non-path. On account of, crushing down enjoyment, defeating the dangers and refuges and on account of the knowledge and vision of the path and non-path The Blessed One has come to the highest good and appeasement of the heart. Sister, the highest of the perception of the sign of water, ... re ... of the sign of fire, ... re ... of the sign of air, ... re ... of the sign blue, ... re ... of the sign yellow, ... re ... of the sign red, ... re ... of the sign white, ... re ... of the sign space, ... re ... of the sign consciousness was realized by The Blessed One, for crushing down enjoyment, for defeating the dangers, for defeating refuges and to crush down the knowledge and vision of the path and non-path. On account of, crushing down enjoyment, defeating the dangers and refuges and on account of the knowledge and vision of the path and non-path The Blessed One has come to the highest good and appeasement of the heart. Cheers Herman Date #88572 From: Ajahn Jose Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] confessions of a bhikkhu ajahnjose My Dear Venerable, what a wonderful Email and how true. But I think that the people who try to tell me things do it with goodness and from the heart. I give my solem promiss to you as a Bikkhu that I will not take my life and will endure the pain. The Government in Australia is very good, I am given all the pain killers that I need and if things get worths I will move to a� Palative care run by Catholicas Nuns, very private. I have 22 miilions US dollars in a Bank in Hawaii, which I inherited from my family, I have six sons but they already got their share. I have a Monk here in Australia who will be my executor and all money will go to Buddhist charities. Metta and my blessings to you, my friend. Ajahn Jose signature Venerable Yanatharo, Ajahn Jose --- On Fri, 8/1/08, pannabahulo wrote: From: pannabahulo Subject: [dsg] confessions of a bhikkhu To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, August 1, 2008, 6:23 AM Dear Dhamma friends, As many of you know already, I gave up posting on this website some time ago. My reasons for that decision were as follows: � Whenever I made a posting I came to be able to easily predict what the response would be. There would be a very narrow, ridged viewpoint which would repeatedly show itself when almost any question was asked or any differing point of view offered. In a word, or phrase, 'Dogmatism rules OK!' Whatever happened to the Kalama Sutta? <....> #88573 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:05 pm Subject: Re: Dhammas and Conditions (Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2.) upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 7/31/2008 7:49:08 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/7/31 : > Hi, Herman - > > ================================== > Conditionality is indeed the backbone of the Dhamma. But conditions, per > se, are themselves just dhammas viewed in their role as engendering or being > co-dependent with the arising of other dhammas, and do not form a separate > category of phenomena. So, it isn't wrong to say that there are only dhammas. We understand this differently. Conditions, to me, are relations between dhammas, and are thereby differentiated from dhammas. > The thing that is important to see, I believe, is that dhammas aren't > separate and self-existent, but are "phenomena in relation" and are aspects of > a complex, integrated, relational net of conditions, each nothing in and of > itself. I agree with you. And from my perspective, this means that if one "knows" only dhammas, one fails to know conditionality. The knowing of a dhamma, as something with it's own nature, is a misperception. > Reality, as far as I'm concerned, is neither one nor many nor both nor > neither, but is just "such," and is merely able to be pointed to, being beyond > capture, by concept and language. Agreed. Cheers Herman =================================== We're differing only in terminology. A dhamma, A, is called a condition for another dhamma, B, in case there is the relationship of conditionality holding between the A and B. What that means is that B arises if and only if all the dhammas in a specific group, G, of dhammas, including A, occur. The dhammas in G are called "the requisite conditions for B". With metta, Howard #88574 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:10 pm Subject: Re: Dhammas and Conditions (Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2.) upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Herman) - In a message dated 7/31/2008 9:07:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, tepsastri@... writes: Hi Howard & Herman, - Let me jump in and quickly jump out ! >Howard: > The thing that is important to see, > I believe, is that dhammas aren't > separate and self-existent, but are "phenomena in relation" and > are aspects of a complex, integrated, relational net of > conditions, each nothing in and of itself. Herman: I agree with you. And from my perspective, this means that if one "knows" only dhammas, one fails to know conditionality. The knowing of a dhamma, as something with it's own nature, is a misperception. T: The seeing of each dhamma in the All as "separate" is right knowing of one who comprehends everything. SN 35.80: "There is the case, monk, where a monk has heard, 'All things are unworthy of attachment.' Having heard that all things are unworthy of attachment, he directly knows every thing. Directly knowing every thing, he comprehends every thing. Comprehending every thing, he sees all themes as something separate. ... And whatever arises in dependence on eye-contact â€" experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither-pleasure-nor-pain â€" that too he sees as something separate. ..." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.080.than.html#n-3 What do you think "separate" here means? ----------------------------------------------- Howard: I have no idea, and I also have no idea of what is meant by 'themes'. I wonder about this translation. -------------------------------------------- Tep ============================ With metta, Howard #88575 From: "nichiconn" Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 9:49 pm Subject: Re: confessions of a bhikkhu nichiconn Venerable sir, > > Why not offer some loving kindness to one who is suffering so much? Why > not make use of a quote that is positively inspiring and hopeful? > > > > "Let him live in love. Let his work be well done. Then in a fullness of > joy he will see the end of suffering." (Dhammapada. ' The Monk' verse > 376). > > yes, that is also "positively inspiring and hopeful" - very much a part of 'best wishes'. > Who would > willingly tread a joyless path? > > or give their life for "even one verse" - knowing all the while, that life ends anyway, with the general rule being that it was, after all, just another painful austerity. to the dying moment, that's all the time we have, and less. i am happy to see you also remembering "the dying words": > we should strive with diligence to work out our own salvation for > ourselves. and here i'd been thinking our relationship had started off rather disagreeably! peace, connie #88576 From: "nichiconn" Date: Thu Jul 31, 2008 11:06 pm Subject: Re: Ajahn Jose/pannabahulo nichiconn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > > Hello Connie, - > > What do you understand the following Buddha's words to mean? > > 'Whatever is felt is included within suffering.' that 'feeling' is a 'separate' thing, as you mention in another thread; that one does well to listen to Saariputta. > > Will such understanding alone be sufficient for Stream Entry? > Why or why not? > first, i think of faith for stream entry. but yes, and beyond. peace, connie #88577 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 1:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ven. Yanatharo, Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka. nilovg Venerable Yanatharo, I really sympathize with your situation and I hope the pain is bearable with the medication you take. I find it very brave that you still read messages on dsg and even react to them. Op 31-jul-2008, om 10:26 heeft Ajahn Jose het volgende geschreven: > An excellent answer by Ajahn Sujin and you. The point is, DID YOU > HAVE THE INTENTION TO KILL? if you dont have the intention then is > kusala sila. otherwise is Akusala. -------- N: Yes, we also read in the Vinaya that if a monk had doubts the Buddha would ask him: did you have the intention to do this deed? I would not say that if there is no intention there is kusala sila, because each situation is very complex, and there are so many akusala cittas of different degrees and kusala cittas arising and falling away. All these cittas arise because of a complexity of conditions that are operating. I think because of the teaching of the Abhidhamma one becomes more careful in judging situations and persons. The different moments of citta change so rapidly. Moreover, nobody can tell of someone else whether his citta is kusala or akusala. If someone kills another being by accident, without any intention we cannot say it is kusala sila. It is not daana, siila which abstains from akusala or bhaavanaa. It may not be of the intensity of akusala kamma patha, but it may be akusala citta in the case of someone who was careless. In the case of a soldier, he may not be a coward, but brave, doing his duty. Again, many different cittas arising in what we call a situation. I admire you that you think so calmly of the end of your life and may you have peace. That is what I wish to you and everybody: a good ending of life that precedes a new beginning that is good. I am thinking of your generosity and many good deeds. You took a lot of trouble traveling to support Western Bhikkhus at their ordination, such as Ven. Dhammanando and many others. Respectfully, Nina. #88578 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 1:48 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 2, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, Abstaining from wrong speech is a form of síla. We understand this in theory, but do we remember it in our daily life, when we are about to say something unpleasant? For example, someone may suggest a plan to us which does not conform to our wishes. Are we impatient and do we say straight away that we do not like his plan, or are we patient and do we abstain from unpleasant speech out of consideration for his feelings? We may know that when we shout there is wrong speech; that is very obvious. But do we realize that there is also wrong speech when we speak with lack of consideration for someone else’s feelings, even though we do not shout? Showing one’s dislike through speech is speech motivated by aversion. How can that be right speech? Even when we do not say anything, but keep quiet with aversion at the moment we do not agree with someone else, it is not kusala citta that abstains form wrong speech. In the suttas we read about gentle speech. For example, in the “Lesser Simile of the Elephant’s Footprint”, the sutta Mahinda preached to King Devanampiya Tissa, we read about gentle speech: “... Abandoning harsh speech, he is one who abstains from harsh speech. Whatever speech is gentle, pleasing to the ear, affectionate, goiing to the heart, urbane, pleasant to manyfolk, agreeable to the manyfolk- he comes to be one who utters speech like this...” Phra Dhammadhara told me about an event which I find an excellent reminder to be patient in one’s speech. One night the bhikkhus