#88800 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 10:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... indriyabala Dear Sarah (Alex, etc.), - I have seen your same comment on "focus" in samatha meditation several times before. > A:> "focusing on the movements of the feet"... When people say that, is there any doubt as why their meditation fails? > .... > S: Focussing on anything, starting with anything will lead to meditation failure. What appears now does so by conditions, not by any intention or wish to have it arise. > .... T: First of all, it is not clear to me what bad meaning you see in 'focussing'. Secondly, I am confused as to why focussing on anything, such as reading a sutta with an intention to understand it, is bad. Thirdly, it is never clear to me why focussing, which to me means paying non-distracted attention on a dhamma ( e.g. while contemplating a feeling or a mind-state), "will lead to failure"? "However, knowing & seeing the eye as it actually is present, knowing & seeing forms... consciousness at the eye... contact at the eye as they actually are present, knowing & seeing whatever arises conditioned through contact at the eye — experienced as pleasure, pain, or neither-pleasure-nor-pain — as it actually is present, one is not infatuated with the eye... forms... consciousness at the eye... contact at the eye... whatever arises conditioned by contact at the eye and is experienced as pleasure, pain, or neither-pleasure- nor-pain. "For him — uninfatuated, unattached, unconfused, remaining focused on their drawbacks — the five clinging-aggregates head toward future diminution. The craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now this & now that — is abandoned by him. His bodily disturbances & mental disturbances are abandoned. His bodily torments & mental torments are abandoned. His bodily distresses & mental distresses are abandoned. He is sensitive both to ease of body & ease of awareness. ... " http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.149.than.html .............. I do not see any failure resulting from "remaining focussed" on the drawbacks of the five aggregates of clinging. Thanks. Tep === #88801 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 10:45 am Subject: Re: Suicide, Antarabhava, can of dead worms truth_aerator Dear Sarah and all. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Alex & all, > ... > A:>He must have been quick, as when the neck is cut (especially if >it is the sleeping artery, his probable aim), the fainting and >blacking out occurs pretty rapidly. > .... > S: You've read the sutta about the speed of the mind and how >nothing compares with the speed of such cittas. I agree that cittas happen lightning quick. However, can Pujjhana go to Arahatship in the matter of few seconds where the cittas are quickly loosing their vividness? Why can't we say that it was a Kamma-Vipaka of an Arahant that brought forth cuti citta? After all, you've said below (regarding Buddha's death) > S: I wouldn't refer to it as a 'passive suicide'. Time for kamma to >bring its result, that's all. Same with Arahat Channa. > A:> If we admit the interrebirth state (it is in the suttas), then >I can concede that he may have had time THERE to become an Arahant. > .... > S: Now you're opening up another can of dead worms. >see 'Intermediate States' in U.P. If we understand that there are >really only cittas, cetasikas and rupas (apart from nibbana), it >will become obvious why there cannot be any 'interrebirth state'. >Cuti cittas have to be followed by patisandhi cittas. > .... Why can't cuti citta is followed by patisandhi citta of an "intermedeate being, gandhabba (call it as you will)" ? > S: As I said above, the (Kamma) vipaka refers to the painful bodily >cittas and feelings. The sense of being overwhelmed and intention to >take life are not vipaka. > .... Take whose life? Is there a distinction between taking someone else's life and "one's own". Best wishes, Alex #88802 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 10:58 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Just studying... How to study Abhidhamma> truth_aerator Hi Sarah, Sukinder, Nina, Jon, Scott, Ken and all --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > >A:I would like to add, that I would LOVE it if Abhidhamma study >alone could bring one to Arahatship. I'd be one of those guys to try >to memorize CMA by heart and could stick the pin through the book >and know on which word the pin ends... > S: If anyone has the idea that "Abhidhamma study alone could bring >one to Arahatship" and that the memorizing of CMA and Abhidhamma >texts is the way to enlightenment, this would be a great example of >how NOT to study the Abhidhamma as given in the snake simile. > > Like with anything else, this can be with right or wrong view, by >natural inclination and habit (usually as a bhikkhu) or by wrongly >approaching the snake. Please explain in your own words and current understanding: How to properly study Abhidhamma for a) Stream Entry b) Post stream Entry Best wishes, Alex #88803 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 7:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma question: What is the difference between these: ? upasaka_howard Hi Alex (and Larry) - In a message dated 8/7/2008 1:00:15 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi Larry and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@... wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > Alex: "a) Citta rooted in Greed & lobha cetasika?" > > Larry: Lobha cetasika is greed, so citta rooted in greed is citta >rooted > in lobha cetasika. Consciousness experiences an object and the >cetasikas > are various ways it does that. For example, taste consciousness >could > experience a cookie greedily. I can understand that citta is bare knowing, while cetasika is "how" (as in with greed or anger) it is known , I still don't fully get it how citta can have a "quality" to it. Why not say that Citta (bare knowing) + Greed Cetasika (quality, lobha, akusala, of knowing). > A: "b) Tranquility of Mind Vs Tranquility of Mental factors? (citta >vs > kaya passadhi) > > L: Cool and calm consciousness vs. cool and calm cetasikas. >Here "cool > and calm" with respect to cetasikas is a sub-category of cetasika >since > "cool and calm" is itself a cetasika. For example, in insight taste >is > experienced with cool and calm and insight itself is cool and calm. > There's no "Gotcha!". "Mental body" refers to the cetasikas as a > coordinated group of functions. > Can someone rephrase the above? Also, what is exact different between Citta & Cetasika? Again, if Citta would be "bare knowing" while cetasika is the "quality of knowing" , then it'd be more clear... But it appears to be redundant to say that Citta rooted in greed, and accompanied with greed cetasika. > A: "c) Ekaggata vs Vitakka > d) Ekaggata Vs Vicara" > > Larry: Vitakka is inquiry and vicara is reasoning. Ekagatta brings > everything together. For example, a nice cup of tea with pleasant > associations might be the object of desire accompanied by some attendant > scheming (vitakka and vicara). Ekaggata brings the feeling, perception, > and choices together with the object of consciousness into one package. > One might speculate that it plays a major role in the formation of a > "compact whole". > > Larry Thank you for this explanation. The follow up question: You say that Ekaggata is "everything together" (vit + vic). What about 2nd sutta Jhana where ekag is present but not the vit&vic? Thank you very much, Anyone else can answer those questions? Best wishes, ===================================== Alex, here's my Abhidhammically untutored perspective on the matter: At any time, there is a bundle of mental operations in action, all associated with some present or recalled or imagined object. That cogniive-affective aggregate is a closely bundled one, with the component operations distinguishable but inseparable. It is called the present "mind state." Of these operations that comprise the mind state, the activity of consciousness is the mere experiential presence of the object (seeing of visual object, hearing of sound, ..., or cognizing of mind-door object). That consciousness (or experiential presence) is the sine qua non for all the others. It is the fundamental "without-which-not" operation. So, the consciousness is called 'citta' in Pali, and the others, which are its "fellow travellers" (or concomitants) are called 'cetasikas', which to me has the ring of "little citta-helper." Sometimes, when one speaks of a "citta," the reference is to the whole bundle, the entire mind state, and not just the mere vi~n~nana. In that case, the English translation for 'citta' would probably better be "mind" than "consciousness." If one speaks of "confused citta," that can be thought of as referring to consciousness accompanied by confusion or, better I think, to "confused mind," meaning a mind state that includes the cetasika of confusion. With metta, Howard #88804 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 11:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma question: What is the difference between these: ? nilovg Hi Alex, Op 7-aug-2008, om 20:18 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > You say that Ekaggata is "everything together" (vit + vic). What > about 2nd sutta Jhana where ekag is present but not the vit&vic? ------- N: as said in my last post to you: highest stage of jhana has as the only factor remaining samaadhi (ekaggata cetasika), it does not need vitakka, vicara, piiti. And it is accompanied by upekkha; pleasant feeling, sukha, has been abandoned. Nina. #88805 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 11:47 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Stream enterer endowed with N8P (which includes Jhana) indriyabala Dear Herman, - You wrote: "It is always good to discuss with you, Tep". Likewise, Herman. It also has been good to discuss the Dhamma here with others, with varying degrees of mutual benefit. What is the main good thing about Dhamma discussion, given that it does not lead to unending series of arguments/debates, is a benefit of hearing another useful reflection of the Teachings. ........... > > > T: So it is up to the public to be wise enough to ignore what is not > true or not useful or promotional item, and adopt only the test- > proven Teachings of Buddhas. > >Herman: I agree with you entirely. And I believe that taken as a whole, dsg discussions would be a healthy source from which a balanced perspective may follow. An open-minded newcomer to this site will soon realise that there is no general agreement on many points, and that it will always remain incumbent on the individual to realise things for themselves. And we can only reinforce that by continuing to question, as opposed to blindly reciting some dogma we may cling to. >Given that, a vote of thanks must go to Jon and Sarah (or the other way around; I'll let them work out who wears the pants :-)) for allowing polite and/or critical discussions (sometimes very critical, but still polite) to take place here. It is a credit to their understanding of the Dhamma, that nothing anybody can say or do, is seen as threatening to the Dhamma. (I won't mention other sites by name here, but believe me, from some of them you would think that the moderators believe the Dhamma depends on them). T: I join you in giving our DSG moderators a vote of thanks. BTW both of them wear pants, Herman. Tep === #88806 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 11:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sila Always Comes First ! Graduated Talk nilovg Hi Alex, Op 7-aug-2008, om 15:33 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Please explain. Here the understanding isn't in terms of fleeting > mind moments, but in macro-world issues. Aging, death, illnesses, > impermanence, danger, punishments, etc. -------- N: Understanding accompanies citta and it falls away together with citta, but there are following moments of understanding. Seeing: with the eye of wisdom. ------ A: A: Here is a talk leading to Stream Entry: > ânupubbî-kathâ: step by step teaching > 1) Generosity (dâna) > 2) Virtue (sîla) > 3) Heaven (sagga) > 4) Danger &Drawback of sensual pleasure (kâmânaṃ âdînava) > 5) Renunciation (nekkhamma) > --------- > N: Exactly. Did you study the perfections, paramis? Can we talk about the 1-5 items (and then 6th one)? ------- N: Here is the link to Kh Sujin's book, if you like. You find all of them in this book. http://www.zolag.co.uk/ you find it under downloads. ---------- A: Samadhi comes second (in order of training) to Sila, and Panna comes after sila & Samadhi. ------- N: They develop together, they are part of the eightfold Path. Sila should not be neglected, from the beginning until the end. Nina. #88807 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 11:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just studying... How to study Abhidhamma> nilovg Hi Alex, Op 7-aug-2008, om 19:58 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Please explain in your own words and current understanding: How to > properly study Abhidhamma for > > a) Stream Entry > b) Post stream Entry ------- N: Always together with mindfulness and understanding of nama and rupa now. If not, the study is in vain. Nina. #88808 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 12:35 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Just studying... How to properly study Abhidhamma> truth_aerator Hi Nina, and all DSG Abhidhammikas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Alex, > Op 7-aug-2008, om 19:58 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > > > Please explain in your own words and current understanding: How to > > properly study Abhidhamma for > > > > a) Stream Entry > > b) Post stream Entry > ------- > N: Always together with mindfulness and understanding of nama and > rupa now. If not, the study is in vain. > Nina. In your own brief & concise words: can you please explain how to study so that mindfulness arises? can you please explain how to study so that understanding of namarupa arises? Thank you Nina very much for all replies to this and other threads. Best wishes, Alex #88809 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 12:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma question: What is the difference between these: ? truth_aerator Hi Nina and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Alex, > Op 6-aug-2008, om 23:16 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > > > Can someone please explain what is the difference between: > > a) Citta rooted in Greed & lobha cetasika? > -------- > N: Citta rooted in Greed, lobha-muulacitta. This is akusala citta > with the roots of lobha and moha, ignorance. These roots are > cetasikas that accompany this akusala citta. Citta and cetasikas > arise together, have the same physical base, experience the same > object and fall away together. While they arise together they each > perform different functions. Citta is the principal in knowing an > object, and lobha has the characteristic of clinging to the object. > -------- Regarding last sentence. Can citta know in a lobha way, while lobha cetasika is the one actually being greedy? Am I understanding this correctly? To me it sounds too hairsplitting & too nitpicking. It'd be much clearer, to me, if citta would be just the ability to know, while cetasika is the relationship of that knowing to the object. > -------- > > > > A: c) Ekaggata vs Vitakka > > d) Ekaggata Vs Vicara > -------- > N: These are different cetasikas. They are also jhaanafactors, > developed in jhaana. As calm grows, the coarser factors are >abandoned > first, such as vitakka and then vicaara. The meditator does not >need them in order to become calm with the meditation subject. >Ekaggata or concentration that is developed is the factor that >remains when the highest stage of jhaana is reached. > Nina. In MN111 4th Jhana has: upekkha adukkhamasukha vedana, cittekaggata, phasso, vedana, sanna, cetana, citta, chando, adhimokkho, viriya, sati, upekkha, manasikaro, http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima- Nikaya/Majjhima3/111-anupada-p.html ~12 factors, not just ekaggata (1 factor) Best wishes, Alex #88810 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 1:03 pm Subject: Re: Sila Always Comes First ! scottduncan2 Dear Tep, Nina, Sarah and Jon - Just to add to the discussion, regarding: "If there is no sense control, o monks, then the basis for virtue is destroyed for one who lacks sense control. If there is no virtue, then the basis for right concentration is destroyed for one who lacks virtue. If there is no concentration, then the basis for knowledge and vision of things as they really are is destroyed for one who lacks concentration." [AN VI, 50] "8. Indriyasanvarasutta.m Control of the mental faculties 005.08. Bhikkhus, without control of the mental faculties, gone wrong in the mental faculties, virtues are destroyed. Without virtues, gone wrong in virtues, right concentration is destroyed. Without right concentration, gone wrong in right concentration, seeing things as they really are, is destroyed. Without seeing things as they really are, gone wrong in seeing things as they really are, knowledge and vision of seeing things as they really are is destroyed. Without knowledge and vision of seeing things as they really are, gone wrong in knowledge and vision of seeing things as they really are, turning away and disenchantment is destroyed. Without turning away and disenchantment, gone wrong in turning away and disenchantment, knowledge and vision of release is destroyed." 50. Indriyasa.mvare bhikkhave asati indriyasa.mvaravipannassa hatuupanisa.m hoti siila.m. Siile asati siilavipannassa hatuupaniso hoti sammaasamaadhi. Sammaasamaadhimhi asati sammaasamaadhivipannassa hatuupanisa.m hoti yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassana.m. Yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassane asati yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassanavipannassa hatuupaniso hoti nibbidaaviraago. Nibbidaaviraage asati nibbidaaviraagavipannassa hatuupanisa.m hoti vimutti~naa.nadassana.m. Scott: I notice, when looking at the Paa.li, that 'sense control' or 'control of the mental faculties' is a function of 'sati'. Mindfulness is said to be 'first' (although I don't agree with a concrete step-by-step, cookbook or recipe reading of these sorts of things) and mindfulness (satindriya.m) - mindfulness as a power - is "...remembering, bearing in mind, the opposite of superficiality and of obliviousness..." (Dhammasa"nga.ni, p. 14). This means to me that unless sati recognizes that the dhammas conditioning siila are in fact kusala - and this can't be done by merely thinking about what one is doing - there is a chance that what one thinks is siila might not be siila. (siilavipannassa). Sincerely, Scott. #88811 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 1:19 pm Subject: Nimitta szmicio Dear Dhamma friends What is nimitta? bye lukas #88812 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 4:16 pm Subject: Re: Sila Always Comes First ! indriyabala Dear Scott (and others) , - Thank you for posting the Pali text for discussion. Now let me focus on the first three lines only. I moved 'bhikkhave' to the front so that the first line can be directly compared with the translation : 005.08. Bhikkhus, (1) without control of the mental faculties, gone wrong in the mental faculties, virtues are destroyed. (2) Without virtues, gone wrong in virtues, right concentration is destroyed. (3) Without right concentration, gone wrong in right concentration, seeing things as they really are, is destroyed. 'Bhikkhave, (1) Indriyasa.mvare asati indriyasa.mvaravipannassa hatuupanisa.m hoti siila.m. (2) Siile asati siilavipannassa hatuupaniso hoti sammaasamaadhi. (3) Sammaasamaadhimhi asati sammaasamaadhivipannassa hatuupanisa.m hoti yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassana.m.' .................. >Scott: I notice, when looking at the Paa.li, that 'sense control' or 'control of the mental faculties' is a function of 'sati'. T: I think I see an error. Asati means 'without mindfulness'. Indriya (six bases) means 'sense faculties', i.e. eye, ear, ..., mind. Indriya here is NOT mental faculties. Samvara means 'restraint' or control in the restraining sense. Nyanatiloka says "restraint of the senses" is 'indriya-samvara'. But the text does not state: 'sense control' or 'control of the mental faculties' is a function of 'sati' (like you did). ................... >Scott: Mindfulness is said to be 'first' (although I don't agree with a concrete step-by-step, cookbook or recipe reading of these sorts of things) and mindfulness (satindriya.m) - mindfulness as a power - is "...remembering, bearing in mind, the opposite of superficiality and of obliviousness..." (Dhammasa"nga.ni, p. 14). T: I think I see another error. Satindriya is 'mindfulness (spiritual) faculty', not mindfulness. Satibala is 'mindfulness as a power'. The following is taken from Nyanatiloka Dictionary. bala = 'powers' Among various groups of powers the following five are most frequently met with in the texts: (1) faith (saddhaa), (2) energy (viriya), (3) mindfulness (sati), (4) concentration (samaadhi), (5) wisdom (paññaa). Their particular aspect, distinguishing them from the corresponding 5 spiritual faculties (indriya), is that they are unshakable by their opposites: (1) the power of faith is unshakable by faithlessness (unbelief); (2) energy, by laziness; (3) mindfulness, by forgetfulness; (4) concentration, by distractedness; (5) wisdom, by ignorance [endquote] ................... >Scott: This means to me that unless sati recognizes that the dhammas conditioning siila are in fact kusala - and this can't be done by merely thinking about what one is doing - there is a chance that what one thinks is siila might not be siila. (siilavipannassa). T: Thank you very much for your opinion. We all have a right to give an opinion, I think. But a good reader should know that your opinion is different from the Buddha's words in the sutta. Tep === #88813 From: "nichiconn" Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 6:04 pm Subject: Re: Sila Always Comes First ! nichiconn Dear Tep, > (2) Without virtues, gone wrong in virtues, right concentration is > destroyed. > (2) Siile asati siilavipannassa hatuupaniso hoti sammaasamaadhi. connie: I'd guess 'asati' here is 'without'... not partaking of. As far as sati, whether it's a power or a faculty, isn't it still sati? peace, connie > > T: I think I see another error. Satindriya is 'mindfulness > (spiritual) faculty', not mindfulness. Satibala is 'mindfulness as a > power'. #88814 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 6:07 pm Subject: Re: Gradual Talk .. Forgive my many questions... indriyabala Hi Sarah and Alex, - My comments are given below. > --- On Wed, 6/8/08, Tep wrote: > >BTW why does "atta-clinging" (attavadupadana?) hang on to the >entry to Arahantship? > .... > S: Attavadupadana, along with all other kinds of wrong view, is >eradicated at the stage of sotapatti-magga. > .... Alex: Sakkayaditthi is removed at stream entry. However even Anagamis have residual conceit and craving (for rupa/arupa lokas) "I am". Avijja is fully removed only at path to arahatship (or the fruit of it). The Buddha & his Arahat disciples didn't feel ANY problem talking with personal prouns: "I, you, me, other wonderers, etc". T: Sarah is right, Alex. All ditthis are abandoned by Sotapanna. And you are right that conceit (mana) is eliminated only by Arahants. .............. > >Tep: How can it be so tough, if our worldling-friends > Sarah and Jon already can see not-self and no-self in all dhammas >at the present moment? > .... > S: !! Friends and people don't see anything. Panna does the tough >work, gradually understanding dhammas as anatta. Alex: So does this panna that typed this, has this understanding? And if it didn't type this, then is another panna hallucinating sitting in front of this PC? T: You have got a valid point, Alex. She talks as if "panna" is an "atta" that is in charge; the dumb mind does not have the capability to know or understand; the eyes do not read; the fingers do not type : the rupa-dhatu types a message. ............. > S: As I was discussing with Phil & Howard, the appreciation that it is only visible object that's seen is the start. Only one reality is ever experienced at a time, hence life really does exist in a moment - this moment! By getting more and more used to the realities of daily life, panna develops. > T: I wonder if you truly know what you are talking about, Sarah, not just imagining things like a novelist. A Pop Quiz ---------- [12 points for each question] Does 'panna' develop and accumulate all kinds of knowledge independent of Sarah or not? Does it know Sarah? Is it outside the body-and-mind called Sarah, or inside her, or in the universe everywhere? How does panna know the Dhamma, while Sarah does not? Is the panna, that is associated with Sarah (or claimed by Sarah), different from that of Alex? Do all cetasika dhammas (including panna) exist regardless of existence or non-existence of beings (humans, deities, etc.)? Why does panna, that understands not-self, stay with Sarah, not with Alex or Tep? How do you know that the panna, that has been accumulating knowledges over the years for you, exists and is not just an imagination that is conditioned by avijja? ................ Forget the pop quiz. But the Patisambhidamagga or the suttas never give me a confusion like this. In Ptsm, I, 365, the bhikkhus develop their minds by adverting to the three higher trainings, one of which is adhi-pa~n~na sikkha. "He trains by adverting to these three kinds of training, he trains by knowing them, by seeing them, by reviewing them, by steadying [cognizance] upon them, by resolving with faith upon them, by exerting energy upon them, by establishing mindfulness upon them, by concentrating cognizance upon them, by understanding them with understanding, by directly knowing what is to be directly known, by fully understanding what is to be fully understood, by abandoning what is to be abandoned, by realizing what is to be realized, he trains by developing what should be developed." [Ptsm, I, 365] You see, no confusion. :-)) Tep === #88815 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 6:33 pm Subject: Re: Sila Always Comes First ! indriyabala Hello Connie, - Thank you for the opportunity to learn better Pali from you. > (2) Without virtues, gone wrong in virtues, right concentration is > destroyed. > (2) Siile asati siilavipannassa hatuupaniso hoti sammaasamaadhi. >connie: I'd guess 'asati' here is 'without'... not partaking of. As far as sati, whether it's a power or a faculty, isn't it still sati? T: My mistake was due to thinking that asati = 'a' + 'sati'. But, how can you tell if 'asati' is not a + sati? Now, for the next question the answer is: although 'sati as a faculty' is a sati, it is more than just 'sati'. Somewhat like a 'luxurious car' is more than just a 'car'. Tep === #88816 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 7:06 pm Subject: Alex Was Wrong About Ekaggataa Re: Concentration with every citta indriyabala Hi Sarah, Suan, Alex, - In the sutta quote below (your message #88776) the sequential development that underlies several other suttas (e.g. Kundaliya Sutta, Avijja Sutta AN 10.61, Sekha-patipada Sutta MN 53, and so on) is clear. Do you agree or not? 3. "Monks, ignorance precedes demerit, followed by lack of shame and remorse. Monks, to the ignorant not seeing one, wrong view arises. To one with wrong view wrong thoughts arise, to one with wrong thoughts wrong speech, to one with wrong speech wrong action, to one with wrong action wrong livelihood, to one with wrong livelihood wrong endeavor, to one with wrong endeavor wrong establishment of mindfulness and to one with wrong establishment of mindfulness wrong concentration arises. 4. "Monks, knowledge precedes merit, followed by shame and remorse. Monks, to the knowing, seeing one, right view arises. To one with right view right thoughts arise, to one with right thoughts right speech, to one with right speech right action, to one with right action right livelihood, to one with right livelihood right endeavor, to one with right endeavor right establishment of mindfulness and to one with right establishment of mindfulness right concentration arises." ***** T: Is the "knowledge" that precedes merit same as ~naana? I think it is an ordinary man's knowledge. What is the Pali for the knowing and seeing that precede right view? Can you tell what kind of knowing and seeing can induce right view? Thanks. Tep === #88817 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 7:22 pm Subject: knowledge that precedes merit truth_aerator Hi Tep and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi Sarah, Suan, Alex, - > ***** > T: Is the "knowledge" that precedes merit same as ~naana? I think it > is an ordinary man's knowledge. > What is the Pali for the knowing and seeing that precede right view? > Can you tell what kind of knowing and seeing can induce right view? > > Thanks. > > > Tep > === It could be multiple things: Conceptual right view (with fermentations)- MN117 "And what is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are priests & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html The "Step by Step talk" which we've just talked about. Ud 5.3 and/or 4 NT. Best wishes, Alex #88818 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 7:35 pm Subject: Re: knowledge that precedes merit - small addition & correction truth_aerator Small correction. I've answered the merit part. Regardomg what precedes right view in MN44 or 43 it is voice of another (some translate as voice from the beyond) & "yoniso manasikara". However thinking about it, the "step-by-step talk" covers a "curriculum" that Buddha has used on occasions to lead people to stream which appeared when 4NT were seen (from a refined mental state). Best wishes, Alex > > === > > It could be multiple things: > > Conceptual right view (with fermentations)- MN117 #88819 From: "connie" Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 8:23 pm Subject: Re: Sila Always Comes First ! nichiconn Dear Tep, Tep: Thank you for the opportunity to learn better Pali from you. connie: HA! I'm equally if not more likely to learn from you. I start "reading" along, thinking I'm doing pretty well and getting oh so impressed with myself until I read what the real translators say & then, more often than not, am oh so much more impressed with how WAY Off base I was. > (2) Without virtues, gone wrong in virtues, right concentration is destroyed. > (2) Siile asati siilavipannassa hatuupaniso hoti sammaasamaadhi. >connie: I'd guess 'asati' here is 'without'... not partaking of. As far as sati, whether it's a power or a faculty, isn't it still sati? T: My mistake was due to thinking that asati = 'a' + 'sati'. But, how can you tell if 'asati' is not a + sati? Now, for the next question the answer is: although 'sati as a faculty' is a sati, it is more than just 'sati'. Somewhat like a 'luxurious car' is more than just a 'car'. c: Or how to tell when a single A is not a shorthand for double A, etc! In this particular case, asati was the only word I couldn't make sense of/to match well enough with the translation, so it was "run for the dictionary" - not the cushiest of rides, but it gets you somewhere... then again, so do my wrong guesses. peace, connie #88820 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 11:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sila Always Comes First ! nilovg Dear Tep, just something regarding the Pali: asati means: when there is not. It does not have to do with sati. Nina. Op 8-aug-2008, om 1:16 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > > hatuupanisa.m hoti siila.m. > (2) Siile asati siilavipannassa hatuupaniso hoti sammaasamaadhi. > (3) Sammaasamaadhimhi asati sammaasamaadhivipannassa hatuupanisa.m > hoti yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassana.m.' > .................. > >Scott: I notice, when looking at the Paa.li, that 'sense control' > or 'control of the mental faculties' is a function of 'sati'. > > T: I think I see an error. Asati means 'without mindfulness'. Indriya > (six bases) means 'sense faculties', i.e. eye, ear, ..., mind. #88821 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 11:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma question: What is the difference between these: ? lbidd2 Hi Alex, Alex: "I can understand that citta is bare knowing, while cetasika is "how" (as in with greed or anger) it is known , I still don't fully get it how citta can have a "quality" to it." Larry: "Bare knowing" is the usual interpretation. Another view: taste is the experience of flavor. Taste _is_ consciousness. Flavor is rupa, and not an experience. It is inferred from the experience of taste. Taste has the quality of sweet, sour, etc. Alex: "But it appears to be redundant to say that Citta rooted in greed, and accompanied with greed cetasika." Larry: "Citta rooted in greed" = "citta accompanied by lobha cetasika". They mean the same thing but "root" often refers to kamma. Alex: "You say that Ekaggata is "everything together" (vit + vic). What about 2nd sutta Jhana where ekag is present but not the vit&vic?" Larry: Concentration still brings the other jhana factors together with the sign. Howard might have some experience of concentration without "thought". You could experiment and see what you see. Larry #88822 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu Aug 7, 2008 11:29 pm Subject: hetupaccaya szmicio Dear Dhamma friends, I found it on Patthana: "3. Pucchaavaaro 1. Paccayaanuloma.m Ekamuulaka.m (1.) Kusalapada.m 25. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca kusalo dhammo uppajjeyya hetupaccayaa. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca akusalo dhammo uppajjeyya hetupaccayaa. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca abyaakato dhammo uppajjeyya hetupaccayaa. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca kusalo ca abyaakato ca dhammaa uppajjeyyu.m hetupaccayaa. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca akusalo ca abyaakato ca dhammaa uppajjeyyu.m hetupaccayaa. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca kusalo ca akusalo ca dhammaa uppajjeyyu.m hetupaccayaa. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca kusalo ca akusalo ca abyaakato ca dhammaa uppajjeyyu.m hetupaccayaa." I don't know the true meaning of that. But it's something like that: kusala dhamma depends on kusala dhamma by the way of root-condition. kusala dhamma depends on akusala dhamma by the way of root-condition....... If I am wrong please correct me. I read in Nina's conditions about hetupaccaya, and there was said that dosa or lobha conditions citta by the way of hetupaccaya, but i cant find anything about kusala dhamma conditions akusala by the way of hetu-paccaya. Why hetupaccaya is explaind in this way? bye Lukas P.s What abyaakato dhamma really means? #88823 From: "rinzeee" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 3:54 am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma question: What is the difference between these: ? rinzeee --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > > Hello all, > > Can someone please explain what is the difference between: > a) Citta rooted in Greed & lobha cetasika? > > b) Tranquility of Mind Vs Tranquility of Mental factors? (citta vs kaya > passadhi) > > c) Ekaggata vs Vitakka > d) Ekaggata Vs Vicara > > Thank you, > > Best wishes, > Re: Abhidhamma question: What is the difference between these: ? Hello everybody! I am from Sri Lanka and new to this panel, but not to the Buddhadhamma. My first introduction to the Dhamma was through reading Visuddhi Magga. Thereafter I have read, listened and studied the Tripitaka to some extent. But, for some time now, I have stopped doing serious study, and have got down to practicing the Dhamma, living it as closely as possible. I am not a Monk, but a layman. I thought I could improve on what I already seem to know, while sharing my views in this panel. The only obstacle being Time constraints. But shall strive to communicate when ever possible. Perhaps, some of you might notice that, my writings would be from a practical, and not so much academic, point of view, but shall try to relate with what is said in the Tripitaka. Though, in the ultimate sense, all thinking must be left aside, to realize the Nibbana. If I may cast my views on what Alex had requested in message 88766. a) Citta is Consciousness, a mind-moment that arises and falls together with many thought-moments, or Cetasikas, all having the same object as Consciousness does. Therefore Citta rooted in Greed is a conscious-moment that arose with Greed as one of its thought- moment among others, of which there are 17. Lobha cetasika is just a thought-moment. b) "Tranquility of Mind" is a cetasika by itself. And tranquility of Mind is a tranquil state of Consciousness, with "Tranquility of Mind", as one of its cetasikas among others. Tranquility of Mental factors are the subdued state of cetasikas, which led to a tranquil mind, as when the 5 hindrances are in abeyance. c) Ekaggata, Vitakka and Vicara are cetaskas. In a state of consciousness, Ekaggata with Vitakka predominating is prone to an investigatiive mind. Whereas Ekaggata with Vicara predominating, aids concentration Rinze #88824 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 5:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma question: What is the difference between these: ? nilovg Dear Rinzee, wellcome to this list. Thank you for your post. I am glad when more people from Sri Lanka join. I am posting some impressions long ago from Sri Lanka where I went twice. Do follow our posts (from Larry) on the Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, and looking forward to any feed back, Nina. Op 8-aug-2008, om 12:54 heeft rinzeee het volgende geschreven: > I am from Sri Lanka and new to this panel, but not to the > Buddhadhamma. My first introduction to the Dhamma was through > reading Visuddhi Magga. #88825 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 5:28 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 4, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, All phenomena are either nåma or rúpa. Theoretical understanding of nåma and rúpa is not enough, it does not bring detachment from the concept of “self”. We have to know nåma and rúpa as they are through direct experience. What does that mean? We have to know them when they appear, one at a time, right now. That is the only way to see them as they are, as not self. What should be known in vipassanå through direct experience? Can a person be known through direct experience? Can hardness be known through direct experience? These are important questions which we discussed. Hardness can be directly experienced through the bodysense when it appears. Is there no hardness now, impinging on the bodysense? We do not have to think of hardness or name it in order to experience it. Hardness is real, it is a physical phenomenon, a rúpa, which can be directly experienced. Can a chair be experienced through the bodysense? We think that we can touch a chair, but what is actually experienced? Hardness or softness can be directly experienced. A chair cannot be directly experienced, it is only an idea we form up in our minds. Thinking can think of many objects, it can think of realities and also of concepts which are not real. When we think that we see a person, it is not seeing, but it is thinking of a concept. Only visible object can be experineced through the eyesense. When we touch what we take for a person, what appears? Hardness, softness, heat or cold can be directly experienced through the bodysense, not a person. The Buddha taught that there is no person, no self. But we have accumulated so much ignorance and wrong view that it seems that we see and touch people. We may find it difficult to understand that there are in the absolute sense no people. There are no people, but this does not mean that there are no realities. What we take for people are different mental phenomena and physical phenomena which arise and fall away. There are realities such as seeing, thinking or generosity, but they are not people; they do not stay. When we think that a person is generous, it is in reality a moment of consciousness which is generous. It arises because of conditions and then it falls away. “Why do we always insert a person in the giving when there is giving”, Khun Sujin said. When seeing arises, there is no person who sees, there is only a moment of consciousness which arises and falls away. Phra Dhammadhara said:”Seeing has no father or mother, it has no name or address, it cannot walk or sit.” This simple example makes it clear that it is very unrealistic, even foolish, to believe in the existence of a person. Through vipassanå one can come to know what is real and what is not real. Concepts are not objects of mindfulness in vipassanå since they are not real. The nåmas and rúpas which appear one at a time are the objects one has to develop understanding of. ********* Nina. #88826 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 5:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sila Always Comes First ! nilovg Dear Connie and Tep, Op 8-aug-2008, om 5:23 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > (2) Siile asati siilavipannassa hatuupaniso hoti sammaasamaadhi. > > >connie: I'd guess 'asati' here is 'without'... not partaking of. > As far as sati, whether it's a power or a faculty, isn't it still > sati? ------- N: I owe you a little more explanation. as: to be, exist. Stem: sant. Weak stem: sat. A locative absolute is formed: sati. siile sati: when there is siila. Siila asati: when there is no siila. (Warder, lesson 21) Asati in the texts does not denote lack of sati. Then another word like pamaado will be used. Nina. #88827 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 2:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 4, no 3. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - I very much like what you wrote here. It does raise some questions, though, for me. I wonder what is your perspective on the following: You write "What we take for people are different mental phenomena and physical phenomena which arise and fall away." Now, the mental phenomena that underlie what we take to be "Nina" are not elements of "our" experience. They are only elements of "your" experience. What do you understand to be the *meaning* of that fact. What makes them "yours" and unavailable to "us"? That is a bit of a mystery, is it not, Nina? Also, the rupas that underlie what we take to be "Nina" are not the same rupas as "you" take to be "Nina". The sights and sounds and touch sensations that Lodewijk, for example, takes as aspects of "Nina" are not the sights and sounds and bodily sensations that "you" experience, Nina. So, what I'm saying is that this matter is not at all a simple one - certainly not as simple, I believe, as most discussions here on DSG would suggest. I would appreciate it if you would take some time to contemplate this matter and see what insights you might come up with. With metta, Howard #88828 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 6:14 am Subject: Re: Sila Always Comes First ! scottduncan2 Dear Tep, T: "...Thank you very much for your opinion. We all have a right to give an opinion, I think. But a good reader should know that your opinion is different from the Buddha's words in the sutta." Yes, true. I forgot that I was fooled by this 'sati' before, and failed to learn the lesson. Sincerely, Scott. #88829 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 6:35 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiitisutta Corner: DN 33 Twos (12-16). Co. part 1. nilovg Dear friends, Dear friends, sutta: DN 33.1.9(12) 'Skill in [knowing] what are causes and what are not. [iii 213] ‘‘.Thaanakusalataa ca a.t.thaanakusalataa ca. -------------- Co: Refers to the dha. sa. 1337: There are certain dhammas that are root cause and condition (hetu paccaya) for the arising of certain dhammas. Proficiency in knowing these is understanding, discernment...non-delusion (amoho) investigation of dhammas (dhammavicayao), right understanding (sammaadi.t.thi). The Co then refers to the Atthasaalinii (Suttanta Couplets, 395): ---------- Co Pali: .Thaanakusalataati ‘‘ye ye dhammaa yesa.m yesa.m dhammaana.m hetupaccayaa uppaadaaya ta.m ta.m .thaananti yaa tattha pa~n~naa pajaananaa’’ti (dha. sa. 1344) eva.m vuttaa ‘‘cakkhu.m vatthu.m katvaa ruupa.m aaramma.na.m katvaa uppannassa cakkhuvi~n~naa.nassa cakkhuruupa.m (dha. sa. a.t.tha. 1344) .thaana~nceva kaara.na~ncaa’’ti eva.m .thaanaparicchindanasamatthaa pa~n~naa. --------- N: As to a.t.thaanakusalataa: the Co states the opposite to the foregoing: “There are dhammas which are not the cause and condition for the arising of certain dhammas...” It refers to the Atthasaalinii which explains that the eye etc. is not the condition, not the cause for hearing when sound is the object. This is the negating of causal conjuncture, referring to relative dhammas that do not fit. ---------- N: This reminds us that the right conditions have to be present for the arising of such or such reality. It cannot be otherwise. When the proper conditions are not present nobody can make a particular dhamma arise. There is no self who can manipulate dhammas. --------- Co Pali: A.t.thaanakusalataati ‘‘ye ye dhammaa yesa.m yesa.m dhammaana.m na hetuu na paccayaa uppaadaaya ta.m ta.m a.t.thaananti yaa tattha pa~n~naa pajaananaa’’ti (dha. sa. 1345) eva.m vuttaa ‘‘cakkhu.m vatthu.m katvaa ruupa.m aaramma.na.m katvaa sotavi~n~naa.naadiini nuppajjanti, tasmaa tesa.m cakkhuruupa.m na .thaana.m na kaara.na’’nti eva.m a.t.thaanaparicchindanasamatthaa pa~n~naa . --------------- sutta: DN 33.1.9(13) 'Straightforwardness and modesty.*1023 (Ajjava~nca lajjava~nca.) ------- The Co refers to the dha. sa. (1339): What is uprightness? It is being upright, not twisted, being not bent, being not crooked. ------------ Co:Abhidhammepi vutta.m – ‘‘tattha katamo ajjavo. Yaa ajjavataa ajimhataa ava"nkataa aku.tilataa, aya.m vuccati ajjavo’’ti (dha. sa. 1346). -------- N: The Co. gives examples of a bhikkhu who is not quite upright when he, in one or two of the three periods of life: youth, middle aged or old age, is negligent. The bhikkhu who has abandoned all crookedness in the three periods of his life, is well behaved, has shame of akusala, is scrupulous, wants to train himself. N: This is an exhortation to be upright at all times, not slack, keen to train oneself in developing satipa.t.thaana. -------- As to lajjavo: this is shame. Shame about what one should be ashamed of, of the committing of evil, unwholesome dhammas. Lajjavanti ‘‘tattha katamo lajjavo? Yo hiriiyati hiriiyitabbena hiriiyati paapakaana.m akusalaana.m dhammaana.m samaapattiyaa. Aya.m vuccati lajjavo’’ti eva.m vutto lajjiibhaavo. --------------- (to be continued) Nina. #88830 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 6:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nimitta nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 7-aug-2008, om 22:19 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > What is nimitta? -------- N: Different meanings in different contexts. This is one meaning: from the suttas: after seeing not to be taken in by the image (nimitta) nor by the details. This happens all the time. Seeing sees only visible object, but instead of realizing this we imagine that we 'see' people and things. We do not need to avoid thinking of the image and details, it is condiitoned, it is natural. But we can slowly, slowly learn the difference between seeing and thinking of concepts. Another more subtle meaning of nimitta: sankhaara nimitta, the nimittas of conditioned realities, of each of the five khandhas. Visible object appears and falls away immediately. It seems that it lasts a little while, but this is not so. Only the sign, the nimitta of it remains. Visible object impinges again on the eyesense, in a following process, but it happens all so fast that it still seems the same visible object. We cannot catch which is the visible object impinging just now. I quote again now from a discussion: < Kh Sujin said: visible object arises and falls away very quickly and the object that just arises vanishes so quickly that we do not know which one is the one that is appearing now. Only a nimitta of it remains. It seems that it lasts for a while. She used the simile of a stick of fire you turn around in a circle and it seems to be a circle of fire. (Ledi Sayadaw mentioned this also). Or it seems that there is one moment that hardness appears. In reality this is not so, there are many moments of hardness arising and falling away. We do not know which one is the present one. There is ruupa-nimitta, vedanaa- nimitta, sa~n~naa-nimitta, sa.nkhaara-nimitta and vi~n~naa.na-nimitta (of each of the five khandhas). Only nibbaana is without nimitta, it is animitta. I asked whether this means that one is aware of a concept of that reality. She said yes. But here we have to be carefull with the word concept. It is not in the sense of mind-construct such as a table or a person. It is of a different order, more subtle. We could use the word shadow of a reality. So, we can continue being aware of characteristitcs of dhammas, but now it is clearer that they fall away so fast. It helps to understand their anattaness. We cannot hold them for a moment. She often said: what appears has arisen. And this also means that what has arisen is gone already before we realize it.> This is a difficult, subtle subject, Lukas. Nina. #88831 From: "Sukinder" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 7:12 am Subject: Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni Sutta sukinderpal Hi Howard, ================ > S: Sometime ago I suggested, I think to you, something to the effect, > that since it is only with the help of the Dhamma that we ever come to > know where we are we at, to state that we “start where areâ€� must refer > to a moment of Right Understanding. In which case shouldn’t we be > careful not to end up justifying any action through body, speech or mind > which might be rooted in akusala? > > To accept the fact of craving, conceit and wrong view existing as > tendency and arising often even with regard to Dhamma, this may be an > instance of right understanding. However to justify certain behavior > using this fact as excuse, would this be right understanding too? I > don’t think so. Akusala of all levels arising in daily life is > acceptable in so far that there is the understanding each time it does, > that this is due to conditions and that it has already fallen away. In > fact, such understanding is kusala and a necessary part of the > development of understanding. But insisting on following an activity, > especially when this is in the name of Dhamma practice, and saying that > it is OK to do it with craving, conceit and wrong view, this is going > against the Teachings and can never lead to any good, can it? > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I think you are confused on this matter, Sukin. Sukin: That is possible, but since I don't see it yet, I'm ending up only defending my position. ;-) =============== Howard: > I suggest realizing the > way things are and not engaging in pretense, but not at all being satisfied > with the way things are. We desire the end of desire, and thank goodness for > that! It is through craving that we can put an end to craving. the Buddha did > teach that. He did not, however, teach that we should pretend that we do not > crave and that we do not suffer. Sukin: But seeing the way things are include the fact of kusala and akusala both arising in a day, even if the latter is many, many times more, is this not your own experience? Do you `give' because of desire to give or you just give? Does metta not arise spontaneously without thinking about it? You say "we desire the end of desire" as if this is the only way that the development will ever take place, but the statement implies also that there must have first been some understanding of the `danger' of desire. What prompted that particular understanding? Likewise, what is `samvegha' if not a moment of kusala, and could this ever be conditioned by desire? Seeing harm in akusala, this is with wise attention. What kind of attention accompanies craving and why would this be reliable? Moreover, do you not see a situation in which kusala at first arising very little but accumulating more to then increase in frequency? Also that a sense of urgency in the beginning to be invariably followed by craving, but then as panna develops, including recognizing better the harm in craving, that samvegha can then be followed by kusala cittas including panna? Why need craving as driving force? And even if panna arose very seldom and there are moments that one wished there was more progress, why presume `craving' and hence judge as `pretence' when someone rejects the need for it? Besides when it is said that akusala including craving arises often and that kusala and more especially those accompanying panna is very rare, does this not indicate that there is some "awareness" of craving, arising intermittently, and hence the craving *not being followed*? And is such moments not accumulative and therefore increase the chance of the same and also other forms of kusala arising? > ------------------------------------------------- > Seeing harm in defilements is due to panna and this is right motivation > to develop kusala. Could it not be that the Bodhisatta was motivated by > this kind of understanding and that the still existing wrong view did > not arise at anytime? > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > If you wish to think that craving didn't arise in Gotama in his forceful > and dramatic efforts to rid himself of the craving that is the source of > suffereing, so be it. I see it as contrary to reality. Sukin: I'm quite sure that at other times ignorance and craving did arise quite often, but not when it came to what it was that motivated the Bodhisatta each time, to follow some practice. Consider the Parami. These would never be with craving and the Buddha- to-be had to develop them with the greatest purity of mind. I doubt that even in previous lives that the Bodhisatta would be motivated to develop what he did with craving. And this was his *last* life, how more unlikely that craving would come in when the perfections were already at brim!? Metta, Sukin #88832 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 7:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] hetupaccaya nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 8-aug-2008, om 8:29 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca kusalo dhammo uppajjeyya hetupaccayaa. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca akusalo dhammo uppajjeyya hetupaccayaa. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca abyaakato dhammo uppajjeyya hetupaccayaa. > I don't know the true meaning of that. But it's something like that: > kusala dhamma depends on kusala dhamma by the way of root-condition. > kusala dhamma depends on akusala dhamma by the way of > root-condition....... ------- N: Hetupaccaya always refers to dhammas that arise together. Thus, the sobhana hetus of alobha and adosa are hetus, and these are hetu paccaya for the citta and the other accompanying cetasikas. Hetu is a firm foundation, like the root for a tree it supports. Kusala dhamma can condition the arising of akusala dhamma later on, by way of natural decisive support-condition (pakatupanissaya paccaya). For example when one does a good deed, and then later on one has conceit about it. The akusala hetus are a condition for the akusala dhammas they accompany by way of hetu-paccaya. I wonder where you found this text? ------- > > P.s > L: What abyaakato dhamma really means? ------ N: It means : not declared. It is neither kusala nor akusala. Thus: vipaaka, kiriya, ruupa or nibbaana. ------- Nina. #88833 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 3:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni Sutta upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin - In a message dated 8/8/2008 10:13:08 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sukinder@... writes: Sukin: But seeing the way things are include the fact of kusala and akusala both arising in a day, even if the latter is many, many times more, is this not your own experience? Do you `give' because of desire to give or you just give? Does metta not arise spontaneously without thinking about it? You say "we desire the end of desire" as if this is the only way that the development will ever take place, but the statement implies also that there must have first been some understanding of the `danger' of desire. What prompted that particular understanding? Likewise, what is `samvegha' if not a moment of kusala, and could this ever be conditioned by desire? Seeing harm in akusala, this is with wise attention. What kind of attention accompanies craving and why would this be reliable? Moreover, do you not see a situation in which kusala at first arising very little but accumulating more to then increase in frequency? Also that a sense of urgency in the beginning to be invariably followed by craving, but then as panna develops, including recognizing better the harm in craving, that samvegha can then be followed by kusala cittas including panna? Why need craving as driving force? ============================== It seems to me that the Bhikkhuni Sutta is clear on this matter, Sukin: "'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. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #88834 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 7:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] hetupaccaya nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 8-aug-2008, om 8:29 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > Pucchaavaaro > > 1. Paccayaanuloma.m > > Ekamuulaka.m > > (1.) Kusalapada.m > > 25. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca kusalo dhammo uppajjeyya > hetupaccayaa. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca akusalo dhammo > uppajjeyya hetupaccayaa. ------ N: This is a question series: pucchaa. And the form siyaa indicates: it might be that... followed by a counter statement. Thus, siyaa is something the questioner suggests, and it can be something absurd. I met such discussions in my tiika to the Visuddhimagga readings. Someone suggests something that is impossible, not true. The whole context may make it clear, and one can study what follows. I think it not helpful, too complicated to pursue this matter. Nina. #88835 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 7:47 am Subject: Alex Was Wrong About Ekaggataa Re: Concentration with every citta abhidhammika Dear Tep, Nina, Scott D, Sarah How are you? I won't be able to post any message regarding your questions for a few days. I hope Nina or Scott could come in and answer your questions sooner than me. Cheers! Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: Hi Sarah, Suan, Alex, - In the sutta quote below (your message #88776) the sequential development that underlies several other suttas (e.g. Kundaliya Sutta, Avijja Sutta AN 10.61, Sekha-patipada Sutta MN 53, and so on) is clear. Do you agree or not? #88836 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 7:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just studying... How to properly study Abhidhamma> nilovg Hi Alex, Op 7-aug-2008, om 21:35 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > In your own brief & concise words: > can you please explain how to study so that mindfulness arises? > can you please explain how to study so that understanding of namarupa > arises? ---------- N:No, we do not study so that mindfulness arises. We study to have more understanding of realities. When we read about the rupas that are objects and doorways, we can be reminded all the time that this pertains to our life now. Seeing sees visible object through the eye-door. Hearing hears sound through the eardoor. There are seeing and hearing now, they occur one at a time. We learn about the different processes, and this teaches us that they occur not at the same time. It does not mean we have to try to catch each citta of each process. On account of what is seen or heard lobha tends to arise. Lobha is a reality of our daily life and it can be known as just a dhamma, not my lobha. As we read or hear about seeing and hearing, we can remember that they occur now. They can be studied with awareness. Of course, not all details of the Abhidhamma can be known. --------- A: Citta is the principal in knowing an > object, and lobha has the characteristic of clinging to the object. > -------- Regarding last sentence. Can citta know in a lobha way, while lobha cetasika is the one actually being greedy? Am I understanding this correctly? ------ N: Citta and all the accompanying cetasikas are conditioned by lobha, they are all akusala. We could say, they are infected by the lobha. Also happy feeling is conditioned by lobha, it is quite different from happy feeling arising with kusala citta. The latter is a quiet happiness. The former is a restless way of happiness. -------- A: To me it sounds too hairsplitting & too nitpicking. It'd be much clearer, to me, if citta would be just the ability to know, while cetasika is the relationship of that knowing to the object. ------ N: They are all conditioned by the object by way of object-condition. They could not arise without there being an object. The cetasikas share that object with the citta and at the same time they each perform their own function. I appreciate the precision of the Abhidhamma. Nina. #88837 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 9:13 am Subject: Re: Sila Always Comes First ! indriyabala Dear Scott (Nina, Connie), - The recent discussions (that I had here and at SD group) teach me again that "my understanding" of the Dhamma is not good enough yet. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > T: "...Thank you very much for your opinion. We all have a right to give an opinion, I think. But a good reader should know that your opinion is different from the Buddha's words in the sutta." > > Yes, true. I forgot that I was fooled by this 'sati' before, and > failed to learn the lesson. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > T: My comment above applies to me as well. I am "fooled" by the sati too, Scott. Thanks to Connie and Nina for their help. Tep === #88838 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 9:46 am Subject: Re: Just studying... How to properly study Abhidhamma> truth_aerator Hello Nina, Jon, Sarah and all, >-- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom >wrote: > > Hi Alex, > Op 7-aug-2008, om 21:35 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > > > In your own brief & concise words: > > can you please explain how to study so that mindfulness arises? > > can you please explain how to study so that understanding of >namarupa > > arises? > ---------- > N:No, we do not study so that mindfulness arises. We study to have > more understanding of realities. Thank you for your reply. Can you explain a typical day for Abhidhammika? How does one apply it to daily life. I can understand reading, but we cannot read all day long. So as you say that one is reminded of just seeing and so on. So after a while defilements start to decrease, because one is used to thinking, (perhaps repeating mentally) and reading about just "seeing" . Thank you for your reply. I would also like if Jon, Sarah and others would explain it in their own words as well. Best wishes, Alex #88839 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 9:57 am Subject: Re: Are there phenomena that are neither nama nor rupa? truth_aerator Hi Nina and all --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > > All phenomena are either nåma or rúpa. What about Nibbana? It is neither nama nor rupa. What about Space? It is neither nama nor "rupa" as we know it. What about laws? Best wishes, Alex #88840 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 10:05 am Subject: Re: Sila Always Comes First ! indriyabala Dear Nina (Connie, Scott), - It is always good when an Elementary Pali student (like me) can get help on the Pali grammar, when it is needed. >Nina (#88820): just something regarding the Pali: asati means: when there is not. It does not have to do with sati. >Nina (#88826): I owe you a little more explanation. as: to be, exist. Stem: sant. Weak stem: sat. A locative absolute is formed: sati. siile sati: when there is siila. Siila asati: when there is no siila. (Warder, lesson 21) Asati in the texts does not denote lack of sati. Then another word like pamaado will be used. T: Thank you for this additional information. It is now clear why 'asati' does not denote lack of mindfulness. BTW should "as: to be, exist." be changed to "sa: to be, exist." ? [A typo 'sa'?] Tep === #88841 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 11:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sila Always Comes First ! nilovg Hi Tep, Op 8-aug-2008, om 19:05 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > "as: to be, exist." be changed to "sa: to be, exist." ? ------ N: It is irregular: asmi, I am. Atthi he is, or there is. Santi, they are. Nina. #88842 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 11:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are there phenomena that are neither nama nor rupa? nilovg Hi Alex, Op 8-aug-2008, om 18:57 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > All phenomena are either nåma or rúpa. > > What about Nibbana? It is neither nama nor rupa. -------- N: Yes, nibbaana is naama. See former discussions. ------- > What about Space? It is neither nama nor "rupa" as we know it. ------ N: Outer space is a concept. But the minute space that separates the groups of rupa is reckoned as rupa. It is pariccheda ruupa, the ruupa that separates. It is a quality of ruupa and included in the 28 ruupas. ------- > > A:What about laws? ------- N: So many meanings. We hear: the law of kamma that produces vipaaka. This is fixed, niyata. Or the order of cittas that succeed one another in a process. For now, I have trouble writing so many posts, I have my homework given by Larry, Connie, Scott;-)) Nina. #88843 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 11:37 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 4, no 3. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 8-aug-2008, om 15:13 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I wonder what is your perspective on the following: > You write "What we take for people are different mental phenomena and > physical phenomena which arise and fall away." Now, the mental > phenomena that > underlie what we take to be "Nina" are not elements of "our" > experience. They > are only elements of "your" experience. What do you understand to > be the > *meaning* of that fact. What makes them "yours" and unavailable to > "us"? ------ N: I am not sure I quite get your question. It seems to me that so much thinking is involved in what you say. To me it does not matter whether the namas and rupas we call Nina are elements of someone else's experience or my own experience. Is it not enough to say that they are immediately gone? That they are elements devoid of self? only this leads to detachment. When disagreeable speech sound is heard, does it matter whether the source is this or that person? Thinking of persons causes aversion and other defilements. Why having more aversion? It does not bring detachment from the self. He and me: so often conceit arises when thinking in that way. Just conditioned dhammas, this does not mean that they are all equal. There are many conditioning factors operating for the arising of each nama and each rupa. -------- H: The sights and sounds and touch sensations that Lodewijk, for example, takes as aspects of "Nina" are not the sights and sounds and bodily sensations that "you" experience, Nina. So, what I'm saying is that this matter is not at all a simple one - certainly not as simple, I believe, as most discussions here on DSG would suggest. ---------- N: You say not as simple as people suggest. I would say, not so simple for another reason: we are so used to thinking by way of this or that person. And now we learn to change this tendency, we learn that there are mere conditioned elements, mere dhammas. This is a long learning process, not so simple. Nina. #88844 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 11:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just studying... How to properly study Abhidhamma> nilovg Hi Alex. Op 8-aug-2008, om 18:46 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Thank you for your reply. Can you explain a typical day for > Abhidhammika? ------ N: Any day is Dhamma day or Abhidhamma day. No choice of day, conditions operate when they please. ------ > A: How does one apply it to daily life. I can understand > reading, but we cannot read all day long. So as you say that one is > reminded of just seeing and so on. So after a while defilements start > to decrease, because one is used to thinking, (perhaps repeating > mentally) and reading about just "seeing" . ------ N: Defilements do not decrease so soon. It is wrong understanding that has to go first. The main thing: not 'I will do this or that" in order to have more wisdom, less defilements. Then I would be again in the center of the world. We cannot select seeing as object of awareness, it shows up by itself, because of its own conditions, produced by kamma of the past which is concealed to us. Nina. #88845 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 11:51 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Are there phenomena that are neither nama nor rupa? truth_aerator Hi Nina and all, >-- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom > wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > > All phenomena are either nåma or rúpa. > > > > What about Nibbana? It is neither nama nor rupa. > -------- > N: Yes, nibbaana is naama. See former discussions. > ------- PariNibbana is an absence of Nama & Rupa (mind & body). PariNibbana is also unconditioned, Nama is conditioned. So how can it be nama? > > What about Space? It is neither nama nor "rupa" as we know it. > ------ > N: Outer space is a concept. Well there is such thing as space-time, curved space and so on. Without space there couldn't be anything. I disagree that "space is a concept of nothing in between two objects". If there were NO space, those two objects wouldn't be possible to be placed anywhere. For anything in the universe, space is required. It is not simply some abstraction. > ------- > > > > A:What about laws? > ------- > N: So many meanings. We hear: the law of kamma that produces >vipaaka. This is fixed, niyata. Or the order of cittas that succeed >one another in a process. Can someone explain to me: "is order of cittas" nama, rupa, both, or neither? > For now, I have trouble writing so many posts, I have my homework > given by Larry, Connie, Scott;-)) > Nina. I understand. If anyone else can answer, please do. Nina, thank you for your answers. Best wishes, Alex #88846 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 1:51 pm Subject: Re: solipsism of present moment? truth_aerator Hi Nina, Howard and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Howard, > ------ > N: I am not sure I quite get your question. It seems to me that so > much thinking is involved in what you say. I think I do get what Howard is saying. There IS a difference between ultimate realities that underlie conceptual Nina, and conceptual Howard, Alex, and so on. If you deny distinction between people then we get something strange. > To me it does not matter whether the namas and rupas we call Nina are > elements of someone else's experience or my own experience. Your kamma is your kamma. My kamma is my kamma. Remember: "We are all heirs to our kamma?" Daily recollection of the monks? Otherwise what you have been saying was almost pure solipsism of the present moment. Lets see: No me, no you, no trees, no outside or inside world, just dhammas. You know, there have been such a radical Buddhist school ======================= Sautrantika - yogacara of Dignaga - Dharmakirti branch was called by this name because of some special features of this subschool... some later representatives of this subschool (Prajnakaragupta, Ratnakirti) to be proponents of the extreme illusionism and solipsism (as well as of solipsism of this moment). The best example of such extreme idealistic ideas was the treatise of Ratnakirti (XI century) "Refutation of the existence of other minds" (Santanantara dusana). The logico-epistemological trend of Yogacara rejected the doctrine of alaya-vijnana but preserved the concept of vasanas, or "habitual force" (the notion designated the energy of habit which conditioned the intentions of mind to project its contents outward). The thinkers of this subschool were extreme nominalists and empiricists who underlined the theory of the momentary character of all existence and considered the contents of the present single perception (svalaksana) to be the only reality. In the same time they were extremely interested in the problems of the formal logic which was used by them in their rather successful and very active polemics with the Brahmanists. http://www.kheper.net/topics/Buddhism/Yogacara.html Who would have thought that Abh of Theravada is so close? Rejection of other minds, other objects, other moments (past or future) Best wishes, Alex #88847 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 10:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are there phenomena that are neither nama nor rupa? TGrand458@... Hi Alex, Nina, All In a message dated 8/8/2008 12:51:59 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi Nina and all, >-- In _dhammastudygroup@dhammastudygdha_ (mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com) , Nina van Gorkom > wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > > All phenomena are either nåma or rúpa. > > > > What about Nibbana? It is neither nama nor rupa. > -------- > N: Yes, nibbaana is naama. See former discussions. > ------- PariNibbana is an absence of Nama & Rupa (mind & body). PariNibbana is also unconditioned, Nama is conditioned. So how can it be nama? ............................................................ TG: Nibbana is described in the Suttas as the complete end of perception, feeling, and consciousness. That is clear and definite. Nibbana is the "end" or "the result of something being put out." The Buddha did not clarify it beyond that to indicate any new type of "arising". If nothing new arises, how could THAT (nothing) be defined as a nama or rupa? As Alex said, nama and rupa are conditioned and Nibbana is most certainly not THAT. ......................................................... > > What about Space? It is neither nama nor "rupa" as we know it. > ------ > N: Outer space is a concept. Well there is such thing as space-time, curved space and so on. .............................................................. TG: Nina...is space ever called a "rupa" in the Suttas? I'd be interested in the reference if it is. Nina, you said earlier that "space is rupa." Here you say "space is concept." If space is concept, how does that make it a rupa??? Or vice cersa? Unless you're going to say that all namas are also all rupas, (which makes categorizing them separately silly), it doesn't seem to make sense. IMO, the Buddha said what he wanted to say, but he didn't say more than he wanted to say. I think Abhidhamma analysis in some cases said way more than the Buddha wanted to say. Some things are better left alone. Otherwise, they're just more garbage to fill up the grasping mind. TG OUT #88848 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 12:02 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 4, no 3. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 8/8/2008 2:38:09 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 8-aug-2008, om 15:13 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I wonder what is your perspective on the following: > You write "What we take for people are different mental phenomena and > physical phenomena which arise and fall away." Now, the mental > phenomena that > underlie what we take to be "Nina" are not elements of "our" > experience. They > are only elements of "your" experience. What do you understand to > be the > *meaning* of that fact. What makes them "yours" and unavailable to > "us"? ------ N: I am not sure I quite get your question. It seems to me that so much thinking is involved in what you say. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Of course there is much thinking involved. That is what "considering" is - thinking over, questioning, looking to understand. We should not just listen and accept, but listen and consider. ------------------------------------------------- To me it does not matter whether the namas and rupas we call Nina are elements of someone else's experience or my own experience. Is it not enough to say that they are immediately gone? That they are elements devoid of self? only this leads to detachment. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I agree with you that what is critical to understand is that all the phenomena we encounter are impermanent, unsatisfying, and not-self. But there is much more than that talked about on DSG, is there not? ------------------------------------------------ When disagreeable speech sound is heard, does it matter whether the source is this or that person? Thinking of persons causes aversion and other defilements. Why having more aversion? It does not bring detachment from the self. He and me: so often conceit arises when thinking in that way. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: All that truly matters is that the sound and all else is impermanent, impersonal, empty, and hurtful to cling to! For sure that is true. But why then do we need all the details about life force, sexuality, and lists & lists of varieties of namas and rupas that Abhidhamma provides? As for your question, the matter of our sense of "you" as distinct from "me" directly relates to the matter of "self," and to me that is very important to understand. -------------------------------------------------- Just conditioned dhammas, this does not mean that they are all equal. There are many conditioning factors operating for the arising of each nama and each rupa. -------- H: The sights and sounds and touch sensations that Lodewijk, for example, takes as aspects of "Nina" are not the sights and sounds and bodily sensations that "you" experience, Nina. So, what I'm saying is that this matter is not at all a simple one - certainly not as simple, I believe, as most discussions here on DSG would suggest. ---------- N: You say not as simple as people suggest. I would say, not so simple for another reason: we are so used to thinking by way of this or that person. And now we learn to change this tendency, we learn that there are mere conditioned elements, mere dhammas. This is a long learning process, not so simple. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Especially not so simple if one refuses to look at what makes some dhammas "me" and others "you". There IS something going on there, Nina, and it is important to break through to an understanding of exactly what it is in order to uproot atta-view and atta-sense. --------------------------------------------------- Nina. ============================ 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) #88849 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 4:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nimitta egberdina Hi Nina, 2008/8/8 Nina van Gorkom : > Dear Lukas, > Op 7-aug-2008, om 22:19 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > > I asked whether this means that one is aware of a concept of that > reality. She said yes. Guess what, Nina, I agree with you !! > But here we have to be carefull with the word concept. It is not in > the sense of mind-construct such as a table or a person. It is of a > different order, more subtle. We could use the word shadow of a > reality. So, we can continue being aware of characteristitcs of > dhammas, but now it is clearer that they fall away so fast. It helps > to understand their anattaness. We cannot hold them for a moment. > She often said: what appears has arisen. And this also means that > what has arisen is gone already before we realize it.> > This is a difficult, subtle subject, Lukas. I also agree that it is a subtle subject. It must be a subtle subject, for the fact that there is no present dhamma to be aware of goes completely over the heads of some here who argue till they are blue in the face that it is otherwise. I do not agree with some of you explanatory marks, but that doesn't matter in the least. What matters is that we understand each other. Cheers Herman #88850 From: "connie" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 4:33 pm Subject: Re: Are there phenomena that are neither nama nor rupa? nichiconn Dear Alex, TG, Maybe you read too quickly or with your minds already made up and ready to jump... so it seems to me anyway. > N: Outer space is a concept. "Outer space", she said. peace, connie #88851 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 4:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Nibbana isn't a thing. If it is a Dhamma, why not space being Dhamma? egberdina Hi connie and Alex, 2008/8/8 connie : > Dear Herman, > >> ... those who proclaim nibbana as being an element are worthy of being ignored :-) > > c: I don't know what phone book you're looking in, but here are a couple entries from Connected Discourses: > > - SN V 7: "This, bhikkhu, is a designation for the element of Nibbaana: the removal of lust, the removal of hatred, the removal of delusion. The destruction of the taints is spoken of in that way." > > - Spk: The removal of lust, etc., is a designation for the unconditioned, deathless Nibbaana element. The destruction of the taints is arahantship. The removal of lust, etc., is a name for arahantship too. > I read your SN quote as affirming that Nibbana is absence (as Alex says). I do not know what the thinking is behind using the word "element" to designate absence. To my way of thinking, an element is an element because it has or is a characteristic, and certainly, absence lacks characteristic, wouldn't you say? Also, I understand anicca, anatta and dukkha to be characteristics of all elements, and I don't see that applying to nibbana. Do you? Cheers Herman #88852 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 4:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni Sutta egberdina Hi Howard, Sukin and Jon, 2008/8/9 : > Hi, Sukin - > > > ============================== > It seems to me that the Bhikkhuni Sutta is clear on this matter, Sukin: > > "'This body comes into being through craving. And yet it is by relying on > craving that craving is to be abandoned.' > "'This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on > conceit that conceit is to be abandoned.' It seems to me, as well, to be quite clear and unambiguous. Well stated, Howard. Cheers Herman #88853 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 6:29 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Nibbana isn't a thing. If it is a Dhamma, why not space being Dhamma? truth_aerator Hi Herman, Connie and all --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi connie and Alex, > > 2008/8/8 connie : > > Dear Herman, > > > >> ... those who proclaim nibbana as being an element are worthy of >being ignored :-) > > > > c: I don't know what phone book you're looking in, but here are a couple entries from Connected Discourses: > > > > - SN V 7: "This, bhikkhu, is a designation for the element of >Nibbaana: the removal of lust, the removal of hatred, the removal of >delusion. The destruction of the taints is spoken of in that way." > > > > - Spk: The removal of lust, etc., is a designation for the >unconditioned, deathless Nibbaana element. The destruction of the >taints is arahantship. The removal of lust, etc., is a name for >arahantship too. Here it is nibbana with remainder. Very briefly, Nibbana is: 1) Ultimate ease (paramam sukham). 2) Absence of greed, anger & delusion. 3) Remainderless cessation of Nama-Rupa and all that. While first two apply to Nibbana of alive Arahant, the 3rd part applies only to Nibbana without Remainder. So how can Nibbana (without remainder) be a Dhamma? Best wishes, Alex #88854 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 6:52 pm Subject: Re: Are there phenomena that are neither nama nor rupa? truth_aerator Dear Connie, Nina, and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > Dear Alex, TG, > > N: Outer space is a concept. > > "Outer space", she said. I can agree that "Outer" is a concept. However, space DOES exist, and it is more than "vaccum between two objects". It is NOT derivative or a conceptual label we put onto the empty, hollow hole. If there isn't any space, then it is impossible for it to be full or empty. Space itself can be bent due to gravity, it itself can expand or contract, and it doesn't need to always follow "euclidian geometry". Best wishes, Alex #88855 From: "connie" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 7:00 pm Subject: Nibbana isn't a thing. If it is a Dhamma, why not space being Dhamma? nichiconn Dear Herman, When you say "I understand anicca, anatta and dukkha to be characteristics of all elements", I think: < sabbe sankhaara anicca; sabbe sankhaara dukkha; sabbe dhamma anattaa > and agree that while sankhaara, anicca and dukkha don't apply to nibbaana, dhamma and anattaa do. {I also believe 'sankhaara' here, but not always, includes vedanaa & sa~n~naa cetasikas.} To say Nibbaana is either the absense or destruction of certain things, I don't think, means that is all there is to it/the only way to characterize it. For example, at PPn 16:66, << It has peace as its characteristic. Its function is not to die; or its function is to comfort. It is manifested as the signless; or it is manifested as non-diversification. >> Then follows (PPn 16:67-74) what is, to me, a pretty tough discussion on nibbaana. The final section stating, in part, << nibbana is not non-existent as regards individual essence in the ultimate sense; for this is said: 'Bhikkhus, there is an unborn, an unbecome, an unmade, an unformed' (Iti.37; Ud.80). >> Maybe 'individual essence' qualifies as 'characteristic'? peace, connie #88856 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 7:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are there phenomena that are neither nama nor rupa? egberdina Hi connie and Alex, 2008/8/9 Alex : > Dear Connie, Nina, and all, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" > wrote: >> Dear Alex, TG, >> > N: Outer space is a concept. >> >> "Outer space", she said. > I think the implications of the teachings on the nimitta are that everything knowable is conceptual. So it is not really useful to say that something is a concept, because it is not possible to point to something non-conceptual to compare it with. > I can agree that "Outer" is a concept. However, space DOES exist, and > it is more than "vaccum between two objects". It is NOT derivative or > a conceptual label we put onto the empty, hollow hole. > > If there isn't any space, then it is impossible for it to be full or > empty. > > Space itself can be bent due to gravity, it itself can expand or > contract, and it doesn't need to always follow "euclidian geometry". > Having said all that, I'd like to throw in my two pennies worth. I understand space as the distance that separates objects. I think it is noteworthy that it is not possible to conceive of space in the absence of objects. Nor is it possible to attend to two objects, and the distance that separates them, at once. To that extent, space is derived, in that it requires multiple observations. But then again, so is everything else that is conceived of. A single, separate and distinct observation is also such a conception. Cheers Herman #88857 From: "nichiconn" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 7:55 pm Subject: Re: Are there phenomena that are neither nama nor rupa? nichiconn Dear Alex, I hope you won't mind a bit of Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma on space as ruupa and concept, but if you aren't interested, please ignore this post & accept my apology for annoying you yet again. Guide to VI.4 (8) << The space element (aakaasadhaatu): Space, as understood in the Abhidhamma, is not bare geometric extension but the void region that delimits and separates objects and groups of material phenomena, enabling them to be perceived as distinct. The space element has the characteristic of delimiting matter. Its function is to display the boundaries of matter. It is manifested as the confines of matter, or as the state of gaps and appertures. Its proximate cause is the matter delimited. >> As to things like "outer space", CMA's examples (VIII, Guide to 30) are "wells, caves, etc.": << called aakaasapa~n~natti, spatial concepts, since they correspond to spatial regions void of perceptible matter. >> peace, connie #88858 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 11:22 pm Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 288-290 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 288-290 Intro: In the following sections twenty modes of the Wheel of Becoming are explained. These are called the twenty spokes of the Wheel. The twelve links are subdivided into different parts in order to show various aspects. ---------- [(iii Cause and Fruit] Text Vis. 288: Again, it should be understood thus: (1) It has three links with cause, fruit, cause As first parts; and (2) four different sections; (3) Its spokes are twenty qualities; (4) With triple round it spins for ever. ---------- N: It spins around until arahatship has been attained. For him there is no rebirth, he is freed from the cycle. As to ‘triple round’, the Tiika explains that these are the rounds of kilesa (defilements), kamma and vipaaka, and, connected with these, vipaaka, kilesa and kamma. Defilements condition the performing of kamma which produces vipaaka in the form of rebirth and of sense-cognitions during life. On account of vipaaka defilements tend to arise and these motivate the committing of kamma. Thus the round of rebirths goes on and on. -------- Text Vis. 289: 1. Herein, between formations and rebirth-linking consciousness there is one link consisting of cause-fruit. ------ N: Kamma-formations condition vi~n~naa.na, which is vipaakacitta, including rebirth-consciousness. ---------- Text Vis.: Between feeling and craving there is one link consisting of fruit-cause. -------- N: Feeling as link of the Dependent Origination is vipaaka. It conditions craving which is cause. -------- Text Vis.: And between becoming and birth there is one link consisting of cause-fruit. -------- N: As we have seen, there are two meanings of becoming, bhava: becoming in the sense of kamma-process becoming, kamma-bhava, and in the sense of rebirth-process becoming, upatti-bhava. Kamma-process becoming is kamma that is the cause of rebirth, and rebirth-process becoming is the result of kamma in the form of rebirth. Bhava, becoming, is used here in the sense of rebirth-process becoming, thus, it is cause. Birth, jaati, is result. ------- Text Vis.: This is how it should be understood that 'it has three links with cause, fruit, cause, as parts'. --------- Text Vis. 290: 2. But there are four sections, which are determined by the beginnings and ends of the links, that is to say, ignorance/formations is one section; consciousness/ mentality-materiality/sixfold base/ contact/feeling is the second; craving/clinging/becoming is the third; and birth/ageing-and-death is the fourth. This is how it should be understood to have 'four different sections'. ******* Conclusion: The sole purpose of all these divisions and subdivisions is to demonstrate that there is no maker of the Wheel, no experiencer, that there are only naama and ruupa, continuing in the cycle because of conditions. What is cause conditions fruit and what is fruit conditions cause, and this again conditions fruit. Thus, the Wheel of life goes round and round without any interruption. However, the situation is not hopeless. It is possible to be liberated from the cycle if one follows the right Path. The arahat is called a breaker of the spokes of the Wheel (Co. to the Vimaanavatthu, sa.msaara- cakkassa araana.m hatattaa). ******* Nina. #88859 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 11:28 pm Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 4, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, What is mindfulness in vipassanå? This was another topic of our discussions. Is being mindful of an object the same as being conscious of an object? For example, when one is conscious of hardness does that mean that one is mindful of hardness? Mindfulness, in Pali: sati, arises with every sobhana citta (beautiful consciousness). Sati is wholesome, it is non-forgetful of what is wholesome.There are many levels of sati. There is sati of the level of dåna. The kusala citta that performs dåna could not arise without sati. There is sati with síla. When kusala citta arises which observes síla there is sati. The kusala citta which develops samatha is accompanied by sati which is aware of the object of samatha. The kusala citta which develops vipassanå is accompanied by sati. Sati in vipassanå is mindful of nåma or reupa which appears right now through one of the six doors. The object of mindfulness in vipassanå can be visible object, seeing, sound, hearing, thinking, or any other reality which appears at the preent moment. In order that the function of sati in vipassana will become clearer, we should first have more understanding of the object of sati. Sati in vipassanå is mindful of the reality appearing at the present moment. What is the meaning of “present moment”? When hearing arises, hearing itself is not accompanied by sati, it just has the function of hearing. But the characteristic of hearing can appear to sati. Can there not be mindfulness of hearing right now? Mindfulness accompanies kusala citta, but even akusala citta can be the object of mindfulness. For example, citta with dislike can be the object of mindfulness. The dislike has fallen away when the citta with mindfulness arises, but can the characteristic of dislike not appear to sati? Dislike is different from like or from seeing. ****** Nina. #88860 From: "rinzeee" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 10:17 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma question: What is the difference between these: ? rinzeee --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rinzee, > wellcome to this list. Thank you for your post. I am glad when more > people from Sri Lanka join. I am posting some impressions long ago > from Sri Lanka where I went twice. > Nina. Dear Nina, Thankyou for your kind response. Shall keep in touch. Lots of merit to you and the rest. Rinze #88861 From: "rinzeee" Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 10:21 pm Subject: An Observation of This Panel rinzeee Dear Everybody I wish to place an observation of this Discussion Panel. Each of us place our views in this panel, of what Lord Buddha taught. The ultimate `Right View' is that of Lord Buddha. All the views that we express here, may or may not be close to this `Right View'. But, they serve, as a (sort of) `commentary' to this `Right View'. Nevertheless, in our own practice, we could verify our views, while adopting others views, that are closer to the Right View, but better than ours, as a stepping stone to arrive at this Right View, keeping in mind that, we should shed all views, ie stop thinking, when we confront reality, in our own practices. May all be Happy Rinze #88862 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 12:34 am Subject: Re: Of Mice and Men (Re: [dsg] A question on contiguity) egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/8/5 jonoabb : > Hi Herman > > >> You suggest that it is a present consciousness that takes a previous >> consciousness as object. But you also acknowledge that this present >> consciousness cannot be known. So why have this belief in a present >> consciousness, other than because your pet theory needs it? > > I'm afraid you've lost me here. I thought we were discussing how, > according to the teachings, a moment of consciousness could become > the object of insight. If that's not what you were asking, then > we've been talking at cross-purposes. > > It is not a matter of my own "belief in a present consciousness". As > always, I was simply putting forward my (intellectual) understanding > of the Buddha's teachings, without claiming (or rejecting) it as my > own. Please let me know if this distinction is not clear. > The distinction is clear, but I don't believe it applies to our discussion. Allow me to explain. I assert that it simply is not possible to have an intellectual understanding of a square circle. No matter how one would try to incorporate being a square and being a circle into a unity, the two exclude each other. And for that reason we would be quite within the bounds of reasonable conduct to tell someone who claimed an intellectual understanding of square circles, that they were wrong. Would you agree with the above? Now to the present discussion. Which was not so much a discussion, but a defining of terms so that a discussion about patterns could meaningfully take place. To that end you defined dhammas as being "anything having an identifying characteristic that can be directly known, in the sense of being experienced by consciousness accompanied by panna." However I questioned all your examples of various types of consciousness as being possible candidates for being dhammas. Simply because consciousness of whatever kind cannot be known. And our recent discussions, as well as other discussions about nimitta bear this out. An intellectual understanding of consciousness, as something that knows itself, is just not possible, Jon. But I would still like to talk about patterns, and that it is not very useful or sincere to just define them away :-) Cheers Herman #88863 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 11:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are there phenomena that are neither nama nor rupa? upasaka_howard Hi, Connie (and Alex) - In a message dated 8/8/2008 10:55:23 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, nichicon@... writes: Dear Alex, I hope you won't mind a bit of Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma on space as ruupa and concept, but if you aren't interested, please ignore this post & accept my apology for annoying you yet again. Guide to VI.4 (8) << The space element (aakaasadhaatu): Space, as understood in the Abhidhamma, is not bare geometric extension but the void region that delimits and separates objects and groups of material phenomena, enabling them to be perceived as distinct. The space element has the characteristic of delimiting matter. Its function is to display the boundaries of matter. It is manifested as the confines of matter, or as the state of gaps and appertures. Its proximate cause is the matter delimited. >> As to things like "outer space", CMA's examples (VIII, Guide to 30) are "wells, caves, etc.": << called aakaasapa~n~natti, spatial concepts, since they correspond to spatial regions void of perceptible matter. >> peace, connie ============================ On the basis of this, it would seem that the "space element" is considered a rupa (i.e., a fundamental material element) for which every instance of it is a phenomenon that serves the function of physical bounding or separation (i.e., serves as a matter/energy boundary). This strikes me as akin to what might be something dealt with in modern micro-physics. OTOH, space in the sense of wells, caves, vast reaches among celestial bodies etc seems to be a matter of *relation* among material aggregates (i.e., among conventional macro-objects), which relation, though not unreal, wouldn't be considered a dhamma (a.k.a., fundamental element) in Abhidhamma nor in modern science either, I believe. For me, this, like scientific theories, is a predictive model, i.e., a "story" that can be useful in predicting experience. 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) #88864 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 8, 2008 11:43 pm Subject: Re: Of Mice and Men (Re: [dsg] A question on contiguity) upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Jon) - In a message dated 8/9/2008 3:34:58 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: However I questioned all your examples of various types of consciousness as being possible candidates for being dhammas. Simply because consciousness of whatever kind cannot be known. And our recent discussions, as well as other discussions about nimitta bear this out. An intellectual understanding of consciousness, as something that knows itself, is just not possible, Jon. ============================== I have one question, Herman: Do you merely *infer* being conscious (i.e., having experiences), or do you *know* that you are conscious? My own answer is that though I do not know exactly how, i.e., by what means and in full detail, there is the awareness, I *do* know that I am conscious. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #88865 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 2:51 am Subject: Clarifiction Re: Of Mice and Men (Re: [dsg] A question on contiguity) upasaka_howard Hi again, Herman (and Jon) - In a message dated 8/9/2008 6:43:11 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Upasaka writes: My own answer is that though I do not know exactly how, i.e., by what means and in full detail, there is the awareness, I *do* know that I am conscious. =============================== The foregoing is ambiguous but can be disambiguated by removing one comma, as follows: My own answer is that though I do not know exactly how, i.e., by what means and in full detail there is the awareness, I *do* know that I am conscious. With metta, Howard #88866 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 7:13 am Subject: Re: An Observation of This Panel indriyabala Dear Rinze, - I am interested in your following remark : "we should shed all views, ie stop thinking, when we confront reality, in our own practices." How do thinking and thought relate to all views? How do you stop thinking and, when you can, for how long? Can self views be shed simply by not thinking? Do arahants not think at all? Thank you for the interesting post. Tep === #88867 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 8:25 am Subject: Re: Of Mice and Men (Re: [dsg] A question on contiguity) egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/8/9 : > Hi, Herman (and Jon) - > > In a message dated 8/9/2008 3:34:58 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > hhofmeister@... writes: > > However I questioned all your examples of various types of > consciousness as being possible candidates for being dhammas. Simply > because consciousness of whatever kind cannot be known. And our recent > discussions, as well as other discussions about nimitta bear this out. > An intellectual understanding of consciousness, as something that > knows itself, is just not possible, Jon. > ============================== > I have one question, Herman: Do you merely *infer* being conscious > (i.e., having experiences), or do you *know* that you are conscious? > My own answer is that though I do not know exactly how, i.e., by what > means and in full detail, there is the awareness, I *do* know that I am > conscious. > The idea of consciousness as a something is a huge misunderstanding, IMO. The idea of consciousness is no more than a reification of the fact that the knowing of objects is not identical with the being of objects. To know an object means being other than that object. But that does not mean that being other is being something. Quite the opposite. The knowing of an object means to NOT BE that object. Consciousness, when reified, is the not being of what is known. Consciousness is entirely negative. And that is how I understand anicca. Consciousness is never what it is, but always arises as one thing and ceases as another. Cheers Herman #88868 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 8:26 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Space truth_aerator Dear Herman, Connie and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Having said all that, I'd like to throw in my two pennies worth. > > I understand space as the distance that separates objects. >>> Not only that, but space is in which objects can be placed. You cannot have ANY objects (including vaccuum) where there isn't space (ie, outside of the universe). > I think it > is noteworthy that it is not possible to conceive of space in the > absence of objects. What do you mean? Close your eyes and imagine a black void devoid of any light or objects. In Buddhist cosmology, there is also a "sphere of infinite space" which is usually devoid of rupa, as I understand it. Best wishes, Alex #88869 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 8:32 am Subject: Re: Are there phenomena that are neither nama nor rupa? truth_aerator Dear Connie --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nichiconn" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > I hope you won't mind a bit of Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma >on space as ruupa I agree here. Please post relevant material from CMA. > and concept, but if you aren't interested, please > ignore this post & accept my apology for annoying you yet again. > > Guide to VI.4 (8) << The space element (aakaasadhaatu): Space, as > understood in the Abhidhamma, is not bare geometric extension but >the > void region that delimits and separates objects and groups of > material phenomena, enabling them to be perceived as distinct. Good, I agree here. > The > space element has the characteristic of delimiting matter. Its > Yes. > > As to things like "outer space", CMA's examples (VIII, Guide to 30) > are "wells, caves, etc.": << called aakaasapa~n~natti, spatial > concepts, since they correspond to spatial regions void of > perceptible matter. >> > > peace, > connie > I agree that "outer" is an english word and a relative concept. However let us not forget that concepts do exist in conceptual & functional way. Thank you for posting this. Best wishes, Alex #88870 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 8:32 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 4, no 3. nilovg Hi Howard, I am really grateful for your input, it makes me 'think'. Op 9-aug-2008, om 1:02 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Howard: > Of course there is much thinking involved. That is what > "considering" is > - thinking over, questioning, looking to understand. We should not > just > listen and accept, but listen and consider. > ------------------------------------------------- > > quote N: To me it does not matter whether the namas and rupas we > call Nina are > elements of someone else's experience or my own experience. Is it not > enough to say that they are immediately gone? That they are elements > devoid of self? only this leads to detachment. > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, I agree with you that what is critical to understand is that all > the phenomena we encounter are impermanent, unsatisfying, and not- > self. But > there is much more than that talked about on DSG, is there not? > ------------------------------------------------ > N: In order to know these truths, there has to be development of > more understanding. The thinking most of the time runs to persons > and things that seem to last. This is natural, it is conditioned. > At the same time it is valuable to know that persons are not real > in the ultimate sense. If we do not see the value of this, the > truths of impermanence, dukkha, anatta cannot be realized. Thus, > what kind of thinking is best to pursue now? > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > All that truly matters is that the sound and all else is impermanent, > impersonal, empty, and hurtful to cling to! For sure that is true. > But why then > do we need all the details about life force, sexuality, and lists & > lists of > varieties of namas and rupas that Abhidhamma provides? ------- N: Blunt people need more details, this is said in the 'Guide', Netti Pakarana. We cling so deeply, we are so ignorant. We can't hear enough that dhammas are conditioned in many different ways. It is not enough to know: dhamma is conditioned. Details about the many intricate ways they are conditioned helps us to have less ignorance. > > ---------- > Quote N: You say not as simple as people suggest. I would say, not so > simple for another reason: we are so used to thinking by way of this > or that person. And now we learn to change this tendency, we learn > that there are mere conditioned elements, mere dhammas. This is a > long learning process, not so simple. > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Especially not so simple if one refuses to look at what makes some > dhammas "me" and others "you". There IS something going on there, > Nina, and it is > important to break through to an understanding of exactly what it > is in order > to uproot atta-view and atta-sense. > --------- N: Those dhammas that makes this person such and that person such are gone before we start to think about them. This can help siila in daily life very much. To me this is very important. I quote from Kh Sujin's Perfections, Patience: I quote what Mike wrote to me recently: In truth, no person behind whatever he does or utters in speech, or experiences. It is not refusing to It is a matter of: what is best to pursue. I think moments of developing understanding of ultimates should not be wasted. Nina. #88871 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 8:58 am Subject: Re: Kinds of people truth_aerator Hi Nina and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > ------- > N: Blunt people need more details, this is said in the 'Guide', >Netti > Pakarana. We cling so deeply, we are so ignorant. We can't hear > enough that dhammas are conditioned in many different ways. It is >not > enough to know: dhamma is conditioned. Details about the many > intricate ways they are conditioned helps us to have less ignorance. But blunt people may misunderstand even the "correct teaching". Furthermore it is not "intellectual" problems that may happen, but emotional & reflexive. Greed, Anger and so on are definately NOT rational, especially when one believe in Anatta. However reading & considering anatta teachings for neyya & padaparama people MAY NOT BE ENOUGH. We aren't the highest two sort of people. I agree that for some people with QUICK Faculties, (ie Sariputta & Maha Mogallana) mere hearing & considering may be enough for stream entry. But for most people today, full of defilements, there needs to be more than just thinking & considering. The reflexive defilements are simply to strong and need strong methods (strong samma-samadhi, & samatha). It is like a ship caught in a serious storm. Good navigational maps (useful as they are) will NOT be enough to sail safely home. Either the ship is able to overpower the storm (with super effort), or try to wait it out (if it is even possible) and then resume sailing. In this similie the ship is the person. The raging storm are the defilements, the navigational map is the book study (& thinking & considering). Some people in Buddha's time had many defilements taken care off even before they've met the Buddha or his disciples. In this case, hearing & considering worked well for them. In our case it is different. Why did they have easier time? It could be due to their samatha practices before... Remember that samatha removes lust, before removing of which one can't become fully awakened (or even in some strong cases to reach the stream). So being far from "useless side excursion" samatha may be CRUCIAL for an insight to arise, and for a ship to travel safely to the other shore. Best wishes, Alex #88872 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 9:55 am Subject: Re: Kinds of people .. Developing Direct Knowledge .. indriyabala Dear Alex & Nina (Howard, Herman), - >Nina: We cling so deeply, we are so ignorant. We can't hear enough that dhammas are conditioned in many different ways. It is not enough to know: dhamma is conditioned. Details about the many intricate ways they are conditioned helps us to have less ignorance. >Alex: Remember that samatha removes lust, before removing of which one can't become fully awakened (or even in some strong cases to reach the stream). So being far from "useless side excursion" samatha may be CRUCIAL for an insight to arise, and for a ship to travel safely to the other shore. T: We need to use direct knowledge to comprehend the five clinging- aggregates and to abandon ignorance and craving. MN 149: "And what qualities are to be comprehended through direct knowledge? 'The five clinging-aggregates,' should be the reply. ..." "And what qualities are to be abandoned through direct knowledge? Ignorance & craving for becoming: these are the qualities that are to be abandoned through direct knowledge." "And what qualities are to be developed through direct knowledge? Tranquillity & insight: these are the qualities that are to be developed through direct knowledge." Question: How is direct knowledge developed ? Tep === #88873 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 6:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are there phenomena that are neither nama nor rupa? TGrand458@... Hi Connie I'm not sure I understand the relevance of your statement in regards to why "outer space" would be a totally different "animal" than "space." In terms of space vs "outer space" this is what I found... Outer space, often simply called space, comprises the relatively empty regions of the _universe_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe) outside the _atmospheres_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_body's_atmosphere) of _celestial bodies_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_bodies) . Outer space is used to distinguish it from _airspace_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airspace) (and terrestrial locations). Contrary to popular understanding, outer space is not completely empty (i.e. a _perfect vacuum_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum) ) but contains a low density of particles, predominantly hydrogen _plasma_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_(physics)) , as well as _electromagnetic radiation_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_radiation) . Hypothetically, it also contains _dark matter_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter) and _dark energy_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy) . The term "outer space" was first recorded by _H. G. Wells_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._G._Wells) in 1901._[1]_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_space#cite_note-0) The shorter term space is actually older, being first used to mean the region beyond Earth's sky in _John Milton_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Milton) 's _Paradise Lost_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradise_Lost) in 1667._[2]_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_space#cite_note-1) The term space is discussed very little in the Suttas and IMO, based on the usage of it in the Suttas, it merely indicates that there is "physical dimensionality" to phenomena. TG OUT In a message dated 8/8/2008 5:34:55 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, nichicon@... writes: Dear Alex, TG, Maybe you read too quickly or with your minds already made up and ready to jump... so it seems to me anyway. > N: Outer space is a concept. "Outer space", she said. peace, connie #88874 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 6:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Nibbana isn't a thing. If it is a Dhamma, why not space being D... TGrand458@... In a message dated 8/8/2008 5:36:49 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Also, I understand anicca, anatta and dukkha to be characteristics of all elements, and I don't see that applying to nibbana. Do you? Cheers Herman Hi Herman IMO, anatta does apply to Nibbana because no-self is also a mere absence...its an absence of "self." Whereas impermanence and affliction are conditionality "happenings," no-self in merely an absence of something....like Nibbana. TG OUT #88875 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 6:24 am Subject: Re: Of Mice and Men (Re: [dsg] A question on contiguity) upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 8/9/2008 11:25:39 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/8/9 : > Hi, Herman (and Jon) - > > In a message dated 8/9/2008 3:34:58 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > hhofmeister@... writes: > > However I questioned all your examples of various types of > consciousness as being possible candidates for being dhammas. Simply > because consciousness of whatever kind cannot be known. And our recent > discussions, as well as other discussions about nimitta bear this out. > An intellectual understanding of consciousness, as something that > knows itself, is just not possible, Jon. > ============================== > I have one question, Herman: Do you merely *infer* being conscious > (i.e., having experiences), or do you *know* that you are conscious? > My own answer is that though I do not know exactly how, i.e., by what > means and in full detail, there is the awareness, I *do* know that I am > conscious. > The idea of consciousness as a something is a huge misunderstanding, IMO. The idea of consciousness is no more than a reification of the fact that the knowing of objects is not identical with the being of objects. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't quite get what you mean by consciousness "as a something". I have defined it as mere "experiential presence." It is an event/activity. --------------------------------------------- To know an object means being other than that object. But that does not mean that being other is being something. Quite the opposite. --------------------------------------------- Howard: To know an object does not just mean being other than it. A tree is other than a cow - so is the tree the knowing of some object? To know an object is to experience it. This is an activity - a very specific sort of activity. I can't imagine what you think it is other than that. ----------------------------------------------- The knowing of an object means to NOT BE that object. --------------------------------------------- Howard: No way. It doesn't *mean* that at all, though it implies it. (It *is* true that the activity of consciousness never, I believe, takes itself as an object.) I do reserve for consideration, though, the possibility that there is a "participative awareness" of knowing-of-an-object occurring simultaneously with that knowing-of-an-object. --------------------------------------------- Consciousness, when reified, is the not being of what is known. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Who is reifying it? If, to speak of an activity or event is to reify it, then we just have to shut our mouths entirely. Hey, though, that will sure make time for more meditating! ;-)) ----------------------------------------------- Consciousness is entirely negative. -------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't follow that in the slightest, Herman. It is a very specific activity. Unconsciousness is negative, though. (Maybe you meant THAT? LOL!) --------------------------------------------- And that is how I understand anicca. Consciousness is never what it is, but always arises as one thing and ceases as another. --------------------------------------------- Howard: What is the one "thing" it arises as, and what is the other that it ends with? Every event that occurs passes through variation. Consciousness seems to me to occur in a wave-like manner, ascending, peaking, and subsiding. Is that what you have in mind? If not, I'm really not getting you at all on this. ----------------------------------------------- Cheers Herman ========================= With metta, Howard #88876 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 6:28 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 4, no 3. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 8/9/2008 11:33:04 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, I am really grateful for your input, it makes me 'think'. ============================= You are kind and generous, as usual. :-) With metta, Howard #88877 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 11:28 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 4, no 3. nilovg Hi Howard, I find your new logo very interesting. Nina. Op 9-aug-2008, om 19:28 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > /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) #88878 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 11:38 am Subject: the Relevance of the Abhidhamma. nilovg Post from Lodewijk to Howard about the relevance of the Abhidhamma, after a discussion about Howard wondering about the necessity of so many details explained in the Abhidhamma. ------- Dear Howard, Our life is composed of myriads of small endlessly variegated details, which, each of them, have an impact on each other, and on the course of our life. There is such a whirlwind of physical phenomena and mental phenomena that change all the time. If we want to understand what our daily life in reality is, it is just simply essential to understand all these details, their intricacy and mutual relationship, as so clearly explained in the Abhidhamma. With warm regards, Lodewijk. #88879 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 11:42 am Subject: Of Mice and Men (Re: [dsg] A question on contiguity) indriyabala Hello Herman & Howard, - Your conversation is too good for me to just read it and forget it. So, please allow me to offer a few thoughts. > >Herman: The idea of consciousness as a something is a huge misunderstanding, IMO. The idea of consciousness is no more than a reification of the fact that the knowing of objects is not identical with the being of objects. ----------------------------------------------- > Howard: I don't quite get what you mean by consciousness "as a something". I have defined it as mere "experiential presence." It is an event/activity. --------------------------------------------- > >Herman: Consciousness is never what it is, but always arises as one thing and ceases as another. > Howard: Consciousness seems to me to occur in a wave-like manner, ascending, peaking, and subsiding. =============== T: Knowing or understanding or discerning cannot be separated from a consciousness that knows (i.e. the knower). Conciousness is a dhatu (element, property) that belongs to nobody; it is void of ownership like any other kinds of dhatu in the cosmos. When there is volitional formation(sankhara), then there is consciousness. Thus consciousness arises and ceases in dependence of the supporting condition. See more about consciousness in MN 43 below. "'Consciousness, consciousness': Thus is it said. To what extent, friend, is it said to be 'consciousness'?" "'It cognizes, it cognizes': Thus, friend, it is said to be 'consciousness.' And what does it cognize? It cognizes 'pleasant.' It cognizes 'painful.' It cognizes 'neither painful nor pleasant.' 'It cognizes, it cognizes': Thus it is said to be 'consciousness.'" "Discernment & consciousness, friend: Are these qualities conjoined or disjoined? Is it possible, having separated them one from the other, to delineate the difference between them?" "Discernment & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. It's not possible, having separated them one from the other, to delineate the difference between them. For what one discerns, that one cognizes. What one cognizes, that one discerns. Therefore these qualities are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference between them." "Discernment & consciousness, friend: What is the difference between these qualities that are conjoined, not disjoined?" "Discernment & consciousness, friend: Of these qualities that are conjoined, not disjoined, discernment is to be developed, consciousness is to be fully comprehended." [MN 43 Mahavedalla Sutta] Tep === #88880 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 11:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are there phenomena that are neither nama nor rupa? nilovg Dear TG, Op 8-aug-2008, om 23:51 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > TG: Nina...is space ever called a "rupa" in the Suttas? I'd be > interested > in the reference if it is. > > > Nina, you said earlier that "space is rupa." Here you say "space is > concept." If space is concept, how does that make it a rupa??? Or > vice cersa? > Unless you're going to say that all namas are also all rupas, > (which makes > categorizing them separately silly), it doesn't seem to make sense. -------- N: Mahaaraahulovaadasutta: Relevant passage of the sutta: ``katamaa ca, raahula, aakaasadhaatu? aakaasadhaatu siyaa ajjhattikaa, siyaa baahiraa. "And what, Rahula, is the space element? The space element may be internal or external. katamaa ca, raahula, ajjhattikaa aakaasadhaatu? ya.m ajjhatta.m paccatta.m aakaasa.m aakaasagata.m upaadinna.m, And what, Rahula, is the internal space element? That, internally, and individually, is space, empty, and clung to, ------- N: In the list of 28 ruupas in the abhidhamma, not only concrete matter is included but also characteristics, qualities of ruupa. Space as pariccheda ruupa is among these. Outer space is not in this list, it is not pariccheda rupa. Nina. #88881 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 11:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: solipsism of present moment? nilovg Hi Alex, Op 8-aug-2008, om 22:51 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Rejection of other minds, other objects, other moments (past or > future) ----- N: No rejection. No rejection of different kammas for different people. Nina. #88882 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 12:09 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: solipsism of present moment? truth_aerator Dear Nina and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Alex, > Op 8-aug-2008, om 22:51 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > > > Rejection of other minds, other objects, other moments (past or > > future) > ----- > N: No rejection. No rejection of different kammas for different >people. > Nina. But didn't few posts before (#88843) you seemed to reject the streams of other people (or at least blurred the line), existence of conventional self of yourself and others? If as you've said Hopefully I have just misunderstood you. Volition of "Nina" is not the same as volition of "Alex". "Your" kamma isn't "mine", and "mine" kamma isn't "yours". Best wishes, Alex #88883 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 12:24 pm Subject: Re: the Relevance of the Abhidhamma. truth_aerator Dear All, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Our life is composed of myriads of small endlessly variegated > details, which, each of them, have an impact on each other, and on > the course of our life. There is such a whirlwind of physical > phenomena and mental phenomena that change all the time. > If we want to understand what our daily life in reality is, it is > just simply essential to understand all these details, their > intricacy and mutual relationship, as so clearly explained in the > Abhidhamma. > > With warm regards, > > Lodewijk. Which Abhidharma? The Theravadin, Sarvastivadin, Sutrantika, Abhidhammasammuccay of Asanga, Dharmaguptaka Úâriputrâbhidharmaúâstra (T. 1548) or the Abhidhamma of Vajjiputakkas? ""Of course you are uncertain, Kalamas. Of course you are in doubt. When there are reasons for doubt, uncertainty is born. So in this case, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, !***by traditions,***! by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering' — then you should abandon them. " http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.065.than.html To tell you the truth, I have strong suspicion that 4NT teaching of the Buddha is the best. It is pragmatic, to the point and truly matters. =========== Ven. Sariputta said: "Friends, just as the footprints of all legged animals are encompassed by the footprint of the elephant, and the elephant's footprint is reckoned the foremost among them in terms of size; in the same way, all skillful qualities are gathered under the four noble truths. Under which four? Under the noble truth of stress, under the noble truth of the origination of stress, under the noble truth of the cessation of stress, and under the noble truth of the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.028.than.html == Best wishes, Alex #88884 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 8:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are there phenomena that are neither nama nor rupa? TGrand458@... Hi Nina Thanks for your detailed answer. I guess, from your answer, that I have to conclude that the answer to my question is no... Space is not called a rupa in the Suttas. IMO, space is used in the Suttas merely to affirm a dimensional component to phenomena. TG In a message dated 8/9/2008 12:56:34 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > TG: Nina...is space ever called a "rupa" in the Suttas? I'd be > interested > in the reference if it is. > > > Nina, you said earlier that "space is rupa." Here you say "space is > concept." If space is concept, how does that make it a rupa??? Or > vice cersa? > Unless you're going to say that all namas are also all rupas, > (which makes > categorizing them separately silly), it doesn't seem to make sense. -------- N: MahaaraahulovaadasuN: Relevant passage of the sutta: ``katamaa ca, raahula, aakaasadhaatu? aakaasadhaatu siyaa ajjhattikaa, siyaa baahiraa. "And what, Rahula, is the space element? The space element may be internal or external. katamaa ca, raahula, ajjhattikaa aakaasadhaatu? ya.m ajjhatta.m paccatta.m aakaasa.m aakaasagata.paccatta.m aakaasa And what, Rahula, is the internal space element? That, internally, and individually, is space, empty, and clung to, ------- N: In the list of 28 ruupas in the abhidhamma, not only concrete matter is included but also characteristics, qualities of ruupa. Space as pariccheda ruupa is among these. Outer space is not in this list, it is not pariccheda rupa. Nina. **************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos. (http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 ) #88885 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 8:40 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 4, no 3. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 8/9/2008 2:28:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, I find your new logo very interesting. Nina ============================= Thanks for mentioning it, Nina. Yes, I find it interesting as well. :-) BTW, my title for it in my list of 5 signature quotes that I currently use is "Nowhere Needed to Go." (The others are "Abandon Hindrances," "Impermanence" (my old standard), "Emptiness," and "Relinquishment." 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) /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) #88886 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 2:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma question: What is the difference between these: ? sarahprocter... Dear Rinze,(*any new members) I'd also like to (belatedly) give you a warm welcome to DSG. I'm sure you have a lot to contribute here and I'll look forward to reading any of your discussions and comments in due course. --- On Fri, 8/8/08, rinzeee wrote: R:> I am from Sri Lanka and new to this panel, but not to the Buddhadhamma. My first introduction to the Dhamma was through reading Visuddhi Magga. Thereafter I have read, listened and studied the Tripitaka to some extent. But, for some time now, I have stopped doing serious study, and have got down to practicing the Dhamma, living it as closely as possible. I am not a Monk, but a layman. .... S: I first started reading the Visuddhimagga in Sri Lanka too. That was when I stayed in a temple a long time ago. You'll also be reading about the wonderful seminars we had there (in Nina's extracts which she's posting). I also first met Jonothan (Jon) in Sri Lanka. Where abouts do you live there? .... R:> I thought I could improve on what I already seem to know, while sharing my views in this panel. The only obstacle being Time constraints. But shall strive to communicate when ever possible. Perhaps, some of you might notice that, my writings would be from a practical, and not so much academic, point of view, but shall try to relate with what is said in the Tripitaka. .... S: Sounds interesting. Looking forward to anything you share. .... R:> Though, in the ultimate sense, all thinking must be left aside, to realize the Nibbana. ... S: Of course, thinking is also conditioned and can be known for what it is. More to dicuss on this topic, I think. I appreciated your answers to Alex's questions. Please help us by answering any others!! Metta, Sarah *p.s If any new (or old) members would care to put a photo in the DSG photo album (left side of home page), it's always nice to see our friends here. Lukas, it may help Herman to remember your name too:-)) ======= #88887 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 2:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... indriyabala Hi, Sarah, Alex, KenH - More on focussing for Sarah, and a "strategy for peace" for KenH to chew on. > Tep: > I have seen your same comment on "focus" in samatha meditation > several times before. > > > A:> "focusing on the movements of the feet"... When people say > that, is there any doubt as why their meditation fails? > > .... > > S: Focussing on anything, starting with anything will lead to > meditation failure. What appears now does so by conditions, not by > any intention or wish to have it arise. > > .... > > T: First of all, it is not clear to me what bad meaning you see > in 'focussing'. Secondly, I am confused as to why focussing on > anything, such as reading a sutta with an intention to understand it, is bad. Thirdly, it is never clear to me why focussing, which to me means paying non-distracted attention on a dhamma ( e.g. while > contemplating a feeling or a mind-state), "will lead to failure"? > > I do not see any failure resulting from "remaining focussed" on the > drawbacks of the five aggregates of clinging. > ================================================ The Strategy of a Peaceful Mind by Ajaan Suwat Suvaco : "Peace of mind is a strategy that we use to test the truth within ourselves. We see that when the mind lets go of the aggregates, it's happy. If you don't yet believe this, you can give it a try. When you sit in concentration, try letting go. Tell yourself that you're not going to carry these aggregates around; you're not going to get riled up about them. Whatever pains there may be, you don't have to pay them any mind. Pay attention to buddho, or whatever your meditation topic may be, until there's nothing left but the property of knowing. And then keep watching, watching, watching, letting go of anything else that comes along until the mind settles down and is peaceful. A sense of ease and pleasure will appear as your evidence: You've been able to let go of the aggregates of form, feeling, perception, and fabrication. As long as you're not involved with them, the mind is peaceful and at ease. But as soon as you get involved with them, the mind is immediately in a turmoil. This is your strategy for seeing stress, for knowing stress. When the mind isn't peaceful, that's stress. As soon as we see this, we'll grow disenchanted. Whatever comes to disturb the mind, there's stress in the process of fabrication, which is conditioned by ignorance. "So we should focus on studying the mind, developing the mind. Once you've brought the mind to peace, you should use that peace as a strategy to contemplate stress so as to disband it. See the connection between stress and lack of peace in the mind, along with their relationship to form, to the aggregates, to the origination of stress. See how the origination of stress is related to the eye seeing forms, the ear hearing sounds, the nose smelling aromas, the tongue tasting flavors. When craving arises, this is where it's going to arise, right here at these things, but the only way to see this is through meditation. If you don't meditate, you won't know. The way to know is through the strategy of finding a peaceful place and making the mind peaceful. That's how you'll gain release from suffering and stress. [endquote] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/suwat/strategypeace.html Ken, if you read this dhamma talk carefully without getting mad first (because of the word "strategy"), then you may agree with me that this is about how to be aware of the origination of dukkha when 'eyes see forms, ears hear sounds',etc. It is a powerful meditative approach to Khun Sujin's teaching. Correct me if I am wrong. Tep === #88888 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 11:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] the Relevance of the Abhidhamma. upasaka_howard Hi, Lodewijk (and Nina) - In a message dated 8/9/2008 2:38:39 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Post from Lodewijk to Howard about the relevance of the Abhidhamma, after a discussion about Howard wondering about the necessity of so many details explained in the Abhidhamma. ------- Dear Howard, Our life is composed of myriads of small endlessly variegated details, which, each of them, have an impact on each other, and on the course of our life. There is such a whirlwind of physical phenomena and mental phenomena that change all the time. If we want to understand what our daily life in reality is, it is just simply essential to understand all these details, their intricacy and mutual relationship, as so clearly explained in the Abhidhamma. With warm regards, Lodewijk. ================================ What you say has much merit, Lodewijk, but I cannot entirely agree. I don't think we need to understand all these details, but only those essential matters leading to awakening, including the tilakkhana and paticcasamupada, and these not by mere finger-pointing-at-the-moon conceptualization but by direct awareness. As wisdom's light falls upon them when looking intently with a (prepared) calm and clear mind, an opening may appear. With metta, Howard P. S. Always good to hear from you, Lodewijk! :-) /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) #88889 From: "connie" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 4:24 pm Subject: Re: Are there phenomena that are neither nama nor rupa? nichiconn Dear TG, TG: I'm not sure I understand the relevance of your statement in regards to why "outer space" would be a totally different "animal" than "space." c: Maybe the CMA quotes in #8857 make it clearer. I was thinking the 'breeds' in question were 'material' and 'conceptual' space. The interesting thing, to me, is that space isn't visible object. peace, connie #88890 From: "connie" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 4:29 pm Subject: Subject: Re: Are there phenomena that are neither nama nor rupa? nichiconn ps. TG, c: Maybe the CMA quotes in #8857 make it clearer. and maybe I am in too big a hurry to answer: make that dsg post #88857. peace, connie #88891 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 5:39 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 4, no 3. kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Nina - > > In a message dated 8/8/2008 2:38:09 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > vangorko@... writes: > > Hi Howard, > Op 8-aug-2008, om 15:13 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > > > I wonder what is your perspective on the following: > > You write "What we take for people are different mental phenomena and > > physical phenomena which arise and fall away." Now, the mental > > phenomena that > > underlie what we take to be "Nina" are not elements of "our" > > experience. They > > are only elements of "your" experience. What do you understand to > > be the > > *meaning* of that fact. What makes them "yours" and unavailable to > > "us"? > ------ > N: I am not sure I quite get your question. It seems to me that so > much thinking is involved in what you say. > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Of course there is much thinking involved. That is what "considering" is > - thinking over, questioning, looking to understand. We should not just > listen and accept, but listen and consider. > ------------------------------------------------- > Hi Howard, Butting in if I may: you are aware of the distinction between concepts and realities. The term 'thinking' in this sense is used to refer to concepts. It stands for 'the product of thinking.' Nina might not like to see concepts being mistaken for realities, but I can assure you she has nothing against thinking in the sense of 'considering.' In fact, she probably wishes we would do a lot more of it! :-) --------------------- <. . .