had no microphone during the Dhamma session and whenever they wanted to speak they had to wait for the microphone being handed over to them. They all found this waiting very helpful. If one speaks straight away one may speak with akusala citta when one does not agree with someone e;se’s words. If one has to wait one has time to collect oneself. How difficult it is to always speak with kusala citta. Even when the topic is dhamma there can be attachment to one’s own words and ideas, there can be pride in one’s knowledge, or there can be aversion towards what others say. When akusala citta motivates our speech, we cannot be of great help to others, even when the topic is Dhamma. Thus we see that right understanding of our different cittas is most helpful for the development of kusala. ****** Nina. #88579 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 2:30 am Subject: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati jonoabb Hi Howard Thanks for your comments. > Howard: > Ah, so you don't *want* to be awakened and freed of suffering! Gosh, I > do. ;-) ... The question we are discussing is whether that wanting/desire is kusala or akusala. If it's akusala then it's one of the 'hindrances', and not a condition for the development of the path. > ... BTW, I recall from my reading that young Prince Gotama also wanted > that - very much, in fact, even to the extent of giving up a "rather pleasant" > lifestyle! Now, that was an atta-oriented motivation, Jon. Lucky for us he had > it! I would not regard the Bodhisatta's renunciation in his final lifetime as an "atta-oriented motivation". But in any event the real question is as to the development of insight by the Buddha that came later (prior to his enlightenment). > The mental factors being referred to when speaking of a "sense of > self" (i.e., wrong view and conceit) are factors that arise only with > akusala consciousness, and so are not present at moments of > consciousness that are kusala or vipaka. > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > So what? > --------------------------------------------------- So the perception that all aspects of our functioning are permeated by sense-of-self is not in fact the case; only certain of the currently arising mind-states (i.e., javana consciousness rooted in lobha) qualify as potential "sense-of-self" mindstates. And as discussed below there can be no assumption that of those moments of javana consciousness rooted in lobha most will be with wrong view (or even with conceit). > Furthermore, those mental factors are not necessarily present with > all akusala consciousness either. For example, the attachment when > tasting pleasant food may well not involve any sense-of-self. > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Really! You're sure about that? > ---------------------------------------------------- I'm certain that wrong view and conceit do not accompany mindstates rooted in dosa, and that mindstates rooted in lobha may or may not be accompanied by wrong view or conceit. The case of enjoying food was mentioned as an example, but as it's not from the texts so I'm not going to pursue it. > Herman's young baby probably has little or no sense-of-self actually > arising. > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I very strongly disagree. No IDEA of self and no active belief in it, > but the craving is most assuredly self-expression. > ---------------------------------------------------- It depends what you mean by "self-expression" here (this is a new term to me, in this discussion). But the contention that there is quite likely no wrong view in the case of the young baby is something that is mentioned in the suttas, if I'm not mistaken. > So, everyone has just as good a chance for movement towards awakening as > anyone else, independent of actions (except for reading & thinking about > Dhamma, of course)! Everyone has accumulated the different kusala qualities, but the degree of each quality, and of their akusala qualities, will of course vary, as will the circumstances into which they ware born. So it cannot be said that everyone has just as good a chance as anyone else. > But we DO begin mired in sense of self. That's the way it goes! Without > bootstrapping, there will be no treading the path. In that regard, please > read AN 4.159. > --------------------------------------------------- Is this the Avarana Sutta quoted at the end of your post? I'm afraid I don't see how it supports the idea that (as I understand you to be saying) a deliberate practice involving sense of self can lead to the arising of awareness and insight. > Let me make myself clear: I'm referring to all the oft repeated, very > conventional activities that the Buddha urged his followers to engage in! What > they consist of, they consist of. > ------------------------------------------------- The Buddha's use of conventional language in his discourses, when speaking to those who were of deemed ready to receive his teaching, should not be mistaken for references to purely conventional activities. Utterances in one part of the suttas need to be read in the light of the rest of the suttas (and indeed the rest of the Tipitaka). > Doing what the Buddha said to do works. It's that simple. We do NOT > start at the goal, but very far from it. Again, please read AN 4.159. > ------------------------------------------------- It has always been agreed that we do not start at the goal, rather very far from it. But there are moments of kusala of different kinds arising in our lives now without the intervention of any kind of "practice". Kusala can and does arise for reasons other than the intention that it should do so. > But you bring up an interesting topic here. Without wanting to get > personal (i.e., not asking you to say anything about your own > "practice" or personal circumstances), what would you say are the > indicators of the correct development of insight as taught by the > Buddha? > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I wouldn't say. > ------------------------------------------------ I suggest it would be a useful topic to discuss some time. Unless the correct yardstick is applied, any perception of one's current practice producing progress on the path will be mistaken. Jon PS Thanks for the sutta quote below. Would you mind saying a few words about how you see it helping in the present discussion. Thanks. > /Suppose there were a river, flowing down from the mountains â€" going far, > its current swift, carrying everything with it â€" and a man would open channels > leading away from it on both sides, so that the current in the middle of the > river would be dispersed, diffused, & dissipated; it wouldn't go far, its > current wouldn't be swift, and it wouldn't carry everything with it. In the same > way, when a seeker has not abandoned these five obstacles, hindrances that > overwhelm awareness and weaken discernment, i.e., sensual desire, ill will, > sloth & torpor, restlessness & anxiety, and sceptical doubt, when s/he is > without strength and too weak in discernment to understand what is for one's own > benefit, to understand what is for the benefit of others, to understand what > is for the benefit of both, then to realize a superior human state, a truly > noble distinction in knowledge & vision: that is impossible/ > > (From the Avarana Sutta, Anguttara Nikaya) #88580 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 2:31 am Subject: Re: kayagatasati jonoabb Hi Tep > T: If you do not think, or believe, that akusala, such as conceit > and a view of self, can deter the arising of an insight, then there > should be nothing wrong with the "sitting, walking, studying or doing > things in a particular way for the purpose of having more insight". > ........................................ The position as I understand it is that right view must arise in order for there to be insight. And the main conditions for right view to arise (apart from existing accumulations of right view, of course) are the hearing of the teachings and reflection on what has been heard and understood. > T: Water as nutriment for plants' growth, as well as concentration > as nutriment for insight development, has to be balanced with other > supporting conditions in order that faster growth can be expected. Well, I don't see it as a matter of "faster growth", but of simply understanding correctly the conditions for growth. > So, How can misunderstanding be avoided? ;-) Misunderstanding cannot be avoided altogether, of course. But with the right conditions being satisfied, there can be more moments of correct understanding. Jon #88581 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 2:32 am Subject: Re: Just studying... jonoabb Hi Alex > > But no-one here is saying that just reading the texts is sufficient. > > You also have said that one needs to consider them. If we want to stick to the words of the sutta, then the factor in question is not *the activity of reading/considering the texts*, but *hearing the true dhamma and reflecting on what has been understood*. > > For a start, it is not the *activity of reading texts* that is > >being referred to, but the *fact of hearing the teachings*, and in > > particular of hearing them explained in a way that is appropriate > >to one's level of understanding. > > The above is no different from method of other traditions/religions. It must be different from other traditions, because it involves *hearing the true dhamma*. Do you not see this as a very material difference? > The proximate cause of "seeing things as they are" isn't considering. > It is samadhi. Hearing the true dhamma is given as one of the 4 factors necessary for the develoment of insight and the attainment of enlightenment. Samadhi is given as the proximate cause for the arising of panna. This refers in my view to the samadhi that accompanies awareness and insight, rather than to the develoment of samatha and jhana. > > Do you not recognise this kind of hearing and considering as part > >of your own development of understanding? > > Yes on sutta/citta maya panna level. Good, but not enough even for > such Giants as Ven. Sariputta and Ven. MahaMoggallana. When Sariputta became enlightened as a stream enterer, was the path consciousness based on jhana (according to the suttas)? Jon #88582 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 2:33 am Subject: Re: Buddha awakened to jhana - SN2.7 jonoabb Hi Alex > Sariputta had to go through 9 Jhanas, so did MahaMoggallana and Buddha > himself. Do you think you need less "water" than them? There is no dispute (and never has been) as to the fact that most of the great disciples (and many other disciples also) attained enlightenment based on jhana. Those disciples have a higher degree of attainment than those who are dry insight attainers. But nowhere in any sutta you have quoted is it said or implied that jhana must be attained before insight can be developed and enlightenment attained. Jon #88583 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 2:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What is a question? jonoabb Hi Alex > Did the Buddha keep abstaining from using personal pronounds, and > names? Such and such, here and there, etc? Check out the beginning of > Anapanasati sutta and many other suttas as well. I agree with what you say here, but I'm afraid I don't see the relevance of it to our discussion. > > Do you have any further comments/sutta quotes on that particular > > point? > > I do. MN64 is an example where Jhana is used as a basis of