> N: > > Is it not enough to say that they are immediately gone? That they are elements devoid of self? only this leads to detachment. Howard: > Well, I agree with you that what is critical to understand is that all the phenomena we encounter are impermanent, unsatisfying, and not-self. But there is much more than that talked about on DSG, is there not? ----------------------- KH: Yes, most of the discussion here is about illusory selves and what those illusory selves can supposedly do in order to get themselves enlightened. But that is because people reject the teaching of paramattha dhammas and insist instead on regarding concepts as realities. Otherwise, there would *not* be "much more than that talked about on DSG." I see now that Nina has replied to this post, so I'll get out of your way. :-) Ken H #88892 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 5:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana isn't a thing. If it is a Dhamma, why not space being Dhamma? egberdina Hi connie and TG, 2008/8/9 connie : > Dear Herman, > When you say "I understand anicca, anatta and dukkha to be characteristics of all elements", I think: < sabbe sankhaara anicca; sabbe sankhaara dukkha; sabbe dhamma anattaa > and agree that while sankhaara, anicca and dukkha don't apply to nibbaana, dhamma and anattaa do. I can see how anatta would apply, because as TG says, it is mere absence as well. > {I also believe 'sankhaara' here, but not always, includes vedanaa & sa~n~naa cetasikas.} To say Nibbaana is either the absense or destruction of certain things, I don't think, means that is all there is to it/the only way to characterize it. For example, at PPn 16:66, << It has peace as its characteristic. To me, it is peace that has the characteristic of peace, and peace is subject to rise and fall. Nibbana is the absence of characteristics. > Its function is not to die; or its function is to comfort. It is manifested as the signless; To me, a manifestation of the unmanifest is the same as a square circle, an impossibility. > or it is manifested as non-diversification. >> Then follows (PPn 16:67-74) what is, to me, a pretty tough discussion on nibbaana. The final section stating, in part, << nibbana is not non-existent as regards individual essence in the ultimate sense; for this is said: 'Bhikkhus, there is an unborn, an unbecome, an unmade, an unformed' (Iti.37; Ud.80). >> I do not follow how the premise that there is an unmade, unbecome etc etc can lead to a conclusion that the unmade, unbecome etc therefore has individual essence. > Maybe 'individual essence' qualifies as 'characteristic'? We would have to ask the commentator what he meant. I see no reason to assume, however, that he would have more insight in the matter than you or me. I'd rather stick to the original texts :-) Cheers Herman #88893 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 5:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Nibbana isn't a thing. If it is a Dhamma, why not space being D... egberdina Hi TG, 2008/8/10 : > > In a message dated 8/8/2008 5:36:49 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, > hhofmeister@... writes: > > Also, I understand anicca, anatta and dukkha to be characteristics of > all elements, and I don't see that applying to nibbana. Do you? > > > > IMO, anatta does apply to Nibbana because no-self is also a mere > absence...its an absence of "self." Whereas impermanence and affliction are > conditionality "happenings," no-self in merely an absence of something....like Nibbana. > Good to see you around. You are quite right. Thanks. Cheers Herman #88894 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 6:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana isn't a thing. If it is a Dhamma, why not space being Dhamma? truth_aerator Hi Herman, Connie, Nina and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > I can see how anatta would apply, because as TG says, it is mere > absence as well. Samsara is absence of Atta. Final Nibbana doesn't have anatta (the 5 Anatta khandas have ceased.) > > > or it is manifested as non-diversification. >> Then follows (PPn >16:67-74) what is, to me, a pretty tough discussion on nibbaana. >The final section stating, in part, << nibbana is not non-existent >as regards individual essence in the ultimate sense; for this is >said: 'Bhikkhus, there is an unborn, an unbecome, an unmade, an >unformed' (Iti.37; Ud.80). >> > > I do not follow how the premise that there is an unmade, unbecome etc > etc can lead to a conclusion that the unmade, unbecome etc therefore > has individual essence. > > > Maybe 'individual essence' qualifies as 'characteristic'? Fault is with the translation. As a certain monk has said, it is possible that the proper translation is not misleading unborn (indication a hint of something) but nothing-is-born. So a more precise translation may be: nothing is born, nothing becomes, nothing is made, nothing is formed, etc. Best wishes, Alex #88895 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 6:43 pm Subject: Re: What is consciousness (Of Mice and Men ) egberdina Hi Howard and Jon and Tep, 2008/8/10 : > Hi, Herman - > >> >> However I questioned all your examples of various types of >> consciousness as being possible candidates for being dhammas. Simply >> because consciousness of whatever kind cannot be known. And our recent >> discussions, as well as other discussions about nimitta bear this out. >> An intellectual understanding of consciousness, as something that >> knows itself, is just not possible, Jon. >> ============================== >> I have one question, Herman: Do you merely *infer* being conscious >> (i.e., having experiences), or do you *know* that you are conscious? >> My own answer is that though I do not know exactly how, i.e., by what >> means and in full detail, there is the awareness, I *do* know that I am >> conscious. >> > > The idea of consciousness as a something is a huge misunderstanding, > IMO. The idea of consciousness is no more than a reification of the > fact that the knowing of objects is not identical with the being of > objects. > ----------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I don't quite get what you mean by consciousness "as a something". I > have defined it as mere "experiential presence." It is an event/activity. I believe that when Jon defines eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness etc as dhammas that can be directly known, and need to be known, he is not talking about experiential presence or events/activities. I'm sure he will correct me if I have misunderstood him. I don't know how "presence" modifies "experiential" in your definition. Phenomenologically speaking, "tree" is quite sufficient to describe an experience. "Consciousness of tree" does not add any layer of understanding, it only introduces a schism into what is a totality, a unit. I would understand your "presence" in the same way, in that I believe it is introducing something that is not there. Tep kindly quoted from MN43 to show that consciousness is to be understood as cognising, and I would say that agrees with your definition of consciousness being an event/activity. For Jon's benefit, MN43 also quite unambiguously states that consciousness is inseparable from what it cognises, which suggests to me that the effort of looking for eye-consciousness, ear consciousness etc is quite wasted. > --------------------------------------------- > > > > To know an object means being other than that object. But that does > not mean that being other is being something. Quite the opposite. > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > To know an object does not just mean being other than it. A tree is > other than a cow - so is the tree the knowing of some object? To know an object > is to experience it. This is an activity - a very specific sort of activity. I > can't imagine what you think it is other than that. I agree with you that knowing and experiencing are interchangeable, and that these are activities. Activity implies that experience extends across time. In the process of knowing an object, it is also known that the object is known from a point of view. That point of view is not part of the object. That point of view is other than the object. That is how I meant it. > ----------------------------------------------- > > The > knowing of an object means to NOT BE that object. > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > No way. It doesn't *mean* that at all, Yes it does, yes it does :-) :-) though it implies it. (It *is* > true that the activity of consciousness never, I believe, takes itself as an > object.) I do reserve for consideration, though, the possibility that there is > a "participative awareness" of knowing-of-an-object occurring simultaneously > with that knowing-of-an-object. > --------------------------------------------- Yes, I agree with that possibility, and I would call it mindfulness. > > Consciousness, when > reified, is the not being of what is known. > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Who is reifying it? If, to speak of an activity or event is to reify it, > then we just have to shut our mouths entirely. Hey, though, that will sure > make time for more meditating! ;-)) > ----------------------------------------------- As I said, the knowing of an object is the taking of a point of view on it. I believe that an act of attempting to take a point of view on that point of view would require reifying it. In order to try to know consciousness, wouldn't you agree that it has to be turned into an object, in order to try and take a point of view on it? > > Consciousness is entirely > negative. > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I don't follow that in the slightest, Herman. It is a very specific > activity. Unconsciousness is negative, though. (Maybe you meant THAT? LOL!) The act of knowing an object involves the act of taking a point of view on it. That point of view is other than the object. It is not the object. We all know and understand that when we know an object, we are not that object. But when we try to know and understand the we that knows and understands, we can't find it. It is not there. There isn't a we that knows, there isn't a consciousness that knows. There is only knowing. But in order to know an object, knowing has to NOT BE that object. Given all that, I think it is quite accurate to refer to consciousness / knowing as being a negative act, or an act of negation. > --------------------------------------------- > > And that is how I understand anicca. Consciousness is never > what it is, but always arises as one thing and ceases as another. > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > What is the one "thing" it arises as, and what is the other that it ends > with? Every event that occurs passes through variation. Consciousness seems > to me to occur in a wave-like manner, ascending, peaking, and subsiding. Is > that what you have in mind? Yes, I wanted to emphasise that consciousness / knowing is never static. Cheers Herman #88896 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 6:54 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 4, no 3. egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/8/10 kenhowardau : > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: >> > > Butting in if I may: you are aware of the distinction between > concepts and realities. The term 'thinking' in this sense is used to > refer to concepts. It stands for 'the product of thinking.' > > Nina might not like to see concepts being mistaken for realities, but > I can assure you she has nothing against thinking in the sense > of 'considering.' In fact, she probably wishes we would do a lot more > of it! :-) > Nina also recently wrote this in relation to nimittas: "I asked whether this means that one is aware of a concept of that reality. She (AS) said yes." So, I actually believe that you misunderstand, and therefore misrepresent Nina, when you say she might not like to see concepts being mistaken for realities. It is clear that Nina understands that it is not possible to know realities, only concepts at best. How do you answer that charge, you serial misrepresenter, you :-) ? Cheers Herman #88897 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 7:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Space egberdina Hi Alex, 2008/8/10 Alex : > Dear Herman, Connie and all, > > > >> I think it >> is noteworthy that it is not possible to conceive of space in the >> absence of objects. > > What do you mean? Close your eyes and imagine a black void devoid of > any light or objects. > Well, if I imagine blackness, then I am not imagining space, am I ? :-) > In Buddhist cosmology, there is also a "sphere of infinite space" > which is usually devoid of rupa, as I understand it. > How would this sphere of infinite space be knowable? It seems to have no characteristic. How is it different to nibbana? Cheers Herman #88898 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 7:13 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Space truth_aerator Hi Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > 2008/8/10 Alex : > > Dear Herman, Connie and all, > > > > > > > >> I think it > >> is noteworthy that it is not possible to conceive of space in the > >> absence of objects. > > > > What do you mean? Close your eyes and imagine a black void devoid of > > any light or objects. > > > > Well, if I imagine blackness, then I am not imagining space, am >I ? :-) You are making a rough approximation of how a black & void space is like without light and any other objects, except itself, of course. > > > In Buddhist cosmology, there is also a "sphere of infinite space" > > which is usually devoid of rupa, as I understand it. > > > > How would this sphere of infinite space be knowable? > 4 Aggregates are still present. > It seems to have > no characteristic. How is it different to nibbana? Arupa planes do have characteristics of 4 aggregates. Nibbana has NO aggregates. No feeling of even "neither pain nor pleasure" (which accompanies aruppa jhana & 4th Jhana). Best wishes, Alex #88899 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 3:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is consciousness (Of Mice and Men ) upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 8/9/2008 9:44:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: In order to try to know consciousness, wouldn't you agree that it has to be turned into a object, in order to try and take a point of view on it? ============================= To know it as an object would require that. But I had talked of a "participative knowing" which is not knowing "as an object." When, for example we experience the warmth of a warm bath and find it pleasant, the warmth is object of consciousness and also of feeling as pleasant, but I believe that at the very same time there is the wordless awareness of the warmth-being-known and of warmth-being-felt-as-pleasant. That awareness of its being known co-occurs with the knowing of the warmth, and the awareness of it being felt as pleasant co-occurs with the feeling as pleasant. This is a participative knowing, and it is different from the knowing of something as an object. With metta, Howard #88900 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 3:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is consciousness (Of Mice and Men ) upasaka_howard Hi again, Herman - In a message dated 8/9/2008 9:44:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > Howard: > What is the one "thing" it arises as, and what is the other that it ends > with? Every event that occurs passes through variation. Consciousness seems > to me to occur in a wave-like manner, ascending, peaking, and subsiding. Is > that what you have in mind? Yes, I wanted to emphasise that consciousness / knowing is never static. ============================= Good! I agree with you. With metta, Howard #88901 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Aug 9, 2008 11:59 pm Subject: Re: Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... kenhowardau Hi Tep <. . .> Ken, if you read this dhamma talk carefully without getting mad first > (because of the word "strategy"), then you may agree with me that > this is about how to be aware of the origination of dukkha when 'eyes > see forms, ears hear sounds',etc. It is a powerful meditative > approach to Khun Sujin's teaching. Correct me if I am wrong. > Tep, I am pleased to say that this is nothing like K Sujin's teaching. Absolutely nothing like it! Right from the start, when the author used the meaningless jargon "the truth within ourselves" I knew what was to follow. And I was right, it was a confidence trick. It was the same sort of confidence trick that is used by self-help gurus in America to make billions of dollars every year. I am not saying that Ajaan Suwat Suvaco (whoever he is) is a confidence trickster. Almost certainly, he is just one of the countless Buddhist meditators who have been tricked and who is unwittingly passing on the trick as a result. The final words of the article were: "but the only way to see this is through meditation. If you don't meditate, you won't know. The way to know is through the strategy of finding a peaceful place and making the mind peaceful. That's how you'll gain release from suffering and stress." When you read those words, didn't alarm bells go off in your mind? Didn't you think of the countless Buddhists who, in all good faith, have dedicated large parts of their lives to meditation, and who are still no nearer to enlightenment? In America, the patsies (people who have wasted thousands of dollars on self-help books and seminars) occasionally ask their gurus, "I have done everything you've told me and yet I am still a helpless, why is that?" Do the gurus take pity on them? Do they say, "Because all this has been a big hoax - you have been tricked out of your money!" No, of course they don't! (Never give a sucker an even break.) The heartless gurus simply say, "Because you haven't being doing it right! Buy my next book and you will see where you have been going wrong." In the same way, "Buddhist" meditation techniques never work. And the blame is always directed back at the meditator, never on meditation itself. I think it is a terrible shame, and I will do whatever I can to protect people from it. Ken H #88902 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Space (Sarah's notes 1) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, There are the two manifestations of space (aakaasa ruupa) and 3 asankhata (unconditioned) dhammas referred to in the texts, including one of the manifestations of aakaasa ruupa. I'd like to add more to what I've written before on this topic as it's such a complicated and controversial topic. [Note: This is the draft of a work-in-progress and I don't have texts with me to check some references and Pali spelling. References at end of last segment] 1. Concept of Space ................................. There is the concept of space which we use all the time as in "flying through space" or the "space in our houses" and there is also the concept of boundless or infinite space as the object of the first aruupa jhaana (aakaasaana~ncaayatana). Often the concepts and conventional terms are actually pointing to the reality of aakaasa dhaatu (space element). Such concepts are used in suttas, for example, in the Mahaaraahulavaada Sutta[1], to help explain the reality (to be discussed in detail below), in this case so that Rahula would not be attached to materiality:. "What, Rahula, is the space element? The space element may be either internal or external. What is the internal space element? Whatever internally, belonging to oneself, is space, spatial, and clung-to, that is, the holes of the ears, the nostrils, the door of the mouth, and that [aperture] whereby what is eaten, drunk, consumed, and tasted gets swallowed, and where it collects, and whereby it is excreted from below, or whatever else internally, belonging to oneself, is space, spatial, and clung-to: this is called the internal space element. Now both the internal space element and the external space element are simply space element. And that should be seen as it actually is with proper wisdom thus: 'This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.' " In CMA[2], the various kinds of concepts are enumerated. We read: "Well, cave, etc, are called aakaasapa~n~natti, spatial concepts, since they correspond to spatial regions void of perceptible matter." They are concepts pointing to the reality of aakaasa. ****** to be contd. Metta Sarah ======== #88903 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Space (Sarah's notes 2) sarahprocter... contd. 2. Reality of Space ............................... When the texts refer to the reality of aakaasa ruupa, there are two kinds or manifestations of space: a) Pariccheda aakaasa ruupa ......................................... This is the element of space which delimits the kalaapas (groups) of ruupas produced by one of the 4 causes of ruupas: kamma, citta (consciousness), utu (temperature) or aahaara(nutriment)]. As pariccheda aakaasa exists whenever the groups of ruupa are produced, it is said to originate from the same 4 causes. If there were no space in between these groups, they would be connected and not distinct. Space is said to originate from the same factors which condition the groups it separates as its arising depends on the arising of them. It lasts for the same time as the se ruupas it delimits and arises and falls away with them. In this connection, space is not the greater space of cavities, holes, the sky or outer space, but the infinitesimal space surrounding kalaapas of ruupas, pariccheda ruupa, where pariccheda means 'limit' or 'boundary'. More detail is given in 'Survey of Paramattha Dhammas'[3]: "The rupa that is space, aakaasa rupa, has the function of limiting or separating all the different groups or kalaapas of rupas. Space in this context is not outer space, but the infinitesimal space surrounding each kalaapa. After its function it is also called pariccheda rupa (pariccheda meaning limit or boundary). What we call matter consists of kalaapas, units of rupas arising and falling away. The rupas within a kalaapa are holding tightly together and cannot be divided. Matter, be it large or small, can only be broken up because the rupa space is in between the different kalaapas, allowing them to be distinct from each other. Without space or pariccheda rupa all rupas would be tightly connected and could not be separated. Because of pariccheda rupa which surrounds each kalaapa, even large matter can be broken up into infinitely tiny particles; it can be broken up only at those points where there is space. .Pariccheda rupa is another kind of asabhaava rupa, which does not have its own distinct nature and does not arise separately; it arises simultaneously with the different kalaapas, and in between them." As we read in CMA, "the space element has the characteristic of delimiting matter. Its function is to display the boundaries of matter. It is manifested as the confines of matter, or as the state of gaps and apertures. Its proximate cause is the matter delimited." (CMA)[4] In the commentary to the Abhidammattha Sangaha [5], it says: "...... As the materiality that is delimiting by way of assuring that the materialities that constitute individual clusters such as the eye decad, etc., are not mixed with other clusters, or that is delimited by those [clusters], or merely the limit of them, this materiality is the materiality of limitation. Indeed, it is as if it delimited the various clusters. Moreover, in the context of contact between the elements of one cluster with those of another, as the state of separation of various things, space is also bounded by materiality. And the things of which it is the limit, it itself does not come into contact with, otherwise there would be no delimitation, since the condition of materialities would be one of spreading out; for the condition of not spreading out is the condition of not coming into contact. So the Blessed One has said 'it is not in contact with the four great elements'. (Dhs 144, #638)." This aakaasa ruupa is "not directly produced" (appa.nihita), it depends on the ruupas in the kalaapas for its arising. It is asabhaava for the same reason (i.e. it doesn't have its own arising and falling away like sabhaava ruupas) and it is therefore "not easily known".) In the Visuddhimagga [6], it indicates that the 10 appanihita or asabhava rupas are "not suitable for comprehension since they are merely the mode-alteration and the limitation-of-interval". ********** to be contd. Metta, Sarah ========= #88904 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Space (Sarah's notes 3) sarahprocter... contd. b) Open Space aakaasa ruupa ............................................. The second kind or manifestation (or characteristic) of aakaasa ruupa is the bigger space as evident in cavities, the sky, in vacuums, in the mouth or ear and so on. Here the aakaasa ruupa does not delimit kalaapas and it doesn't depend on such kalaapas. So in this case, the definition and characteristic is different.. The Atthasaalini [9], describes the aakaasa ruupa as having the characteristic (lakkhana) of "delimiting material objects" and the function (rasa) of "showing the boundaries ". In addition to the manifestation of "showing their limits" (as discussed above), it also refers to the "state of being untouched by the four great elements and of being their holes and openings as manifestation, the separated objects as proximate cause (padatthana). It is that of which in the separated groups we say 'this is above, this is below, this is across' ". So this is another manifestation of 'untouchedness', the holes, gaps and apertures. It says that by "untouched by the four great elements" what is meant is "the unentangled space-element untouched by these is stated, such as in a vacuum (vivara) or hole or the sky. It defines space as that "which is not 'scratched, not scratched off, which is not possible to scratch, cut, or break. Wherever there is 'no obstacle', that is space." In other words, where there are no mahaabhuuta (primary) elements existing, this kind of aakaasa ruupa has to be manifesting and this is how we can walk in and out of spaces, swallow food and so on. In this case the aakaasa ruupa is not conditioned by kamma, citta, temperature or nutriment. It is the unconditioned aakaasa. Even when the kalaapas don't arise and fall away, there is still this aakaasa dhaatu, the asankhata (unconditioned) aakaasa ruupa. When the Buddha refers to the empty space of holes and openings as in auditory and nasal orifices, the mouth, as above in the Mahaaraahulavaada Sutta [10] or in the Dhatuuvibhanga Sutta (quoted below) [11], it is to this manifestation of aakaasa ruupa that he is referring. It makes it possible to swallow food, hear and so on. It also makes it possible to walk into or out of a space. In a vacuum, again as there are no mahaabhuuta rupas, there is this second kind of aakaasa ruupa: "Bhikkhu, what is the element of space? There is internal and external space element. What is internal space element? The internal spaces in the form of space in the ear lobes, nostrils, open space from the mouth, where anything enjoyed, drunk, eaten and tasted is stored, and the space through which it is turned out or any other internal, space that is one's own. Bhikkhu, this is internal space element. The internal and external space, is the space element. This is not me. I'm not in it. It's not self. This should be seen with right wisdom, as it really is and the mind should be nipped and detached from the space element." The Buddha uses concepts and conventional language to refer to the space of the auditory orifices and the other holes and openings of the body. Space in the ear is one of the conditions for hearing. it is only rupa element, but we take it for our body all the time. The same with outer space, it is ruupa element, not some 'thing'. ******* to be contd. Metta, Sarah ========= #88905 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Space (Sarah's notes 4) sarahprocter... contd. - final 3. Asankhata Dhammas (Unconditioned dhammas) ..................................... So, actually, there are 3 asankhata dhammas: a) pa~n~natti (concepts), b) aakaasa (space) [an-antaakaasa, not pariccheda aakaasa] c) nibbana. In the Melinda Pa~nha[12], it is said that there are "two things not born of kamma, hetu (cause) nor of physical change". These are aakaasa and nibbana. This refers to the second definition of aakaasa (above). Also when references are to boundless and immeasurable space, they are to this kind of space. Again in Milinda Pa~nha in the same chapter [13], Nagasena says: "Whatever beings are cognisant, sire, all these are born of kamma. Fire and everything born of seeds are born of cause. The earth and the mountains and water and wind are all born of physical change. Aakaasa and nibbaana - these two - are not born of kamma, not born of cause, not born of physical change." Another interesting quote with reference to the asankhata aakaasa is in another section [14]: "Reverend Naagasena, when you say that eleven special qualities of aakaasa are present in nibbaana, what are the eleven qualities of aakaasa that are present in nibbaana?" "As, sire, aakaasa is not born, does not age, does not die, does not decease (here), does not arise (elsewhere), is hard to master, cannot be carried off by thieves, depends on nothing (anissata), is the sphere of birds (vihagamana - lit. goes through the air), without obstruction, unending, even so, sire, is nibbaana, not born, does not age, does not die, does not decease, does not arise, is hard to master, cannot be carried off by thieves, depends on nothing, is the sphere of ariyans, without obstruction, unending. These, sire, are the eleven special qualities of aakaasa that are present in nibbaana." Other references in Milinda Pa~nha are to "air established on space" and the five qualities of space to be adopted [15]. The fourth one refers to how space is unending, boundless and immeasurable and this is how our moral habits and knowledge should be! ****** In conclusion, when reading the texts, we need to be clear as to whether it's the conditioned or unconditioned space element that is being referred to and also to appreciate that while space is referred to with the use of concepts, there is also the reality of space element which manifests in two different ways. ******** [1] Mahaaraahulavaada Sutta, MN62 (~Naanamoli, Bodhi translation) [2] Compendium Manual of Abhidhamma, (translation of Abhidhammattha Sangaha), edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi (CMA), Ch VIII, Compendium of Conditions, Guide to #30 [3] Survey of Paramattha Dhammas by Sujin Boriharnwanaket, Ch 4 [4] CMA, Ch VI, Compendium of Matter, Guide to #4 [5] The Commentary to Abhidhammattha Sangaha, (PTS), translated by Wijeratne & Gethin, Ch VI, Materiality [6] The Visuddhimagga, ~Naanamoli translation, Ch XV111, 16 [7] The Dhammasangani, translated by Khine, Element Of Space (Ruupa Ka.nda) [8] The Visuddhimagga, Ch XIV [9] The Atthasaalini, PTS translation, 'The Expositor' II, Book II, Part I, Ch III, 326, Derived Material Qualities, definition of space-element [10] Mahaaraahulavaada Sutta [11] Dhatuuvibhanga Sutta, MN 140, http://mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima3/140-dhatuv\ ibhanga-e.html [12] Milinda Pa~nha, translated by I.B.Horner as 'Milinda's Questions', (Dilemmas V11, 'What is in the world that is not Born of Cause) [13] Ibid, same chapter, 'Born of Kamma and so on', [14] Ibid, Dilemmas VIII, "Nibbana is without a Counterpart": [15] Ibid, ('Questions on Talk of Similes, #26, 'Space') ============================================== Metta, Sarah ======= #88906 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:51 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 4, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, Being mindful of a reality is not the same as being conscious of an object. When, for example, hardness impinges on the bodysense, a citta arises which merely experiences hardness, it has the function of experiencing hardness. This type of citta does not like or dislike the object, neither can it have right understanding of it. Shortly after this citta has fallen away, akusala cittas or kusala cittas arise. If there are conditions for kusala citta with mindfulness of the object, there can be “study” of the characteristic of that object, so that right understanding can develop. There cannot be right understanding immediately, it has to be developed little by little through mindfulness. We used to study only by reading, listening or thinking. Study with mindfulness is different: it is study through the direct experience of the characteristics of nåma and rúpa as they appear one at a time. Khun Sujin often said: “Without study paññå (wisdom) cannot grow”. Only one reality at a time can be the object of sati. Can we experience more than one object at a time? It seems that we can see and hear at the same time. But each citta which arises can experience only one object and then it falls away, to be succeeded by the next citta. Seeing experiences visible object through the eye-door and then falls away. Hearing is completely different from seeing, it experiences sound through the ear-door and then falls away. Since cittas arise and fall away very rapidly it seems that seeing and hearing last for a while and that they can occur at the same time, but that is not so. Is there no seeing or hearing now? There is often forgetfulness, no “study” of any reality. Hardness impinges on the bodysense time and again, but there is no study of hardness as only a reality, a kind of rúpa. When we touch something which is hard we have no doubt that it is hard; even a child can know this. But is there study of the characteristic of hardness as only a rúpa, not mixed up with a concept of a finger or a chair which is hard? When we think that we experience a “whole” such as a finger or a chair, it shows that there is no mindfulness of any reality. We may experience hardness many times with attachment, with aversion and with ignorance. Sometimes sati may arise and then the charactreistic of hardness can be studied so that right understanding can develop. From the foregoing examples we can see that mindfulness or awareness in vipassanå is not the same as what we mean in conventional language by “awareness” of something or being consciousness of something. ******* Nina. #88907 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 1:27 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiitisutta Corner: DN 33 Twos (12-16), Co, part 2. nilovg Dear friends, DN 33.1.9(14) 'Patience and gentleness. (Khanti ca soracca~nca.) Co: refers to dha.sa. 1341 (transl. (U Kyaw Khine 1348): -------- Co Pali: Khantiiti ‘‘tattha katamaa khanti? Yaa khanti khamanataa adhivaasanataa aca.n.dikka.m anassuropo attamanataa cittassaa’’ti (dha. sa. 1341) eva.m vuttaa adhivaasanakhanti. ----------- The “Atthasaalinii” (Suttanta couplets, 395, 396) explains: < The mode of being patient is ‘long-suffereing’. By this state they suffer without retaliating. ’Compliance’ is to persist without repulsing or opposing. ‘Absence of rudeness’ is the state of one who is not rude. ‘Absence of abruptness’, i.e. , from being badly placed or uttered, an ill-spoken word is abrupt. By being opposed to it a good word is not abrupt. Herein the reason has been shown by a figure of speech. ‘Complacency of heart’. that is, the mentality itself of the heart as joyous; just the state of one’s own mind. The state of not being charged with ill-will is the meaning.