insight. It is not in dispute that there are many suttas describing the attainment of enlightenment where that attainment is based on jhana. But those sutta show that enlightenment *may* be proceeded by jhana, not that it *must*. > Please cut out the "path moment only" interpretation as it is clearly > inconsistent with the suttas. What do you mean by the "path moment only" interpretation? And would you mind indicating in what sense you see this interpretation as being inconsistent with the suttas. Thanks. > > The idea that Sariputta "needed all 9 meditation levels to become > an Arahant" does not accord with the traditional view that he spent > many lifetimes developing the perfections necessary to fulfil the vow > made to become a chief disciple. > > > 1st) Give me a sutta in the 4 Nikayas that says that. Please do. :) No sutta reference to hand (and not sure if there is one or not). That's why I described it as a "traditional view". > 2nd) If HE, with such huge accumulations HAD to go through 9 > meditation levels in order to realize Arhatship, then what about us, > who have even more work to do? Your argument here assumes that the level of attainment would be the same in both cases (yours and mine vs. Ven. Sariputta's). However, this is not so. While all arahants attain a level of insight sufficient to eradicate the remaining accumulated akusala tendencies, there are vast differences otherwise in the levels of their attainments. Jon #88584 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 2:36 am Subject: Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. jonoabb Hi KenH > I think Andrew had a third definition of santati, which he thought > was contained somewhere in the texts. It related to a kind of bridge > that linked the world of persisting things with the world of > momentary dhammas. It made both worlds available (or efficacious) > for Dhamma practice. Yes, I remember the reference to a bridge (which Phil agreed with, I think), but must confess I wasn't able to follow the point being made at the time. > When someone like me is heard ranting about no-hippopotamuses alarm > bells might well go off. We can't blame Andrew for that. Let's hope > he returns when he feels so inclined, and tries to talk some sense > into me. :-) He may think he's tried that already ;-)) ;-)) Jon #88585 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 2:38 am Subject: Of Mice and Men (Re: [dsg] A question on contiguity) jonoabb Hi Herman > And what consciousness knows this consciousness accompanied by panna? > Don't you see, Jon, the infinite regress that these particular texts > rely on? I see no "infinite regression" in the scenario of one moment of consciousness being the object of a succeeding moment of consciousness. Any perceived "infinite regression" would only apply as regards the claimed *knowing* of such and of all subsequent knowings. But that is not being suggested. (Even then, I see no *regression* but a simple *continuity*). > Unless there is a consciousness that takes itself as object, > the pursuit of consciousness of any kind as a reality to be known is a > wild goose chase. Sorry, but you haven't made this case at all ;-)). Jon #88586 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 2:39 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. jonoabb Hi Herman > If we are unable to perceive rise and fall of dhammas, as you say > here, what makes you believe it is otherwise? Only if rise and fall has been directly experienced by developed panna can it be confirmed. Until then it is just another of the many things found in the teachings that remain to be verified. In the meantime, it can be considered whether or not a hypothesis of rise and fall is consistent with experience. > ... If you base your claim > that it is otherwise on the authority of another, did they claim the > ability to perceive the rise and fall of dhammas? And if they did > claim that, did they also claim that it was useful to them in any way? It is not a matter of "usefulness" but of seeing things the way they truly are (and when you think about it what could be more useful than that?). Jon #88587 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 2:41 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Each presently arisen state jonoabb Hi Herman > The word "pattern" refers to any repeated sequence of events or > objects. It is a well-known English word, and that is how I use, and > no doubt you have often used it in that way as well. Yes, I'm familiar with the word, of course. My uncertainty is as to its precise meaning in the context of your statement that "a pattern consists of many dhammas over time". What would be an example of this? > An example of a pattern would be the dissatisfaction that invariably > follows when anyone who has not been a disciple of A Sujin tries to > have a discussion with you :-) ;-)) (but not sure from your wording on whose part there is dissatisfaction ;-)) Jon #88588 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 3:31 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma, Logic, Anatta jonoabb Hi Herman > If I am not mistaken, when you refer to "the teachings" you mean to > include teachings about: > > a)pancadvarika citta vithi > b)manodvarika citta vithi > c)appana citta vithi > d)nirodha samapatti > > And also: > > a)kama loka > b)rupa loka > c)arupa loka > > Until you claim otherwise, I will assume that neither A Sujin, Nina, > you or Sarah, or anyone else who is a disciple of A Sujin, are a > saint, or a non-returner, or have attained mastery of the jhanas of > the formless planes, or have attained mastery of the jhanas of the > form plane. You're welcome to assume that for myself, but I can't speak for the others ;-)) > In other words, I assume that core dsg members do nothing other than > think, speak and form judgments about nibbana, jhanas and the sensed > world from the vantage point of a very large, juicy, obese self. A person who still has the accumulated tendency for wrong view of self ("core dsg member" or not;-)) does not necessarily have wrong view of self constantly or continuously. As regards any consideration of the teachings, moments of correct intellectual understanding will be kusala and hence self-free. > > I'd be interested to know where I can read more about these different > > kinds of "self" and their relationship to the jhanas. > > You will find, if you care to look, abundant references to jhanas in > all the three baskets. If you care to look, these jhanas are > recommended by the Buddha every turn of the way. That is not to say > that they ARE the end, it only means that they are the means to the > end. It is still a self, but only a thinner, leaner self that can > actually get there. Which parts of the three baskets in particular do you have in mind here, in relation to jhana and the "thinner, leaner self"? > >> Let me reaffirm, the present reality is dependent on which self is > > assumed. > > > > Still trying to get my head around this one. > > > > If a fat self shares their intellectual understanding of leanness, > should anyone take note? Fat self/lean self has no relevance as regards intellectual understanding :-)) As mentioned above, intellectual understanding moments are kusala and hence self-free. Jon #88589 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 3:33 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma, Logic, Anatta jonoabb Hi Herman > Do you think the sabbe as in "sabbe sankhara anicca, sabbe sankhara > dukkha, sabbe dhamma anatta" is imprecise? No imprecision in "sabbe". But it's the "sankhara" and "dhamma" part of the expression that I've been alluding to. > I would think that reducing "all" to "all members of only this limited > and fixed set that I have drawn up" would be the fearful act of a self > unable to relinquish the idea of control. The set in question is not drawn up by me, but is the "sankhara" and "dhamma" of your quoted passage. Jon #88590 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 1:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 8/1/2008 5:30:56 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Is this the Avarana Sutta quoted at the end of your post? I'm afraid I don't see how it supports the idea that (as I understand you to be saying) a deliberate practice involving sense of self can lead to the arising of awareness and insight. =============================== No, it is the Bhikkhuni Sutta, found at http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.159.than.html As for the Avarana Sutta, if the abandoning of the hindrances, which is what occurs during jhana and is also supported by the four right efforts, were not something that one can contribute to by intentional actions, I would see no point in the Buddha having taught this. We do have sense of self more than not, and it occurs throughout the performance of all the various activities the Buddha urged to train the mind. I, of course, utterly dismiss that the Buddha did not urge such intentional activities. With metta, Howard /Suppose there were a river, flowing down from the mountains — going far, its current swift, carrying everything with it — and a man would open channels leading away from it on both sides, so that the current in the middle of the river would be dispersed, diffused, & dissipated; it wouldn't go far, its current wouldn't be swift, and it wouldn't carry everything with it. In the same way, when a seeker has not abandoned these five obstacles, hindrances that overwhelm awareness and weaken discernment, i.e., sensual desire, ill will, sloth & torpor, restlessness & anxiety, and sceptical doubt, when s/he is without strength and too weak in discernment to understand what is for one's own benefit, to understand what is for the benefit of others, to understand what is for the benefit of both, then to realize a superior human state, a truly noble distinction in knowledge & vision: that is impossible/ (From the Avarana Sutta) #88591 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 5:34 am Subject: nice posts rjkjp1 In complete disregard for the rules of the forum(avoid "me too" posts ), I just want to say how much I enjoy the series of recent posts by Jon. Succint but very clear (IMO only of course). Robert #88592 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 5:34 am Subject: Re: Dhammas and Conditions (Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2.) egberdina Hi Tep, 2008/8/1 Tep : > Hi Howard & Herman, - > > T: The seeing of each dhamma in the All as "separate" is right > knowing of one who comprehends everything. > > SN 35.80: "There is the case, monk, where a monk has heard, 'All > things are unworthy of attachment.' Having heard that all things are > unworthy of attachment, he directly knows every thing. Directly > knowing every thing, he comprehends every thing. Comprehending every > thing, he sees all themes as something separate. ... And whatever > arises in dependence on eye-contact â€" experienced either as pleasure, > as pain, or as neither-pleasure-nor-pain â€" that too he sees as > something separate. ..." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.080.than.html#n-3 > > What do you think "separate" here means? > I honestly have no clue, Tep. It is not one of Maha Kaccana's suttas, is it ? :-) Cheers Herman #88593 From: mlnease Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 7:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] nice posts m_nease Couldn't agree more! mike rjkjp1 wrote: > > > In complete disregard for the rules of the forum(avoid "me too" posts ), I > just want to say how much I enjoy the series of recent posts by Jon. > Succint but very clear (IMO only of course). > Robert > > #88594 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 8:42 am Subject: Sangiitisutta Corner DN 33 1.9 (8-11) scottduncan2 Dear All, Continuing from #88262: CSCD aapattikusalataa ca aapattivu.t.thaanakusalataa ca. Walshe DN 33.1.9(8) Skill in [knowing] offences and [the procedures for] rehabilitation from them. (aapattikusalataa ca aapattivu.t.thaanakusalataa ca.) Olds [ 2.8 ] Skill in the rules regarding offenses and skill in rehabilitation from offenses RD's [ 2.8 ]Proficiency as to offences and restoration from them. CSCD Samaapattikusalataa ca samaapattivu.t.thaanakusalataa ca. Walshe DN 33.1.9(9) Skill in entering and returning from [jhaana].*1021 (Samaapattikusalataa ca samaapattivu.t.thaanakusalataa ca.) Olds [ 2.9 ] Skill in attaining and skill at emerging from attainment [2.9] RD's [ 2.9 ]Proficiency as to attainments and recovery from them (viz.: as to jhaana). CSCD Dhaatukusalataa ca manasikaarakusalataa ca. Walshe DN 33.1.9(10) Skill in [knowing] the [eighteen] elements *1022 and in paying attention to them. (Dhaatukusalataa ca manasikaarakusalataa ca.) Olds [ 2.10 ] Skill in knowledge of The Elements (dhaatu[ 2.10 ]); and skill in applying the mind to them RD's [ 2.10 ]Proficiency in elements 2.10 and in understanding them. CSCD aayatanakusalataa ca pa.ticcasamuppaadakusalataa ca. Walshe DN 33.1.9(11) Skill in [knowing] the [twelve] sense-spheres and dependent origination. (aayatanakusalataa ca pa.ticcasamuppaadakusalataa ca.) Olds [ 2.11 ] Skill in knowledge of the spheres (aayatana) 2.11 ]); and skill in Downbound Confounded Rebounding Conjuration (pa.ticca samuppada) RDs [ 2.11 ]Proficiency in the (twelve) spheres of sense and in the (twelve factors2.11 of the) causal formula. Sincerely, connie/Scott. #88595 From: "Tep" Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 9:23 am Subject: Dhammas and Conditions (Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2.) dhammanusarin Hi, Herman and Howard, - >SN 35.80 Comprehending every thing, he sees all themes as something separate. ... And whatever arises in dependence on eye-contact ��" experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither-pleasure-nor- pain ��" that too he sees as something separate. ..." In a previous post I asked the question : "What do you think "separate" here means? Herman: I honestly have no clue, Tep. It is not one of Maha Kaccana's suttas, is it ? :-) Howard: I have no idea, and I also have no idea of what is meant by 'themes'. I wonder about this translation. -------------------------------------------- T: It was a Buddha's lecture in Salayatana-samyutta . The translator explains that "separate" is aññato: literally, 'as other.' "The Commentary explains this as 'in another way' or 'differently' from the way ordinary beings view things, but that does not fit with the syntax of the Pali, nor does it really answer the monk's question." Now let's compare the above with the translation at Mettanet.org. Salayatana-samyutta 34. 8. 7. (80) Avijjà 2 Ignorance 2 [snipped] 5. Venerable sir, knowing and seeing what is the dispelling of ignorance and the arising of knowledge to the monk? 6. Here, monk, to the monk knowledge arises that nothing is suitable to settle in. He learns everything. thoroughly and accurately and looks at all signs as foreign. Forms, eye-consciousness, eye-contact and whatever feelings pleasant, unpleasant or neither unpleasant nor pleasant born of eye-contact as foreign Repeat for sounds, scents, tastes, touches and ideas. 7. Monk, knowing and seeing thus ignorance gets dispelled and knowledge arises to the monk. http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/3Samyutta- Nikaya/Samyutta4/34-Salayatana-Samyutta/08-Gilanavaggo-e.html T: So it seems that 'foreign' is a synonym for 'separate' and 'as other'. Most people have a tendency to attach (or identify themselves) to things that are not 'other', i.e. not 'separate' from themselves. So I think the right attitude for dispelling ignorance is to really know & see the 'All' as "not me, not mine, not my self". But it is alright if you do not see the same meaning. Tep === #88596 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 9:40 am Subject: Re: Just studying & Sariputta truth_aerator Dear Jon and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > If we want to stick to the words of the sutta, then the factor in > question is not *the activity of reading/considering the texts*, >but > *hearing the true dhamma and reflecting on what has been >understood*. > > > > For a start, it is not the *activity of reading texts* that is > > >being referred to, but the *fact of hearing the teachings*, and >in > > > particular of hearing them explained in a way that is >appropriate > > >to one's level of understanding. > > > > The above is no different from method of other >traditions/religions. > > It must be different from other traditions, because it involves > *hearing the true dhamma*. Do you not see this as a very material > difference? > A priest may say: "Hear and reflect on the Bible, the true teaching!" > > The proximate cause of "seeing things as they are" isn't > considering. > > It is samadhi. > > Hearing the true dhamma is given as one of the 4 factors necessary > for the develoment of insight and the attainment of enlightenment. True but there are other things involved. > When Sariputta became enlightened as a stream enterer, was the path > consciousness based on jhana (according to the suttas)? > > Jon The opening of Dhamma eye could definately be based on Jhana. But this doesn't mean that prior groundsetting (removal of hindrances) isn't needed. As I understand, he was a wonderer