> -------- N: The term adhivaasana khanti is used. This is patience with regard to our daily surroundings . Quote from Khun Sujin’s Perfections: The subco states regarding adhivaasana khanti, endurance when facing offenses from others, that is adhivaasanakhanti>. N: It may be difficult to always be patient, but in being mindful of naama and ruupa we can learn that there is no person who offends and no person who is offended. Quote from Khun Sujin’s Perfections: < We read: "All those phenomena by which wrong was done, and those to whom it was done-- all those, at this very moment, have ceased.” Whoever may have done wrong to us or may have harmed us, his deeds have ceased at that moment, and therefore we should not continue to be angry. At this moment that person does not do wrong to us; we should not think of what is past already and continue to be angry. If we reflect on the truth in the right way, we shall understand that all those phenomena by which wrong was done, and those to whom it was done-- all those, at this very moment, have ceased. We read: “With whom, then, should you now be angry, and by whom should anger be aroused? When all phenomena are non-self, who can do wrong to whom?"> --------------- As to gentleness, soracca, the Co refers to dha. sa. 1342:< it is non- transgression in action, non-transgression in speech, non- transgression in both action and speech. This is called gentleness. Also all restraint of virtue is gentleness. This is said to be a gentle nature (suratabhaavo). > ------------ Co Pali: Soraccanti ‘‘tattha katama.m soracca.m? Yo kaayiko aviitikkamo, vaacasiko aviitikkamo, kaayikavaacasiko aviitikkamo. Ida.m vuccati soracca.m. Sabbopi siilasa.mvaro soracca’’nti (dha. sa. 1342) eva.m vutto suratabhaavo. ------- N: The Atthasaalinii explains: ------ The subco to the Sangiitisutta states: Because of pure siila he is contented in [facing] what is good or bad, he is brave, with temperance (siracca). Therefore it is said ‘with a gentle nature’. ****** Nina. #88908 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 1:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just studying... How to properly study Abhidhamma> sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Sat, 9/8/08, Alex wrote: > > In your own brief & concise words: > > can you please explain how to study so that mindfulness arises? > > can you please explain how to study so that understanding of >namarupa > > arises? .... S: I think that by carefully considering what we've read and heard with regard to the dhammas (the namas and rupas) at the present moment, there are conditions for understanding of namas and rupas to grow. Seeing the value in such understanding and having a keen interest to understand more deeply means that we are inclined to listen, read and consider further. This in turn is a condition for more wise reflection, sati and panna to grow. .... A:>>>>Can you explain a typical day for Abhidhammika? .... S: I don't give myself this label, but for us, a typical day is very ordinary - work, shopping, household chores, swimming, hiking, office work, dhamma reading/writing if there's time. For over 30 years I worked hard (psychologist, social worker, teacher etc) - often too tired to read, but I always had confidence that for the real study of the present dhammas, a lack of time for book study or a busy work life was not any hindrance at all. Now I have more free time, but still many interests. Whatever our lifestyle, whatever the activity, whether as a bhikkhu or a busy lay person, there are always the realities of seeing, visible object, hearing, sound and so on to be aware of and to understand. When it comes to the development of satipatthana, we learn that there are only realities to be known. The 'busy work life', the 'bhikkhu life', the 'book study', the 'chores' are all concepts, ideas about different situations. ... A:> How does one apply it to daily life. .... S: I don't consider applying the awareness and understanding to daily life. When we appreciate the value of listening and considering the Dhamma carefully, there are conditions for such 'application'. For example, we read and hear about the importance and value of kind speech and metta. If we appreciate this, it may be a condition for more kind speech and metta during the day, such as when we write here or spend time with our family and friends. We understand it's not just a matter of reciting a sutta and sitting in a quiet room following a metta meditation, not wishing to be disturbed. When it comes to the understanding of dhammas, the more we investigate and learn about what these dhammas are, i.e. not the 'situations' as given above, the more we appreciate that the 'application' is just the moment of directly understanding these dhammas (one at a time), no matter 'where' or 'when'. .... A:> I can understand reading, but we cannot read all day long. ... S: Exactly. The wise consideration and practice is not a matter of reading. As Sukin has pointed out, we all have different accumulations and interest in this regard. .... A: >So as you say that one is reminded of just seeing and so on. So after a while defilements start to decrease, because one is used to thinking, (perhaps repeating mentally) and reading about just "seeing" . ... S: As soon as there are expectations (about defilements decreasing) or wisdom arising, there is clinging to oneself again and a lack of understanding of the reality at this very moment. It always comes back to the 'now'. .... A:> Thank you for your reply. I would also like if Jon, Sarah and others would explain it in their own words as well. .... S: I hope these are good questions. Perhaps Jon will also give his comments. Thank you for asking. Metta, Sarah ========== #88909 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 2:52 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 4, no 3.nimitta. nilovg Hi Herman, Op 10-aug-2008, om 3:54 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > Nina also recently wrote this in relation to nimittas: > > "I asked whether this means that one is aware of a concept of that > reality. She (AS) said yes." > > So, I actually believe that you misunderstand, and therefore > misrepresent Nina, when you say she might not like to see concepts > being mistaken for realities. It is clear that Nina understands that > it is not possible to know realities, only concepts at best. ------ N: No, it is still somewhat different from what you think. The matter is complicated and subtle, I know. Remember: nimitta is shadow of reality. As Sarah said: There can be mindfulness of charactreistics of realities. But we know the present one cannot be catched, only a sign of it can be known. I cam across an old post of Sarah, and included is a discussion with Howard: S:-When satipatthana has really developed, there is the beginning of seeing the difference between concept and reality, but it's still nimitta (sign) unless it's the clear realizing of the rising and falling away of realities (at the third stage of insight). Before that there has to be the clear knowledge of the distinction between concepts and realities, the knowledge of when there is and is not sati (awareness) and the distinction between namas and rupas. -At the moments of understanding the arising and falling away of dhammas, there is the understanding that the nimitta is a characteristic of a reality which arises and falls away. - Even after the moments of the direct experiencing of the arising and falling away of realities, the characteristics appearing are the nimitta of realities. Only nibbana doesn't have nimitta. I remember she stressed that the difference is in the vijja or avijja arising. The arahant still pays attention - it's not a matter of getting rid of nimitta at all. The cetasikas perform their functions like before, but without kilesa. Even though he doesn't pay as much attention as worldly people do, this doesn't mean no attention. He/she still thinks a lot as well. The aim is not to stop thinking. Nimitta are still experienced because of the rapidity of the succession of rising and falling realities. So, I think it's the same meaning when we refer to sanna making a sign of the 5 khandhas as when we refer to the nimitta of the khandhas appearing now. Also, when we refer to the nimitta experienced by jhana cittas, again it's still nimitta, but a different aspect or level because of different kinds of cittas arising as I understand. .... > N<...>. > Nimitta in the second sense is an image of lasting beings and things. > Nimitta as sankhara nimitta is referring to conditioned dhammas and > it is not the same as the second sense. > I said that the nimitta remains, but not in the sense of a lasting > thing. It is just a reminder of the rapidity with which the nama or > rupa that was the object of mindfulness has fallen away. .... Kh Sujin said: dhammas are arising and > > falling away very quickly and only the nimitta, the sign remains. > > There is the nimitta of rupakkhandha, saññakkhandha, of all khandhas. .... S: Just to add to this, at each moment now, sanna makes a sign of the 5 khandhas. This is why each khandha has its nimitta, because the khandhas arise and fall away so fast that without highly developed panna, it has to be the 'sign' that is marked, just like in the example given in the texts of the swirling fire-stick. .... Howard:> What khandha do nimittas fall under? If the sign is something that > remains, what is it? Nama or rupa, of what exact sort, and how long > does it last? > (Or do nimittas constitute a 6th khandha?) .... Sarah: No, nimittas are the signs of the khandhas. What is left all the time after the dhamma has fallen away is the sign, like the sign of visible object or sound. But each one has fallen away already. It's a shadow of reality. A shadow isn't a khandha itself. When panna grows it knows the difference between the conditioned dhammas which rise and fall and have nimitta and the unconditioned dhamma which doesn't have any nimitta. When we appreciate that what appears now is only the nimitta of a khandha, it helps us to see that we live in the world of nimittas, a kind of dream world as has been stressed so much. S: We read that panna leads out of sankhara nimitta but actually this is referring to the leading away from wrong view, leading away with detachment from clinging with wrong view. K.Sujin referred to how no door, no hole in the roof is found as long as there is no understanding. Even at the first 2 stages of insight, the panna is not strong enough to directly penetrate the paramattha dhammas as opposed to the nimittas of paramattha dhammas, because the direct knowledge of the rise and fall of dhammas hasn't been fully realized. .... N: > When there is mindfulness we do not have to think of a mentally > constructed reproduction as the actual present object. That thinking > takes too long. There is just a beginning to attend to > characteristics that appear. Then hardness, then visible object, then > seeing, then unpleasant feeling. .... S: Yes, true. And if there's no awareness now of the characteristics of dhammas appearing, such as seeing and visible object, there's no need to be concerned about nimittas! -------- N (now): that is what I understood. Just being aware of any charactreitsic that appears and not being concerned. Nina. #88910 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 3:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What is a question? jonoabb Hi Herman > There was a time when the holy life was lived under the Blessed One > for the sake of total Unbinding through lack of clinging. > > Since then things have changed somewhat. > > From the "Questions of Milinda" > > And when he saw that Nâgasena had finished his meal, he took a lower > seat, and sat beside him, and said: 'What shall we discuss?' > ... > 'Certainly not, Sire. Some for those reasons,but some have left the > world in terror at the tyranny of kings. Some have joined us to be > safe from being robbed, some harassed by debt, and some perhaps to > gain a livelihood.' I think you're making the point that after the Buddha's death there were monks who joined the sangha for the wrong reason. In fact, this happened in the time of the Buddha himself also (for example, joining the order to gain access to medical treatment), so it's not a new phenomena that's being described. But that apart, I'm afraid I don't see the significance of the point to our discussion. > I imagine, because you question my statements as to their relevance to > the path, that you have a certain path in mind. Is it total unbinding > through lack of clinging that you seek? If it is, then there are those > who have gone before you who have identified waypoints for you whereby > you may mark your progress. Thanks for the quote from MN 24 that follows. Could you please be a little more explicit as to its significance to our discussion? Thanks. > "So, my friend, I will give you an analogy, for there are cases where > it's through analogies that knowledgeable people can understand the > ... > Unbinding through lack of clinging. And it's for the sake of total > Unbinding through lack of clinging that the holy life is lived under > the Blessed One." MN24 > > Consequences are known only in relation to a goal. If one doesn't have > or know a goal, then they have no way of evaluating their actions. > Where do you hope to end up? A goal is a thought held on the part of the 'doer'. According to the teachings, moments of consciousness that accompany actions are either wholesome or unwholesome by their nature, regardless of any perception as to the goal of the action. > Again, these can only be evaluated in terms of a goal. Some > suggestions as to why people might do the above: > > brushing teeth: habit, fear, vanity > eating breakfast: craving, fear, habit > conversation: fear, craving, habit, vanity But these could hardly be called goals. Craving, fear and vanity are unwholesome mental factors. These are the things that give actions their ethical quality. > > And whichever it is, is this really part of the path to enlightenment? > > That depends on what you imagine enlightenment to be. Are you getting > any closer? :-) There is a path to enlightenment found in the teachings. It is the understanding of that path that interests me, for the purpose of this discussion. Jon #88911 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 3:55 am Subject: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati jonoabb Hi Herman > And why do you regularly and intentionally fly to Bangkok, Jon? Is it > in the hope that there will be an unintended non-self moment there? > Why bother, I hear that the non-self moments in Hong Kong are just as > good, and I can certainly vouch for the ones in Australia :-) I agree with the general thrust of what you're suggesting here, namely, that any idea of a particular time or place as being more conducive to the arising of awareness/insight is mistaken (in fact, I think it'd be wrong view). However, making arrangements to meet to discuss dhamma does not necessarily imply an idea of there being moments of awareness/insight involved in the discussion. In principle it is no different from, say, logging on to an internet discussion group to exchange messages about the teachings. Jon #88912 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 3:57 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Metta, Ch 9, no 2. jonoabb Hi Herman > I agree with you that seeing the way things are is the most useful > activity. In the context of that, I believe that seeing anicca as > applying universally (to whatever falls under "the all") is the limit > of experience. Conversely, I believe that moments, in which a member > of a catalogue of paramattha dhammas with their own sabbhava that rise > and fall individually, are not experiencable. I also believe that all > modern theories of how perception works reject that experience is > composed of individual, absolute elements. My understanding of seeing things the way they truly are, according to the teachings, involves firstly understanding at an intellectual level what are the "things" that can be directly experienced at the present moment. These of course are the "dhammas" that you would rather not talk about ;-)). Anicca as a characteristic of dhammas is something that becomes apparent as awareness of/insight into dhammas is developed. It is not something that, having been conceptualised, can be seen as applying in and around us in the world. (Of course, there is a sense in which the conventional world can be regarded as manifesting impermanence, but that is something altogether different to the impermanence spoken of by the Buddha, as I understand the texts.) Jon #88913 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 3:58 am Subject: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni Sutta jonoabb Hi Howard > Craving for awakening and release is based in sense of self. As you say, > "motivated by craving or conceit." The prisoner's craving for escape is > self-oriented. Prince Gotama's desire also was. So is ours. We start where we Putting aside for now the Bodhhisatta and the Great Renunciation, I agree that (for the rest of us) an interest in awakening and release is first aroused motivated by craving and conceit. But that doesn't mean that when the Buddha spoke of the development of the path he was advocating practices that must necessarily involve craving and conceit. > We start where we are, not where we hope to be. True. And where we are is a being in whom both kusala and akusala arise. The arising kusala is to be developed, and the akusala not. The factors for the arising of kusala include seeing the value in kusala and (for awareness/insight in particular) in hearing the teachings. Jon #88914 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 4:00 am Subject: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Avarana Sutta jonoabb Hi Howard > > 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. > ... > What I said was exactly a statement about my view. I didn't say, as you > wrote, "it would not have been taught by the Buddha." I said "I would see no > point in the Buddha having taught this." There is a big difference, Jon, and > I think it would have been preferable had you let my own words stand. > --------------------------------------------------- Well I apologise for any incorrect paraphrase. But either way, you related the statement to the Avarana Sutta when, it seemed to me, that sutta does not support such a statement. Jon #88915 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 4:01 am Subject: Re: Relentless Training: No Retreat, No Surrender! No pain, no gain! jonoabb Hi Alex > > What is needed is for those accumulated tendencies to be further > > built on (i.e., developed). > > This is area of discussion. How exactly that is to be done? Can you > please explain it to me? This can best be understood by taking as an example the kind of kusala that may arise naturally in a day, i.e., unrelated to any idea of a "practice". For instance, being (spontaneously) helpful, considerate or friendly/ polite to another person. If kusala, this would be metta, right? Most of the time such kusala moments probably pass by unnoticed. There is the (bare) accumulation of metta, not its development. However, when there is the appreciation that the present moment is kusala and worthy of development, this is kusala of a higher degree, and is a condition for the further development of that quality (metta). Hoping this is clear. Jon #88916 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 4:02 am Subject: Re: Relentless Training: No Retreat, No Surrender! No pain, no gain! jonoabb Hi Alex > Lets start with MN20, for example. > ========================== > ... > The sutta illustrates "doing" something about akusala thoughts. Not > simply "understanding what one read in a book". > > Please explain how you understand it. My understanding of this sutta is as follows: The sutta is talking about samatha bhavana, not vipassana bhavana. It begins as follows: <> As we know, akusala mind states are a hindrance to the development of samatha. So if high stages of samatha (including jhanas) are to be attained, akusala mind-states cannot prevail, as they do with us. That's why the sutta says (abbreviating): <> To my understanding, it is the arising of kusala that "crushes" the akusala, not willpower or directed effort of some kind. Jon > "If evil, unskillful thoughts — imbued with desire, aversion or > delusion — still arise in the monk while he is attending to the > relaxing of thought-fabrication with regard to those thoughts, then — > with his teeth clenched and his tongue pressed against the roof of > his mouth — he should beat down, constrain, and crush his mind with > his awareness... With their abandoning, he steadies his mind right > within, settles it, unifies it, and concentrates it. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.020.than.html #88917 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 4:04 am Subject: Re: kayagatasati jonoabb Hi Connie > Jon: The interpretation offered by the commentaries may seem "exotic" at first, but in my experience it is never inconsistent with the suttas. > > Some interpretation is obviously needed, because the term "exertion", in and of itself, is capable, in the context, of more than one meaning. > > connie: It just seems that 'exertion', 'energy' or 'effort' aren't really much of anything alone but indicate an intensity or level of assistance to/application of something else - say, 'patience' or 'irritation'. A good way of putting it. Thanks for the comment. > Butting back out. Welcome to butt in anytime. Jon #88918 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 4:06 am Subject: Re: Just studying & Sariputta jonoabb Hi Alex > Hearing the Bible is something that *happens* as a result of past > kamma too! Correct. But how does that help in the point we're discussing, namely: (a) whether this is what other teachings proclaim (as far as I know, it's not), and (b) even if it is, whether it would lead to the same outcome (I don't think it would). > They all say that. "Ours teaching is better than yours!". In the > tradition that I've followed prior to Buddhism it was: "Our teaching > is the best, and the original one. If any other traditions sound like > us, it is because they took (stolen) from our teaching. Other > teachings are like a sandbox for children. Ours is final". But this has nothing to do with our discussion, does it? > > A person could not, by hearing an explanation of the > > teachings in the Bible, come to an intellectual understanding of > > dhammas and the way things truly are; only the hearing of the true > > dhamma can make that possible, and without that hearing such > > understanding could not occur. > > In Upanisa sutta the proximate condition is Samadhi. Yes, samadhi; not samatha/jhana. That is a reference to the samadhi that accompanies panna, not to mundane jhana. If I remember correctly, the Upanisa Sutta lists about 10 factors, of which samadhi is only 1. They are all kusala mental factors that are prominent at different stages of the develoment of insight. They are not a list of things to be practised individually. > At best it only GUIDES one practice into a right direction. If you > consider the written word as "The Gospel Truth", then its a Dogma > which even Buddha has rejected. As I've tried to explain, we are not talking about reading what is on a printed page, but about hearing the teachings explained in a way that is appropriate for us. Of course, it is still possible for wrong view to arise. But the fact remains that hearing the teachings explained is indispensible to the arising of awareness/insight. > What are other 3? Supported by what does right view lead to Arhatship > (mn43 or 44) Samatha, Vipassana! The 4 factors are: association with the wise, hearing the true Dhamma, appropriately reflecting on what has been understood, practice in accordance with the Dhamma. > > From reading your comments, I take it that the short answer to the > > question I put to you is that there's *no indication* in the sutta > > that Sariputta's enlightenment as a sotapanna was based on jhana. > > You're really only speculating that there could be. > > ... No. It is included by default. There is no textual statement to that effect, either. That is yet another inference (more speculation on your part!). > > Any sutta quote for the proposition that "The truth is happening > > constantly. It is just clouded by defilements. Precepts & Jhana drive > > the clouds away."? > > The Samadhi Indriya happens right before Panna-Indriya. Thanks for the sutta passage. I'm afraid that doesn't come near to stating that precepts and jhana drive the clouds of defilements away, leaving the truth bare to be seen by panna. Again, you are relying on an inference, namely, an inference drawn from the order in which the indriyas are dealt with. Jon > ================================ > "Monks, there are these five faculties. Which five? The faculty of > conviction, the faculty of persistence, the faculty of mindfulness, > the faculty of concentration, the faculty of discernment. > > [alex: note the order in which they develop. saddha->viriya->sati- > >samadhi->panna ] > > > "And what is the faculty of concentration? There is the case where a > monk, a disciple of the noble ones, making it his object to let go, > attains concentration, attains singleness of mind. Quite withdrawn > from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, he > enters & remains in the first jhana... fourth jhana. This is called > the faculty of concentration. > > "And what is the faculty of discernment? There is the case where a > monk, a disciple of the noble ones, is discerning, endowed with > discernment of arising & passing away — noble, penetrating, leading > to the right ending of stress. He discerns, as it has come to > be: 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is > the cessation of stress... This is the path of practice leading to > the cessation of stress.' This is called the faculty of discernment. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn48/sn48.010.than.html > > > There is also a sutta somewhere that talks about 5 faculties being > present in all noble induvidials (including saddha/dhamma nusarin) in > different degrees. Weakest is in saddhanusarin, strongest in Arhat. #88919 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 4:07 am Subject: Re: kayagatasati .. Relentless Training ... jonoabb Hi Tep > (#88601) Tep: The dhammas to be understood are as follows: the > wholesome and the unwholesome; nutriment; the four noble truths; > ageing & death and all other links of the DO from birth up to > ignorance [MN 9]. Elsewhere in the suttas, it is the dhammas comprising "the All" that are to be known. So I'm not sure I would agree with your reading of MN 9 here. > T: Let's take a look at one of the dhammas in the list, e.g. > nutriment. Arahant Sariputta said, " When a disciple of the noble > ones discerns nutriment, the origination of nutriment, the cessation > of nutriment, and the way of practice leading to the cessation of > nutriment, then he is a person of right view... who has arrived at > this true Dhamma". So it is clear to me that "then he is a person of > right view..." is a consequence of the discernment of nutriment, its > origin, its cessation, and the way of practice leading to its > cessation. To me, the words "then he is a person of right view... who has arrived at this true Dhamma" refer to the person who has attained enlightenment. So I would read the passage as describing what an enlightened being has come to understand (i.e., through his developed understanding of dhammas), rather than as describing the dhammas about which understanding is to be developed. > These four discernments of each DO link, in accordance > with the Four Noble Truths, are the conditions for arising of right > view (samma ditthi). Please consider whether that is the only inference to be drawn from the passage, or whether in fact it could equally be read as meaning that it is these truths, etc that are known by virtue of the development of right understanding. > But please feel free to elaborate why you think these four > discernments are instead the realization of "developed insight", > because I do not have a clue as to what you meant. Hoping that what I've said above gives a clearer idea of what I meant. Jon #88920 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 4:08 am Subject: Re: kayagatasati .. Relentless Training ... jonoabb Hi Tep > T: The Venerable Ananda had the urgency to attain arahantship so he > could be qualified to attend the next-morning meeting of the arahants > in order to review the Dhamma after the Buddha's Parinibbana. The > following story is NOT a joke, Jon. Yes, I'm familiar with the story (very inspiring), but do not see it as establishing the proposition that samvega has to do with the desire of a worldling to become enlightened within a particular time- frame. > T: Of course, right effort arises as a kusala cetasika-dhamma. > However, right effort cannot be separated from body and mind, Jon. > Just like a man's voice is dependent on the man's vocal cord and > other organs, right effort is not a tree that grows in the sky. The > determination by the monks, "gladly would we let the fresh & blood > etc.", indicates that there were earnest monks (that are defined by > bodies -- rupa and maha-bhuta rupa-- , minds and cetasikas) who > urgently practiced according to the Teachings of the real Buddha. To my understanding, the passage is not talking about the kind of conventional effort to be made, but is describing the extent of the kusala determination/effort necessary, i.e., determination/effort of a very highly developed kind. Such determination/effort cannot be induced by conventional exertion. > Such determination and effort by those monks influenced their goal > attainment -- they could reach nibbana faster, sooner than other > monks who are not possessed of samma-vayama. I see samma-vayama as a momentary mental factor, so for all persons developing the path it's arsing will be dependent on conditions (especially those of association with the wise, hearing the true Dhamma, etc). For those whose samma-vayama is more developed, it is likely to arise more frequently. And for those for whom samma-vayama arises more frequently, it's development is likely to proceed more rapidly. > T: Knowing the Teachings about conditioned dhammas, one understands > that right effort arises because of conditions (the four exertions as > defined in DN 22, for example). In MN 117 right effort of the path is > accompanied by right view and right mindfulness. As a consequence, an > arising of "presently unarisen kusala" will occur with no akusala > dhamma whatsover. Such right effort is volitional formations, > therefore there is intention/volition with desire (chanda) to > accomplish a goal such as aiming for the arising of "presently > unarisen kusala", etc. In this scenario, the deliberate > intentional/volitional action (kamma) is always meritorious. If the deliberate intention to have kusala arise (in place of presently arising akusala) is itself kusala, it would mean that kusala could be developed by merely intending to have more kusala. This doesn't seem right. Jon > > >"Thus you should train yourselves: > > > 'We will relentlessly exert ourselves, [thinking,] > > > "Gladly would we let the flesh & blood in our bodies dry up, leaving > > > just the skin, tendons, & bones, but if we have not attained what can > > > be reached through human firmness, human persistence, human striving, > > > there will be no relaxing our persistence." ' > > > That's how you should train yourselves." > > > [AN 2.5: Appativana Sutta. Relentlessly] #88921 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:22 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 4, no 3.nimitta. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (And Herman & Sarah) - In a message dated 8/10/2008 5:53:22 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Herman, Op 10-aug-2008, om 3:54 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > Nina also recently wrote this in relation to nimittas: > > "I asked whether this means that one is aware of a concept of that > reality. She (AS) said yes." > > So, I actually believe that you misunderstand, and therefore > misrepresent Nina, when you say she might not like to see concepts > being mistaken for realities. It is clear that Nina understands that > it is not possible to know realities, only concepts at best. ------ N: No, it is still somewhat different from what you think. The matter is complicated and subtle, I know. Remember: nimitta is shadow of reality. As Sarah said: There can be mindfulness of charactreistics of realities. But we know the present one cannot be catched, only a sign of it can be known. I cam across an old post of Sarah, and included is a discussion with Howard: S:-When satipatthana has really developed, there is the beginning of seeing the difference between concept and reality, but it's still nimitta (sign) unless it's the clear realizing of the rising and falling away of realities (at the third stage of insight). Before that there has to be the clear knowledge of the distinction between concepts and realities, the knowledge of when there is and is not sati (awareness) and the distinction between namas and rupas. -At the moments of understanding the arising and falling away of dhammas, there is the understanding that the nimitta is a characteristic of a reality which arises and falls away. ============================== It seems to me that in the psychological sense that is relevant to this discussion, a nimitta is much along the lines of what modern psychologists call "a percept." It is the projected characterizing quality imposed by sa~n~na on an observed object at the most immediate, elementary level of application of sa~n~na, prior to full-blown, higher level, conceptual construction. There is a similarity between this and a notion in kabbalah, which is that of a pair of fundamental cognitive operations called chochma and binah (personified as male and female - maybe brother & sister or husband and wife), with chochma being wisdom in the sense of mere experiencing of something as it is but without further characterization, and binah being the immediate understanding or recognition or characterization that follows upon the mere knowing that is chochma. Binah is a further but immediate cognitive development, and it produces a characterizing "mark" or "sign". Roughly, chochma is vi~n~nana and binah is sa~n~na. The former observes a dhamma, and the latter "understands" it. Without the perceptual mark/sign (nimitta) that sa~n~na produces - the percept, I'd say - there is no "understanding" of what was experienced in our usual sense of "understanding." Nibbana, being beyond all conditions, is beyond perception/characterization, and so is signless. I think that the nimitta is exactly a percept of the simplest sort, and the production of such percepts is the first step in a process of thinking. With metta, Howard #88922 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Avarana Sutta upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 8/10/2008 7:00:30 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Howard > > 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. > ... > What I said was exactly a statement about my view. I didn't say, as you > wrote, "it would not have been taught by the Buddha." I said "I would see no > point in the Buddha having taught this." There is a big difference, Jon, and > I think it would have been preferable had you let my own words stand. > --------------------------------------------------- Well I apologise for any incorrect paraphrase. -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Thank you, Jon! ;-) ------------------------------------------------------ But either way, you related the statement to the Avarana Sutta when, it seemed to me, that sutta does not support such a statement. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. :-) ---------------------------------------------------- Jon =========================== With metta, Howard #88923 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 5:39 am Subject: [Was: Focussing on Anything is Wrong?} Sour Grapes. indriyabala Dear Ken H (and Alex), - One thing that is certain (and it almost denies the impermanence principle) is that you always think south when I say north. Yet, I am still thankful for your reply. KenH: Right from the start, when the author used the meaningless jargon "the truth within ourselves" I knew what was to follow. And I was right, it was a confidence trick. It was the same sort of confidence trick that is used by self-help gurus in America to make billions of dollars every year. T: Jumping quickly to that conclusion is a risk you are taking, Ken. Chances are you again have mistaken another hard-to-find, well- practiced monk, who clearly understood the Dhamma and its purpose, for a "confidence trickster". KenH: The final words of the article were: "but the only way to see this is through meditation. If you don't meditate, you won't know. The way to know is through the strategy of finding a peaceful place and making the mind peaceful. That's how you'll gain release from suffering and stress." When you read those words, didn't alarm bells go off in your mind? Didn't you think of the countless Buddhists who, in all good faith, have dedicated large parts of their lives to meditation, and who are still no nearer to enlightenment? T: When I read Ajaan Suwat's golden words about finding "peace of mind" through meditation, I only hear the sound of peace like when I was vistiting Budhhist temples in Thailand. You told a story about how those shameless, self-help authors made profit from innocent (and stupid ?) people in America. Then you made a 90-degree turn to your own unsuccessful-and-sad meditation story : KenH: In the same way, "Buddhist" meditation techniques never work. And the blame is always directed back at the meditator, never on meditation itself. I think it is a terrible shame, and I will do whatever I can to protect people from it. T: Sorry to hear that the grapes you ate were all sour, Ken. But it is not true to say that all grapes are sour, because the grapes I have tasted so far are all so sweet ! Tep === #88924 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 5:58 am Subject: Re: kayagatasati .. Relentless Training ... indriyabala Dear Jon, - I am going to insert a reply while reading yours ... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > Hi Tep > (#88601) Tep: The dhammas to be understood are as follows: the > wholesome and the unwholesome; nutriment; the four noble truths; > ageing & death and all other links of the DO from birth up to > ignorance [MN 9]. Elsewhere in the suttas, it is the dhammas comprising "the All" that are to be known. So I'm not sure I would agree with your reading of MN 9 here. ------------------------ T: If you want an even bigger picture, then not only the All but also the 201 dhammas as stated in the Patisambhidamagga as well. ------------------------ > T: Let's take a look at one of the dhammas in the list, e.g. > nutriment. Arahant Sariputta said, " When a disciple of the noble > ones discerns nutriment, the origination of nutriment, the cessation > of nutriment, and the way of practice leading to the cessation of > nutriment, then he is a person of right view... who has arrived at > this true Dhamma". So it is clear to me that "then he is a person of > right view..." is a consequence of the discernment of nutriment, its > origin, its cessation, and the way of practice leading to its > cessation. To me, the words "then he is a person of right view... who has arrived at this true Dhamma" refer to the person who has attained enlightenment. So I would read the passage as describing what an enlightened being has come to understand (i.e., through his developed understanding of dhammas), rather than as describing the dhammas about which understanding is to be developed. ......................... T: It is always interesting to me how two persons can have so much different understanding of the same thing. ......................... > These four discernments of each DO link, in accordance > with the Four Noble Truths, are the conditions for arising of right > view (samma ditthi). Please consider whether that is the only inference to be drawn from the passage, or whether in fact it could equally be read as meaning that it is these truths, etc that are known by virtue of the development of right understanding. ------------------------- T: If you look at the egg first, then you may think that egg comes first, then chicken. ------------------------- > But please feel free to elaborate why you think these four > discernments are instead the realization of "developed insight", > because I do not have a clue as to what you meant. Hoping that what I've said above gives a clearer idea of what I meant. Jon .......................... T: Not very much, Jon. Tep === #88925 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 6:33 am Subject: Re: kayagatasati .. Relentless Training ... indriyabala Hello Jon, - My inserted reply follows yours. Hi Tep > T: The Venerable Ananda had the urgency to attain arahantship so he > could be qualified to attend the next-morning meeting of the arahants > in order to review the Dhamma after the Buddha's Parinibbana. The > following story is NOT a joke, Jon. Yes, I'm familiar with the story (very inspiring), but do not see it as establishing the proposition that samvega has to do with the desire of a worldling to become enlightened within a particular time- frame. ................ T: Even in a court of law an evidence is often ignored and judges are known for passing a wrong judgment. ................ > T: Of course, right effort arises as a kusala cetasika-dhamma. > However, right effort cannot be separated from body and mind, Jon. > Just like a man's voice is dependent on the man's vocal cord and > other organs, right effort is not a tree that grows in the sky. The > determination by the monks, "gladly would we let the fresh & blood > etc.", indicates that there were earnest monks (that are defined by > bodies -- rupa and maha-bhuta rupa-- , minds and cetasikas) who > urgently practiced according to the Teachings of the real Buddha. To my understanding, the passage is not talking about the kind of conventional effort to be made, but is describing the extent of the kusala determination/effort necessary, i.e., determination/effort of a very highly developed kind. Such determination/effort cannot be induced by conventional exertion. ----------------------- T: Effort may be right (samma) or wrong (miccha); never heard of conventional effort. ----------------------- > Such determination and effort by those monks influenced their goal > attainment -- they could reach nibbana faster, sooner than other > monks who are not possessed of samma-vayama. I see samma-vayama as a momentary mental factor, so for all persons developing the path it's arsing will be dependent on conditions (especially those of association with the wise, hearing the true Dhamma, etc). For those whose samma-vayama is more developed, it is likely to arise more frequently. And for those for whom samma-vayama arises more frequently, it's development is likely to proceed more rapidly. ..................... T: The contributing factors to speed that you mentioned are: supporting conditions; degree of dhamma maturity (less developed or more developed); how frequent right effort arises. But urgency and determination both influence frequency of the development effort. ..................... > T: Knowing the Teachings about conditioned dhammas, one understands > that right effort arises because of conditions (the four exertions as > defined in DN 22, for example). In MN 117 right effort of the path is > accompanied by right view and right mindfulness. As a consequence, an > arising of "presently unarisen kusala" will occur with no akusala > dhamma whatsover. Such right effort is volitional formations, > therefore there is intention/volition with desire (chanda) to > accomplish a goal such as aiming for the arising of "presently > unarisen kusala", etc. In this scenario, the deliberate > intentional/volitional action (kamma) is always meritorious. If the deliberate intention to have kusala arise (in place of presently arising akusala) is itself kusala, it would mean that kusala could be developed by merely intending to have more kusala. This doesn't seem right. Jon ------------------ T: An intention or motivation to have more kusala is necessary, otherwise how can you be mindful in developing kusala? ------------------ Tep === #88926 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 7:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are there phenomena that are neither nama nor rupa? nilovg Dear TG, Sarah has given a detailed answer today. This may clarify to you what you are wondering about. Nina. Op 9-aug-2008, om 21:24 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > Thanks for your detailed answer. I guess, from your answer, that I > have to > conclude that the answer to my question is no... Space is not > called a rupa > in the Suttas. IMO, space is used in the Suttas merely to affirm a > dimensional component to phenomena. #88927 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 7:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: solipsism of present moment? nilovg Hi Alex, Op 9-aug-2008, om 21:09 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Hopefully I have just misunderstood you. > > Volition of "Nina" is not the same as volition of "Alex". "Your" > kamma isn't "mine", and "mine" kamma isn't "yours". ------- N: You have a point in warning against solipsism. But there is no danger if one studies the whole of the Tipitaka. And as to Abhidhamma: study also the patthanaa which explains accumulations of different individuals, kamma of the past that produces vipaaka now etc. It is good to study the Dependent Origination as we do now with Larry's postings of the Visuddhimagga. But, when speaking of awareness of paramattha dhammas, it is explained that the present nama or rupa is the object of mindfulness. There can be only one object, a paramattha dhamma, which is the object of awareness. As understanding develops, stages of insight can be reached. At the second stage of tender insight there is direct understanding of realities as being conditioned. Then, the D.O. is no longer just a text. It comes to life. It is pa~n~naa that takes care of balance, no danger of solipsism as you call it. Nina. #88928 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 9:09 am Subject: Re: Relentless Training: No Retreat, No Surrender! No pain, no gain! truth_aerator Dear Jon and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > Hi Alex > The sutta is talking about samatha bhavana, not vipassana bhavana. But it does end with Arahatship. So even *if* the sutta talks about just "samatha", it is of a good sort. > To my understanding, it is the arising of kusala that "crushes" the > akusala, not willpower or directed effort of some kind. But the arising of kusala has to be caused, many times and very energetically (atappi, and all that). It is not "just happens out of a clear sky". Strong effects, require strong causes. Samatha Bhavana can be useful as you've just admitted as it can help kusala to arise, willpower & directed effort to be mobilized and so one. Thank you very much for your reply. Best wishes, Alex #88930 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 11:24 am Subject: Re: Meditation in the suttas. truth_aerator Hi Ken, Tep and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Tep, I am pleased to say that this is nothing like K Sujin's > teaching. Absolutely nothing like it! What about one of the most knowledgeble masters of Tipitaka, Mahasi Saydaw? Why did he (being one of the most learned in Tip, a MahaPandita, someone 100x better than most Abh teachers) became a meditation teacher? Why did the Buddha stress Jhana and such, so often? > Right from the start, when the author used the meaningless > jargon "the truth within ourselves" I knew what was to follow. And >I > was right, it was a confidence trick. It was the same sort of > confidence trick that is used by self-help gurus in America to make > billions of dollars every year. > > I am not saying that Ajaan Suwat Suvaco (whoever he is) is a > confidence trickster. Almost certainly, he is just one of the > countless Buddhist meditators who have been tricked and who is > unwittingly passing on the trick as a result. Almost certainly you are slandering one of the great teacher monks. >>>> The final words of the article were: "but the only way to see this is through meditation. If you don't meditate, you won't know. The way to know is through the strategy of finding a peaceful place and making the mind peaceful. That's how you'll gain release from suffering and stress." When you read those words, didn't alarm bells go off in your mind? >>> Alarm bell did go off. There are simply too many passages of Buddha, his teachers (whom he wanted to teach first because they were ready) and his monks meditating. Ex: DN16 35. "For at one time, Lord, Alara Kalama was on a journey, and he went aside from the highway and sat down by the wayside at the foot of a tree to pass the heat of the day. And it came about, Lord, that a great number of carts, even five hundred carts, passed by him, one by one. And then, Lord, a certain man who was following behind that train of carts, approached and spoke to him, saying: 'Did you, sir, see a great number of carts that passed you by?' And Alara Kalama answered him: 'I did not see them, brother.' 'But the noise, sir, surely you heard?' 'I did not hear it, brother.' Then that man asked him: 'Then, sir, perhaps you slept?' 'No, brother, I was not sleeping.' 'Then, sir, were you conscious?' 'I was, brother.' Then that man said: 'Then, sir, while conscious and awake you still did not see the great number of carts, even five hundred carts, that passed you by one after another, nor heard the noise? Why, sir, your very robe is covered with their dust!' And Alara Kalama replied, saying: 'So it is, brother.' 36. "And to that man, O Lord, came the thought: 'Marvellous it is, most wonderful indeed it is, the state of calmness wherein abide those who have gone forth from the world!' And there arose in him great faith in Alara Kalama, and he went his way." 37. "Now what do you think, Pukkusa? What is more difficult to do, more difficult to meet with — that a man, while conscious and awake, should not see a great number of carts, even five hundred carts, that passed him by one after another, nor hear the noise, or that one conscious and awake, in the midst of a heavy rain, with thunder rolling, lightning flashing, and thunderbolts crashing, should neither see it nor hear the noise?" 38. "What, O Lord, are five hundred carts — nay, six, seven, eight, nine hundred, or a thousand or even hundreds of thousands of carts — compared with this?" 39. "Now one time, Pukkusa, I was staying at Atuma, and had my abode in a barn there. And at that time there was a heavy rain, with thunder rolling, lightning flashing, and thunderbolts crashing. And two farmers who were brothers were killed close to the barn, together with four oxen, and a great crowd came forth from Atuma to the spot where they were killed. 40. "Now at that time, Pukkusa, I had come out of the barn and was walking up and down in thought before the door. And a certain man from the great crowd approached me, respectfully greeted me, and stood at one side. 41. "And I asked him: 'Why, brother, has this great crowd gathered together?' And he answered me: 'Just now, Lord, there was a heavy rain, with thunder rolling, lightning flashing, and thunderbolts crashing. And two farmers who were brothers were killed close by, together with four oxen. It is because of this that the great crowd has gathered. But where, Lord, were you?' "'I was here, brother.' 'Yet, Lord, did you not see it?' 'I did not see it, brother.' 'But the noise, Lord, you surely heard?' 'I did not hear it, brother.' Then that man asked me: 'Then, Lord, perhaps you slept?' 'No, brother, I was not sleeping.' 'Then, Lord, you were conscious?' 'I was, brother.' Then that man said: 'Then, Lord, while conscious and awake, in the midst of a heavy rain, with thunder rolling, lightning flashing, and thunderbolts crashing, you neither saw it nor heard the noise?' And I answered him, saying: 'I did not, brother.' 42. "And to that man, Pukkusa, came the thought: 'Marvellous it is, most wonderful indeed it is, the state of calmness wherein abide those who have gone forth from the world!' And there arose in him great faith in me, and he respectfully saluted me, and keeping his right side towards me, he went his way." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.1-6.vaji.html#t-40 Buddha could have easily said: Meditation is bad! But no. What he did was to tell this Buddha's meditation was even more deeper. Or check-> "'Now, I — without moving my body, without uttering a word — can dwell sensitive to unalloyed pleasure for a day and a night... for two days & nights... for three... four... five... six... seven days & nights. So what do you think: That being the case, who dwells in greater pleasure: King Seniya Bimbisara of Magadha or me?' "'That being the case, venerable Gotama dwells in greater pleasure than King Seniya Bimbisara of Magadha.'" That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, Mahanama the Sakyan delighted in the Blessed One's words. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.014.than.html =========================================== I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Savatthi, in Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Now at that time Ven. Sariputta was sitting not far from the Blessed One, his legs crossed, his body held erect, having mindfulness established to the fore. The Blessed One saw Ven. Sariputta sitting not far away, his legs crossed, his body held erect, having mindfulness established to the fore. Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed: Just as a mountain of rock, is unwavering, well-settled, so the monk whose delusion is ended,like a mountain, is undisturbed. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.3.04.than.html ==== Sariputta was sitting & meditating like a "mountain of rock". ============================================== Now at that time Ven. Maha Moggallana was sitting not far from the Blessed One, his legs crossed, his body held erect, having mindfulness immersed in the body well established within. The Blessed One saw Ven. Maha Moggallana sitting not far away, his legs crossed, his body held erect, having mindfulness immersed in the body well established within. Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed: With mindfulness immersed in the body, well established, restrained with regard to the six media of contact — always centered, the monk can know Unbinding1 for himself. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.3.05.than.html > Didn't you think of the countless Buddhists who, in all good > faith, have dedicated large parts of their lives to meditation, and > who are still no nearer to enlightenment? Did they reach Jhana? If so which one? Did they reach Cessation of Perception & feelings? Did the reach Vipassana nanas, if so, which ones? ================= "Now, there is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana:.. he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called renunciation-pleasure, seclusion-pleasure, calm- pleasure, self-awakening-pleasure. And of this pleasure I say that it is to be cultivated, to be developed, to be pursued, that it is not to be feared. ...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. That is its transcending. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.066.than.html [Jhana is transcendent by higher Jhana, not something else] Best wishes, Alex #88931 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 2:43 pm Subject: Re: Meditation in the suttas. ... Flood of Sutta Quotes Up the Wrong Tree indriyabala Dear Alex (and KenH), - Boy, look at the flood of sutta quotes about jhana that you kindly gave to Alex for his benefit !! =================================== # 'Marvellous it is, most wonderful indeed it is, the state of calmness wherein abide those who have gone forth from the world!' # The Blessed One saw Ven. Sariputta sitting not far away, his legs crossed, his body held erect, having mindfulness established to the fore. ... ... Now at that time Ven. Maha Moggallana was sitting not far from the Blessed One, his legs crossed, his body held erect, having mindfulness immersed in the body well established within. ... #With mindfulness immersed in the body, well established, restrained with regard to the six media of contact — always centered, the monk can know Unbinding for himself. ... #This is called renunciation-pleasure, seclusion-pleasure, calm- pleasure, self-awakening-pleasure. And of this pleasure I say that it is to be cultivated, to be developed, to be pursued, that it is not to be feared. ... ... ================================== But hasn't the truth ever occured to you, Alex, that Ken never ever reads them? Do you remember that Sarah once warned you that you were "barking up the wrong tree"? You are now warned again ! ;-)) Sincerely yours, Tep === #88932 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 3:45 pm Subject: Re: Just studying & Sariputta truth_aerator Hi Jon, >-- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" >wrote: > Hi Alex > > > Hearing the Bible is something that *happens* as a result of past > > kamma too! > > Correct. But how does that help in the point we're discussing, > namely: > (a) whether this is what other teachings proclaim (as far as I >know, it's not), and Other teachings also may say: "Just study and consider our texts". So studying and considering by itself is not unique to Buddhism. > (b) even if it is, whether it would lead to the same outcome (I >don't think it would). Studying non-Dhamma can't directly lead to Dhamma. > > > They all say that. "Ours teaching is better than yours!". In the > > tradition that I've followed prior to Buddhism it was: "Our > teaching > > is the best, and the original one. If any other traditions sound > like > > us, it is because they took (stolen) from our teaching. Other > > teachings are like a sandbox for children. Ours is final". > > But this has nothing to do with our discussion, does it? It does. What is the difference between lets say studying, considering & trying to apply Abh vs Talmud (for example)? I know that Buddhist teaching is da best, but one of the reasons for that is that it has extra things up its sleaves... :) > > > A person could not, by hearing an explanation of the > > > teachings in the Bible, come to an intellectual understanding of > > > dhammas and the way things truly are; only the hearing of the > true > > > dhamma can make that possible, and without that hearing such > > > understanding could not occur. > > > > In Upanisa sutta the proximate condition is Samadhi. > > Yes, samadhi; not samatha/jhana. That is a reference to the >samadhi > that accompanies panna, not to mundane jhana. Mundane Jhana is useful and may even be required (at least for SOME people who are the slowest types). Alara Kalama & Udakka Ramaputta were the two people whom Buddha wanted to teach the first, since they could understand it. They had very little, if any, Buddhist Panna. But they did have lots of Samadhi-Bhavana... > If I remember correctly, the Upanisa Sutta lists about 10 factors, >of which samadhi is only 1. The samadhi is proximate condition of "seeing things as they are" in that sutta. Please don't conviniently leave that out. > > > From reading your comments, I take it that the short answer to > the > > > question I put to you is that there's *no indication* in the > sutta > > > that Sariputta's enlightenment as a sotapanna was based on > jhana. > > > You're really only speculating that there could be. Do you have quick faculties of > > > > ... No. It is included by default. > > There is no textual statement to that effect, either. That is yet > another inference (more speculation on your part!). I've just given them. The 5 faculties are present in all ariyas, one of them is samma-samadhi, which is defined as 4 Jhanas. > Thanks for the sutta passage. I'm afraid that doesn't come near to > stating that precepts and jhana drive the clouds of defilements >away, > leaving the truth bare to be seen by panna. > > Again, you are relying on an inference, namely, an inference drawn > from the order in which the indriyas are dealt with. > > Jon I've given them, the MN70 sutta, the indriya samyutta... And even *IF* it is proven that Sariputta didn't do Jhana for stream, it is yet to be proven that Neyya/Padaparama induvidials don't need it. Sariputta was head and shoulders above us, both in circumstances (meeting his disciple, already being ascetics, then meeting the Buddha), and with QUICK intution. We are with slow intuition. If we were with Quick intuition, we'd become stream enterers from hearing ONE (or even dozen) of sentences on Dhamma. But is this the case? What works for some, may not be enough for others. There are some things listening&considering can't accomplish, For the rest of us there is Jhana... Best wishes, Alex #88933 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 4:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Scholasticism, practice, mindfulness, and all that. egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/8/7 sarah abbott : > Hi Alex, > > .... > S: Focussing on anything, starting with anything will lead to meditation failure. What appears now does so by conditions, not by any intention or wish to have it arise. > .... By now I am quite used to your black and white statements. How about I add a little grey for the more discerning reader, and of course those who already see full-colour will not be harmed by that either. Focussing on anything, starting with anything arises by conditions. Intentions, wishes, arise by conditions. When intentions or wishes fail to be realised it can be said, with hindsight only, that the conditions did not support the outcome. Your prediction that any focussing will lead to the failure of all meditation is bizarre. People meditate with different objectives in mind. I am more often than not succesful in reaching those objectives. With hindsight only, it may be said that conditions supported the outcome. But I can assure you, that I never just find myself in a deep meditative state, it is not thrust upon me. In every sense of the word, I must act in certain ways to bring the intention to fruition, and conversely, failure to do certain things will ensure failure. I have no idea what you intended to achieve when your meditation repeatedly failed. Perhaps an evaluation of the intended outcome is in order? Cheers Herman #88934 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 4:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/8/10 kenhowardau : > Hi Tep > > In the same way, "Buddhist" meditation techniques never work. And the > blame is always directed back at the meditator, never on meditation > itself. I think it is a terrible shame, and I will do whatever I can > to protect people from it. > You have been a member of the black and white club for as long as I remember, and certainly this lives up to any expectation one may have of that group. What did you hope meditation would deliver, that it didn't? I hope it wasn't some preposterous ego-trip you were on. If it was, of course it had to fail. But for the record, meditation techniques do work if you want to reach calmness, bliss, tranquility. Quite a fine place to be, wouldn't you say? Cheers Herman #88935 From: "rinzeee" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 8:30 pm Subject: Re: An Observation of This Panel rinzeee --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Dear Rinze, - > > I am interested in your following remark : > > "we should shed all views, ie stop thinking, when we > confront reality, in our own practices." > > How do thinking and thought relate to all views? > How do you stop thinking and, when you can, for how long? > Can self views be shed simply by not thinking? > Do arahants not think at all? > > Thank you for the interesting post. > > > Tep > === > Dear Tep, I do not have a personal computer of my own. But I hope to post a comprehensive reply, so please give me some time Tep. May all be Happy Rinze #88936 From: "connie" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 8:39 pm Subject: Re: Sila Always Comes First ! nichiconn Dear Tep, Scott, All, Have you ever read von Hinuber's "Pali as an Artificial Language"? I just see it mentioned here in BB's SN notes. Just curious, not at all acquainted. But imagine bookworms forgetting DO 101: & ! No wonder Nina gave us Warder homework. I looked, but when I shake my head all those grammar terms just roll around like rocks in my cave without a proper sense of true logic. Yes, I know the common sense answer to that, but let's move on to another answer to the other sati question (and park the car). Right before the river with the island in the middle in SN V 43:3 "Saaketa" (BB p.1688), the Blessed One said << There is a method of exposition, bhikkhus, by means of which the five faculties become the five powers and the five powers become the five faculties. And what is that method of exposition? That which is the faculty of faith is the power of faith; that which is the power of faith is the faculty of faith. >> Ditto for energy, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom. BBodhi remarks (in part - v n.230) that << Though it is tempting to see the powers (bala) as a more highly developed stage than the faculties, nothing in the canon or the commentaries supports this idea >>. Then he talks about Spk, where it seems the unshakeable power (presence? shaken by lack) & the faculty of control regarding/in the sense of application, establishment, nondistraction and seeing (paggaha, upa.t.thaana, avikkhepa, dassana) are just different aspects of these qualities. peace, connie #88937 From: "colette" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 6:02 pm Subject: Re: Meditation in the suttas. ... Flood of Sutta Quotes Up the Wrong Tree ksheri3 Hi-Tep, pardon-the-hyphens-,it's-the-broken-keyboard. > > But hasn't the truth ever occured to you, Alex, that Ken never ever > reads them? > colette:-is-the-problem:-the-existance-of-fear-OR-is-the-problem-that- Ken-may-choose-to-not-read? D.O.-please:-What-is-the-CAUSATION-of-Ken's-fear?-Is-it-failure-of- result.-I-mean,-is-he-affraid-of-what-he-may-find-that-may-just- unlock-countless-doors-OBSCURING-he-enlightenment?-We-find-this- behavior-in-the-"Idealist"-schools-of-Buddhism-that-fear-to-explore- Shunyata,-for-instance.-Is-the-fear-a-direct-confrontation-with-the- Buddha's-own-words-concerning-Laziness-or-Sloth-&-Topor?-What-could- the-fear-be-RESULTANT-from? > Do you remember that Sarah once warned you that you were "barking up > the wrong tree"? > colette:-Did-Sarah-issue-a-warning-or-an-OBSERVATION? > You are now warned again ! ;-)) > colette:OUCH. toodles, colette #88938 From: "colette" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 6:17 pm Subject: WHY-NOT? ksheri3 HI-Alex, I-repeat-myself-quite-often,-WHY-NOT? > > Studying non-Dhamma can't directly lead to Dhamma. > colette:-everything-the-Buddha-did-THEN,-applying-your-beliefs-above- changes-history-and-so-the-Buddha-never-lived.