belonging to Skeptic school. He wasn't awefully young and he probably managed to deal with at least first two hindrances quite well. Furthermore it is not unlikely that more events happened at that time that the discource didn't mention. Sariputta and many others had QUICK FACULTIES. In other words, they needed a little bit in order to get awakened. I don't know about you, but mine faculties aren't even close to those two giants (Sariputta & Mogalana). I have lots of hindrances, and so are most of the people now. The arising of Dhamma eye is characterized as "seeing rise & fall". This is one of the nanas. If you can achieve such nana from a single hearing of a discource - GOOD FOR YOU. The "mundane" jhana is very helpful at *suppressing* these defilements so that eye of wisdom could work. Those whose coarse & middling defilements are weak, need less (if any) mundane Jhana for stream entry. Those who have more obscurations, need more cleaning. Of course I believe than neither precepts, nor jhana by themselves can cause insight to arise. What they CAN do is to provide the required clarity of cognition so that eye-of-wisdom (instructed by the Buddha) could see. The truth is happening constantly. It is just clouded by defilements. Precepts & Jhana drive the clouds away. The more clouds, the stronger Precepts & Jhana are required. When one knows what to look for (read the suttas) & manages to drive out the clouds - then enlightment can occur. Best wishes, Alex #88597 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 9:47 am Subject: Re: Buddha awakened to jhana - SN2.7 truth_aerator Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > But nowhere in any sutta you have quoted is it said or implied that > jhana must be attained before insight can be developed and > enlightenment attained. > > Jon The mind must get rid of 5 hindrances for sufficiently long time prior to becoming a stream enterer. If you can do it without Jhana, good for you. Most people have a lot of defilements, strong & quick to arise, which must be restrained & beatened into submission first. Best wishes, Alex #88598 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 6:43 am Subject: Re: Dhammas and Conditions (Re: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2.) upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Herman) - In a message dated 8/1/2008 12:23:58 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, tepsastri@... writes: Hi, Herman and Howard, - >SN 35.80 Comprehending every thing, he sees all themes as something separate. ... And whatever arises in dependence on eye-contact ��" experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither-pleasure-nor- pain ��" that too he sees as something separate. ..." In a previous post I asked the question : "What do you think "separate" here means? Herman: I honestly have no clue, Tep. It is not one of Maha Kaccana's suttas, is it ? :-) Howard: I have no idea, and I also have no idea of what is meant by 'themes'. I wonder about this translation. -------------------------------------------- T: It was a Buddha's lecture in Salayatana-samyutta . The translator explains that "separate" is aññato: literally, 'as other.' "The Commentary explains this as 'in another way' or 'differently' from the way ordinary beings view things, but that does not fit with the syntax of the Pali, nor does it really answer the monk's question." Now let's compare the above with the translation at Mettanet.org. Salayatana-samyutta 34. 8. 7. (80) Avijjà 2 Ignorance 2 [snipped] 5. Venerable sir, knowing and seeing what is the dispelling of ignorance and the arising of knowledge to the monk? 6. Here, monk, to the monk knowledge arises that nothing is suitable to settle in. He learns everything. thoroughly and accurately and looks at all signs as foreign. Forms, eye-consciousness, eye-contact and whatever feelings pleasant, unpleasant or neither unpleasant nor pleasant born of eye-contact as foreign Repeat for sounds, scents, tastes, touches and ideas. 7. Monk, knowing and seeing thus ignorance gets dispelled and knowledge arises to the monk. http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/3Samyutta- Nikaya/Samyutta4/34-Salayatana-Samyutta/08-Gilanavaggo-e.html T: So it seems that 'foreign' is a synonym for 'separate' and 'as other'. Most people have a tendency to attach (or identify themselves) to things that are not 'other', i.e. not 'separate' from themselves. So I think the right attitude for dispelling ignorance is to really know & see the 'All' as "not me, not mine, not my self". But it is alright if you do not see the same meaning. Tep ================================ It is clear now. Very good, Tep! The 'separate' or 'other' or 'foreign' means "not me" and "not mine"; i.e., impersonal. It refers to that aspect of the meaning of 'anatta' that is "other than and unrelated to any (alleged) personal self". With metta, Howard #88599 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 1, 2008 6:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just studying & Sariputta upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Jon) - In a message dated 8/1/2008 12:42:02 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Of course I believe than neither precepts, nor jhana by themselves can cause insight to arise. What they CAN do is to provide the required clarity of cognition so that eye-of-wisdom (instructed by the Buddha) could see. The truth is happening constantly. It is just clouded by defilements. Precepts & Jhana drive the clouds away. The more clouds, the stronger Precepts & Jhana are required. When one knows what to look for (read the suttas) & manages to drive out the clouds - then enlightment can occur. ============================= Well said, IMO, Alex! With metta, Howard