-The-dhamma-previously- exists-for-us-but,-there-certainly-was-a-time-when-it-did-not-exist- if-we-are-to-believe-that-the-Buddha-himself,-achieved-enlightenment- AS-WELL-as-his-desire-to-enlighten-others:-Your-statement-about-the- Dhamma's-capabilities-are-extremely-myopic. Svabhava-is-a-good-place-to-study-the-TWO-TRUTHS-(Relative-and- Ultimate). toodles, colette #88939 From: "rinzeee" Date: Sun Aug 10, 2008 10:34 pm Subject: Re: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 4, no 3. rinzeee --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: Dear Nina, > Dear friends, > > All phenomena are either nåma or rúpa. Theoretical understanding of > nåma and rúpa is not enough, it does not bring detachment from the > concept of "self". We have to know nåma and rúpa as they are through > direct experience. What does that mean? We have to know them when > they appear, one at a time, right now. That is the only way to see > them as they are, as not self. R: Do you mean that we should not think, what `we' see directly, when nama or rupa appear, in our meditative moments? Because, it is when we think, that this `self' intervenes. Therby, we lose the `directness' of insight. Is this what you mean, Nina? > What should be known in vipassanå through direct experience? Can a > person be known through direct experience? Can hardness be known > through direct experience? These are important questions which we > discussed. R: A `person' is a further construction of the ultimate realities. This person is conceived in the mind, and therefore, a Sanskara Dhamma The fact that this `person' is not ultimate reality can therefore be seen in Dhamma Anupassana, ie, observing the thoughts that rise and fall, right? > Hardness can be directly experienced through the bodysense when it > appears. Is there no hardness now, impinging on the bodysense? We do > not have to think of hardness or name it in order to experience it. > Hardness is real, it is a physical phenomenon, a rúpa, which can be > directly experienced. R: Of the 5 aggregates, rupa, vedana, sanna, sanskara and vinnana, when we start to think of hardness while experiencing it, then we are dabbling with sanskara. Our attention then shifts to sanskara from rupa, right? > We may find it difficult to understand that there are in the > absolute sense no people. There are no people, but this does not > mean that there are no realities. What we take for people are > different mental phenomena and physical phenomena which arise and > fall away. R: These mental phenomena are thought constructs of the person that we behold in our minds. Therefore the person `Nina' could vary from one to another, depending on the past associations, one had with `Nina'. When, in fact, `Nina' or `Rinze' or any person is just these 5 aggregates, rupa, vedana, sanna, sanskara and vinnana. Right? Comparing the 5 aggregates of two different persons, the difference lies, not in the Rupa, but in Nama and Vinnana, due to the infinite variation of accumulating Kamma. Right? > ********* > > Nina. May all being be Happy Rinze #88940 From: "szmicio" Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 1:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] hetupaccaya szmicio Dear Nina, > Op 8-aug-2008, om 8:29 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > > Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca kusalo dhammo uppajjeyya > hetupaccayaa. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca akusalo dhammo > uppajjeyya hetupaccayaa. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca abyaakato > dhammo uppajjeyya hetupaccayaa. > > I don't know the true meaning of that. But it's something like that: > > kusala dhamma depends on kusala dhamma by the way of root-condition. > > kusala dhamma depends on akusala dhamma by the way of > > root-condition....... > ------- > N: Hetupaccaya always refers to dhammas that arise together. Thus, > the sobhana hetus of alobha and adosa are hetus, and these are hetu > paccaya for the citta and the other accompanying cetasikas. Hetu is a > firm foundation, like the root for a tree it supports. > Kusala dhamma can condition the arising of akusala dhamma later on, > by way of natural decisive support-condition (pakatupanissaya > paccaya). For example when one does a good deed, and then later on > one has conceit about it. > The akusala hetus are a condition for the akusala dhammas they > accompany by way of hetu-paccaya. > I wonder where you found this text? Now it's clear. I found it on tipitaka.org, Tipitaka-> Abhidhammapitaka->Patthanapali-1->Pucchavaro. bye Lukas #88941 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 2:10 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 5, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 5. Any reality which appears now can be the object of mindfulness in vipassanå. Isn’t there seeing now? That can be object of mindfulness. Isn’t there hearing now? That can be object of mindfulness. We had many discussions about seeing, visible object and thinking of what is seen, because we all are inclined to confuse different realities. In vipassanå a very precise understanding of the different realities has to be developed. Seeing is a mental phenomenon, it experiences visible object. Visible object is that which is seen, which is experienced through the eyesense. We can call it visible object or colour, it does not matter how we call it, but its characteristic can be known when it appears through the eyes. When we pay attention to the shape and form of what we see, when we perceive a person or a particular thing, it is not seeing. Because of remembrance of past experiences we form up concepts such as “person” or “chair”. It seems that there is a long moment of seeing and that seeing sees people and things, but seeing falls away immediately and it is succeeded by other types of cittas. Cittas succeed one another very rapidly. When we recognize different colours such as red and blue, it is again remembrance of concepts. Seeing is only the experience of what appears through the eyesense. This does not mean that visible object is without any colour. When visible object is the object of mindfulness, it does not change into something else. It is visible object that appears. “It appears now”, Khun Sujin reminded us time and again. It may seem very hard to know the difference between seeing and thinking. We may be inclined to think of seeing and we wonder what it is like. If we continue to wonder and to think about seeing, instead of being mindful of seeing right now, seeing can never be known as it is. Paññå (wisdom), which develops through mindfulness, will know seeing as the experience of visible object, different from the perceiving of shape and form. Visible object appears now, when our eyes are open. We may close our eyes and think of something or someone, but that is not the experience of visible object, since visible object appears through the eyesense. We forget to be mindful when it appears, now. Do we know visible object already, or do we still believe that we see a chair or a person? Phra Dhammadhara remarked that visible object has no arms or legs, that one cannot carry it away. Visible object can only be seen, it cannot be touched. When visible object appears, there must also be seeing. Seeing is a mental phenomenon, it is a type of nåma that sees. There is no self who sees. Seeing can only see, it cannot hear, it cannot think. Seeing which is a mental phenomenon is different from visible object which is a physical phenomenon. Mindfulness can be aware of seeing or visible object, but only of one reality at a time. In that way their different characteristics can gradually be known as they are. ***** Nina. #88942 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 3:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sila Always Comes First ! nilovg Dear Connie, I remember this from Kh Sujin: She said that long, long ago. I think that in the last sense it is in the case of the arahat. Nina. Op 11-aug-2008, om 5:39 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > And what is that method of exposition? That which is the faculty of > faith is the power of faith; that which is the power of faith is > the faculty of faith. >> Ditto for energy, mindfulness, > concentration and wisdom. > > BBodhi remarks (in part - v n.230) that << Though it is tempting to > see the powers (bala) as a more highly developed stage than the > faculties, nothing in the canon or the commentaries supports this > idea >>. Then he talks about Spk, where it seems the unshakeable > power (presence? shaken by lack) & the faculty of control regarding/ > in the sense of application, establishment, nondistraction and > seeing (paggaha, upa.t.thaana, avikkhepa, dassana) are just > different aspects of these qualities. #88943 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 7:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 4, no 3. nilovg Dear Rinzee, thank you for your interest. Op 11-aug-2008, om 7:34 heeft rinzeee het volgende geschreven: > We have to know nåma and rúpa as they are through > > direct experience. What does that mean? We have to know them when > > they appear, one at a time, right now. That is the only way to see > > them as they are, as not self. > > R: Do you mean that we should not think, what `we' see directly, when > nama or rupa appear, in our meditative moments? Because, it is when we > think, that this `self' intervenes. Therby, we lose the `directness' > of insight. Is this what you mean, Nina? ------- N: It is a learning process, it takes along, long time before there can be direct insight. There can be a beginning of attending to the characteristics of the nama or rupa that appears through one of the six doors. I say: right now, since in selecting specific moments or a specific time the idea of self intervenes. Awareness and understanding can and should be developed in daily life. There are conditions for thinking all the time, and it can be learnt that also thinking is a conditioned nama. We should not try to avoid thinking, since this is again catering to the idea of self. There should not be any selection of objects. --------- > > R: > What should be known in vipassanå through direct experience? > Can a > > person be known through direct experience? Can hardness be known > > through direct experience? These are important questions which we > > discussed. > > R: A `person' is a further construction of the ultimate realities. > This person is conceived in the mind, and therefore, a Sanskara Dhamma ------- N: Sankhaara dhamma means a conditioned reality. Nama and rupa are sankhaara dhammas, a person is not. ---------- > R: The fact that this `person' is not ultimate reality can > therefore be > seen in Dhamma Anupassana, ie, observing the thoughts that rise and > fall, right? ------- N: First we can understand intellectually that a person is a concept. Dammanupassana satipa.t.thaana: this includes all realities, dhammas that are not included in the first three Applications of mindfulness. But there is no need to think of which Application of Mindfulness is applied when awareness arises. Any dhamma can be the object; even when thinking of a person, that thinking is a reality, the person is not. As to rise and fall, this is a stage of insight that cannot be reached if the difference between the characteristics of nama and rupa is not yet directly known, when they appear. --------- > > > Hardness can be directly experienced through the bodysense when it > > appears. Is there no hardness now, impinging on the bodysense? We do > > not have to think of hardness or name it in order to experience it. > > Hardness is real, it is a physical phenomenon, a rúpa, which can be > > directly experienced. > > R: Of the 5 aggregates, rupa, vedana, sanna, sanskara and vinnana, > when we start to think of hardness while experiencing it, then we are > dabbling with sanskara. Our attention then shifts to sanskara from > rupa, right? ------- N: Any condiitoned reality is sankhaara dhamma. It does not matter whether there is awareness of rupa or of nama which thinks. We do not have to worry whether attention shifts, since whatever happens is anatta, not in anyone's power, and the aim is to know anatta. If one tries to direct the attantion to this or that there is again the danger of clinging to self and we are far away from understanding anatta. --------- > > > We may find it difficult to understand that there are in the > > absolute sense no people. There are no people, but this does not > > mean that there are no realities. What we take for people are > > different mental phenomena and physical phenomena which arise and > > fall away. > > R: These mental phenomena are thought constructs of the person that we > behold in our minds. Therefore the person `Nina' could vary from one > to another, depending on the past associations, one had with `Nina'. > When, in fact, `Nina' or `Rinze' or any person is just these 5 > aggregates, rupa, vedana, sanna, sanskara and vinnana. Right? ------ N: Yes, sa~n~naa, remembrance, conditions our thinking of this or that person. Sa~n~naa is only a kind of nama, or, this is the same, a khandha. ------- > > R: Comparing the 5 aggregates of two different persons, the difference > lies, not in the Rupa, but in Nama and Vinnana, due to the infinite > variation of accumulating Kamma. Right? ------ N: Yes, there is an infinite variation of accumulated kamma that produces result at birth. There is also variety in bodily features due to kamma. Some people are healthy, others weak, some are comely, others not handsome. In the case of human birth, there can be only nine types of rebirth-consciousness, but the variety is much greater. There are many intensities of the types of rebirth-consciousness and this influences our whole life. ******* Nina. #88944 From: "connie" Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 8:10 am Subject: Re: Sila Always Comes First ! nichiconn Dear Nina, All N: I remember this from Kh Sujin: c: That is how I'm used to thinking of it, too, so the sutta and BB's note surprised me. N: I think that in the last sense it is in the case of the arahat. c: I hadn't considered that before. I also see that I left out faith's resolution/achimokkha in my earlier list, which read like the separate 'directings' or 'functionings' all applied to each and every faculty, so: faith, resolution (adhimokkha); energy, application (paggaha); mindfulness, establishment (upa.t.thaana); concentration, non-distraction (avikkhepa); wisdom, seeing (dassana). peace, connie >>. Then he talks about Spk, where it seems the unshakeable power (presence? shaken by lack) & the faculty of control regarding/in the sense of application, establishment, nondistraction and seeing (paggaha, upa.t.thaana, avikkhepa, dassana) are just different aspects of these qualities. #88945 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 10:07 am Subject: Wise/Unwise reflection: MN2 truth_aerator Hello all, in MN#2 the Buddha has stated that: "Am I not?" is a wrong reflection and that wise attention leading to stream is: "He attends appropriately, 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. As he attends appropriately in this way, three fetters are abandoned in him: identity-view, doubt, and grasping at precepts & practices. These are called the fermentations to be abandoned by seeing. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.than.html Does Abhidhamma deals with 4NT, if so, exactly how? Interestingly, no direct mention of "understanding nama-rupa", but there is mention of understanding 4NT. Any comments? Best wishes, Alex #88946 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 11:06 am Subject: Re: Relentless Training: No Retreat, No Surrender! No pain, no gain! truth_aerator Dear Jon and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > > > > What is needed is for those accumulated tendencies to be further > > > built on (i.e., developed). > > > > This is area of discussion. How exactly that is to be done? Can you > > please explain it to me? > > This can best be understood by taking as an example the kind of > kusala that may arise naturally in a day, i.e., unrelated to any idea > of a "practice". In the MN2 there are specific instructions: Asavas "abandoned by seeing, by restraining, by using, by tolerating, by destroying, by developing." The nature of those isn't "become wise by doing nothing", there are specific instructions, so I do NOT believe what you have said. Oh, and reflections: "I have no self... Am I not?" are WRONG reflections. ============================================================== "When a monk's fermentations that should be abandoned by seeing have been abandoned by seeing, his fermentations that should be abandoned by restraining have been abandoned by restraining, his fermentations that should be abandoned by using have been abandoned by using, his fermentations that should be abandoned by tolerating have been abandoned by tolerating, his fermentations that should be abandoned by avoiding have been abandoned by avoiding, his fermentations that should be abandoned by destroying have been abandoned by destroying, his fermentations that should be abandoned by developing have been abandoned by developing, then he is called a monk who dwells restrained with the restraint of all the fermentations. He has severed craving, thrown off the fetters, and — through the right penetration of conceit — has made an end of suffering & stress." That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, the monks delighted in the Blessed One's words. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.than.html === Best wishes, Alex #88947 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 1:20 pm Subject: Re: Sila Always Comes First ! scottduncan2 Dear connie, Sorry for the delay. Four straight days of deep house cleaning... c: "Have you ever read von Hinuber's "Pali as an Artificial Language"? I just see it mentioned here in BB's SN notes. Just curious, not at all acquainted..." Scott: No, I've not read it, but I've tried to locate it on-line without success so far. I'll keep looking. c: "But imagine bookworms forgetting DO 101: & ! No wonder Nina gave us Warder homework. I looked, but when I shake my head all those grammar terms just roll around like rocks in my cave without a proper sense of true logic. Yes, I know the common sense answer to that, but let's move on to another answer to the other sati question (and park the car)." Scott: Of course, good one. I guess I'm not much of a bookworm - a book-maggot maybe. c: "Right before the river with the island in the middle in SN V 43:3 'Saaketa' (BB p.1688), the Blessed One said << There is a method of exposition, bhikkhus, by means of which the five faculties become the five powers and the five powers become the five faculties. And what is that method of exposition? That which is the faculty of faith is the power of faith; that which is the power of faith is the faculty of faith. >> Ditto for energy, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom." Scott: I was thinking about the meaning of indriya - that of controlling principle or directive force. And I was thinking about the term 'indriya samvara siila'. I was wondering about what it is that serves the function of restraining the senses and thinking that, although 'siila comes first' in one sense, that dhamma (or those dhammas in sequence) which do so would, in another sense, come first. That is, without it (or them), there would be no restraining of the senses. Speech and bodily action would be unrestrained. And these are ruupa, of course, so it must be naama which serves the function of restraint. I don't think, therefore, that there could be siila without sati, and I don't think sati can be willed into action. I wonder what the factors might be which lead to the development of sati? c: "BBodhi remarks (in part - v n.230) that << Though it is tempting to see the powers (bala) as a more highly developed stage than the faculties, nothing in the canon or the commentaries supports this idea >>. Then he talks about Spk, where it seems the unshakeable power (presence? shaken by lack) & the faculty of control regarding/in the sense of application, establishment, nondistraction and seeing (paggaha, upa.t.thaana, avikkhepa, dassana) are just different aspects of these qualities." Scott: Yes, different aspects of dhammas functioning as controlling forces and at different strengths. And here, I think, comes again the need to consider that we are dealing with impersonal dhammas. The lack of clinging which occurs as a function of 'guarding the senses' has to do, perhaps, as much with sati as with the relative depth to which pa~n~naa would have penetrated the dhammas in relation to the characteristic of anatta - that is, the five aggregates are not a self. When sati is present, the senses are guarded. Anyway... Sincerely, Scott. #88948 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 3:24 pm Subject: Re: Sila Always Comes First ! indriyabala Hi Connie (and Nina, Scott), - Thank you for quoting SN V 43:3. ... the Blessed One said << There is a method of exposition, bhikkhus, by means of which the five faculties become the five powers and the five powers become the five faculties. And what is that method of exposition? That which is the faculty of faith is the power of faith; that which is the power of faith is the faculty of faith. >> Connie: Ditto for energy, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom. [Nina's message # 88942] Kh Sujin: N: She said that long, long ago. I think that in the last sense it is in the case of the arahat. T: Nina's suggestion implies that the five spiritual faculties (indriya) and the five powers (strengths, bala) become one through the arahant path (and fruition). But how ? According to SN 50.1, a monk who develops and pursues the five powers attains Nibbana at the end of the arahant path. "Just as the River Ganges flows to the east, slopes to the east, inclines to the east, in the same way when a monk develops & pursues the five strengths, he flows to Unbinding, slopes to Unbinding, inclines to Unbinding." ......................................... Connie (#88944, to Nina): I hadn't considered that before. I also see that I left out faith's resolution/achimokkha in my earlier list, which read like the separate 'directings' or 'functionings' all applied to each and every faculty, so: faith, resolution (adhimokkha); energy, application (paggaha); mindfulness, establishment (upa.t.thaana); concentration, non-distraction (avikkhepa); wisdom, seeing (dassana). T: Your listing of these meanings of the five faculties reminds me of another sutta : "With a noble disciple who has conviction, who is resolute and persistent, whose mindfulness is established, and whose mind is rightly concentrated, it may be expected that he will discern: 'From an inconceivable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating and wandering on. The total fading and cessation of ignorance, of this mass of darkness, is this peaceful, exquisite state: the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' Whatever discernment he has, is his faculty of discernment. "And so this convinced noble disciple, thus striving again and again, recollecting again and again, concentrating his mind again and again, discerning again and again, becomes thoroughly convinced: 'Those phenomena that once I had only heard about, I here and now dwell touching them with my body and, through discernment, I see them clear through.' Whatever conviction he has, is his faculty of conviction. [SN 48.50 in the 'Wings to Awakening'] ----------------------------- Tep === #88949 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 3:38 pm Subject: Re: An Observation of This Panel indriyabala Dear Rinze, - You wrote: > Dear Tep, >I do not have a personal computer of my own. But I hope to post a >comprehensive reply, so please give me some time Tep. >May all be Happy >Rinze Oh, I did not mean to trouble you; a spontaneous reflection that you have when you read my question is enough. Please don't trouble yourself writing a comprehensive reply. Tep === #88950 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 4:10 pm Subject: Re: Meditation in the suttas. ... Flood of Sutta Quotes Up the Wrong Tree indriyabala Hello Colette (and KenH), - How are you today? > C: pardon-the-hyphens-,it's-the-broken-keyboard. T: It is a liitle bit difficult to read, but not too bad. > > But hasn't the truth ever occured to you, Alex, that Ken never ever > reads them? > colette:-is-the-problem:-the-existance-of-fear-OR-is-the-problem-that- Ken-may-choose-to-not-read? D.O.-please:-What-is-the-CAUSATION-of-Ken's-fear?-Is-it-failure-of- result.-I-mean,-is-he-affraid-of-what-he-may-find-that-may-just- unlock-countless-doors-OBSCURING-he-enlightenment?-We-find-this- behavior-in-the-"Idealist"-schools-of-Buddhism-that-fear-to-explore- Shunyata,-for-instance.-Is-the-fear-a-direct-confrontation-with-the- Buddha's-own-words-concerning-Laziness-or-Sloth-&-Topor?-What-could- the-fear-be-RESULTANT-from? T: Ken is very negative about meditation because his previous meditative experience was bitter. So he threw the suttas away with Buddhist meditation (somewhat like pouring the baby down the drain with the dirty bath water, so to speak). However, Ken himself can answer your questions better than I. BTW Is the fear to explore 'Shunyata' similar to the fear of the "Self Demon" that Sarah frequently lets out to scare meditators like me and Alex? > Do you remember that Sarah once warned you that you were "barking up the wrong tree"? > colette:-Did-Sarah-issue-a-warning-or-an-OBSERVATION? T: You're right; it was more like an observation than the kind of warning that may lead to a censorship. ;-) > You are now warned again ! ;-)) > colette:OUCH. A friendly warning that does not bite, of course. Tep === #88951 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 4:39 pm Subject: Re: Relentless Training: No Retreat, No Surrender! No pain, no gain! indriyabala Dear friend Alex, - Out of your unlimited meditative energy, loving-kindness, and perseverance, you wrote: In the MN2 there are specific instructions: asavas "abandoned by seeing, by restraining, by using, by tolerating, by destroying, by developing." A: The nature of those isn't "become wise by doing nothing", there are specific instructions, so I do NOT believe what you have said. A: Oh, and reflections: "I have no self... Am I not?" are WRONG reflections. ................... T: More likely the kind of reply you will get is the following "programmed statements": The sutta has to be interpreted carefully within the right context: the dhammas here arise because of conditions; there is nobody trying to do anything. It is the panna of Satipatthana that does the work. Sincerely, Tep === #88952 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 4:54 pm Subject: Re: Relentless Training: No Retreat, No Surrender! No pain, no gain! truth_aerator Dear Tep and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > T: More likely the kind of reply you will get is the > following "programmed statements": > > The sutta has to be interpreted carefully within the right context: > the dhammas here arise because of conditions; there is nobody trying > to do anything. It is the panna of Satipatthana that does the work. The dhammas also arise in such a way as to sit crosslegged and enter deep meditation levels where the hindrances obstructing seeing as it is are ceased and Arahatship arises. ======================================================== ... at that time Ven. Sariputta was sitting not far from the Blessed One — his legs crossed, his body held erect — modest, content, solitary, unentangled, his persistence aroused, devoted to the heightened mind. The Blessed One saw Ven. Sariputta sitting not far away — his legs crossed, his body held erect — modest, content, solitary, unentangled, his persistence aroused, devoted to the heightened mind. Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed: Exalted in mind & heedful, the sage trained in sagacity's ways: He has no sorrows, one who is Such, calmed & ever mindful. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.4.07.than.html ================================================================== Somebody better wake up the Buddha and tell him: "What have you taught Sariputta, the wisest disciple? Don't you know that there are only Dhammas and he is following rites&rituals with a sakkayditthi of 'I can do something'" !!! - Best wishes, Alex #88953 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 5:53 pm Subject: Re: Meditation in the suttas. ... Flood of Sutta Quotes Up the Wrong Tree kenhowardau Hi Tep (Cotette and all), > T: Ken is very negative about meditation because his previous > meditative experience was bitter. You are welcome to come to that conclusion if that is how it seems to you. However, I don't believe I have ever described my meditation history (from 1976 to 2002) as bitter. As I recall, I was quite happy with it. At the time I came across DSG (in 2002) I was looking forward to passing on a few meditation techniques I had learnt. But, 'the best laid plans of mice and men . . .' ----------------- T: > So he threw the suttas away with > Buddhist meditation ----------------- No, there is no mention of meditation in the suttas. There is only mention of bhavana, which is something altogether different. (How many times do I need to say this? (!)) Ken H #88954 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 6:06 pm Subject: What are they doing!? Someone call DSG police! Save their panna!!! truth_aerator Dear Ken and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Tep (Cotette and all), > > > T: Ken is very negative about meditation because his previous > > meditative experience was bitter. > > You are welcome to come to that conclusion if that is how it seems >to > you. However, I don't believe I have ever described my meditation > history (from 1976 to 2002) as bitter. As I recall, I was quite >happy > with it. At the time I came across DSG (in 2002) I was looking > forward to passing on a few meditation techniques I had learnt. > But, 'the best laid plans of mice and men . . .' Which Vipassana-nana did you reach? Which Jhana did you reach? > No, there is no mention of meditation in the suttas. There is only > mention of bhavana, which is something altogether different. (How > many times do I need to say this? (!)) > Ken H Please tell me what Sariputta was doing? =================== ... at that time Ven. Sariputta was sitting not far from the Blessed One — his legs crossed, his body held erect — modest, content, solitary, unentangled, his persistence aroused, devoted to the heightened mind. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.4.07.than.html ================================= ...Now at that time Ven. Pindola Bharadvaja was sitting not far from the Blessed One, his legs crossed, his body held erect — a forest dweller, an alms-goer, a rag-robe wearer, an owner of only one set of three robes, modest, content, solitary, unentangled, his persistence aroused, an advocate of the ascetic practices, devoted to the heightened mind. The Blessed One saw Ven. Pindola Bharadvaja sitting not far away, his legs crossed, his body held erect — a forest dweller, an alms-goer, a rag-robe wearer, an owner of only one set of three robes, modest, content, solitary, unentangled, his persistence aroused, an advocate of the ascetic practices, devoted to the heightened mind. Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed: Not reviling, not injuring, restraint in line with the Patimokkha, moderation in food, dwelling in seclusion, devotion to the heightened mind: this is the teaching of the Awakened Ones. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.4.06.than.html ====== "And what more is to be done? There is the case where a monk 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. [removes hindrances] Quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, he enters and remains in the first jhana...4th Jhana: [achieves 3 knowledges and becomes an Arahant] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.039.than.html ======= What are they doing? You better correct them and their outdated practices of rites & rituals! Best wishes, Alex #88955 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 6:24 pm Subject: Re: Relentless Training: No Retreat, No Surrender! No pain, no gain! indriyabala Dear Jon (Alex, Herman, and Howard), - Your reply is based on a simple real-life case that is easy to explain. It is a classic example that shows how a weak idea can sound right in some simple situations. But it will fail to apply further. .............................................................. > > Alex: If one doesn't enage in N8P as much as possible, then there > > will never be accumulations! >Jon: I think we can take it that there *are* accumulations of insight already. For each of us, there must have been the hearing and understanding of the teachings in former lifetimes, otherwise there would be neither the opportunity to hear nor the interest in this lifetime. >What is needed is for those accumulated tendencies to be further built on (i.e., developed). T: That kind of undeveloped insight, that is not well supported by samadhi, is like a few drops of water that evaporate quickly. The water drops do not have a chance to accumulate, unlike heavy rainfalls (analogous to developed & strong insight knowledges) that can fill up lakes and rivers. ............................... > > > > Alex: This is area of discussion. How exactly that is to be > >done? Can you please explain it to me? > Jon: This can best be understood by taking as an example the kind of kusala that may arise naturally in a day, i.e., unrelated to any idea of a "practice". >For instance, being (spontaneously) helpful, considerate or friendly/polite to another person. If kusala, this would be metta, right? >Most of the time such kusala moments probably pass by unnoticed. There is the (bare) accumulation of metta, not its development. >However, when there is the appreciation that the present moment is kusala and worthy of development, this is kusala of a higher degree, and is a condition for the further development of that quality(metta). >Hoping this is clear. ............................................. T: Superficially-thin metta, similar to the "few drops of water" as explained before, does not accumulate or "develops" further to be powerful unlike the metta-cetovimutti case in the suttas. A worldling's appreciation of such undeveloped kusala in a present moment once in a while is like adding a few more drops of water to a dry container that has been left open in the sun all day long -- they evaporate quickly too. § 110. {Iti IV.11; Iti 115} This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "If, while he is walking, there arises in a monk a thought of sensuality, a thought of ill-will, or a thought of harmfulness, and he does not quickly abandon, dispel, demolish, or wipe that thought out of existence, then a monk walking with such a lack of ardency & concern is called continually & continuously lethargic & low in his persistence. "If, while he is standing... "If, while he is sitting... "If, while he is lying down, there arises in a monk a thought of sensuality, a thought of ill-will, or a thought of harmfulness, and he does not quickly abandon, dispel, demolish, or wipe that thought out of existence, then a monk lying down with such a lack of ardency & concern is called continually & continuously lethargic & low in his persistence. "But if, while he is walking, there arises in a monk a thought of sensuality, a thought of ill-will, or a thought of harmfulness, and he quickly abandons, dispels, demolishes, & wipes that thought out of existence, then a monk walking with such ardency & concern is called continually & continuously resolute, one with persistence aroused. "If, while he is standing... "If, while he is sitting... "If, while he is lying down, there arises in a monk a thought of sensuality, a thought of ill-will, or a thought of harmfulness, and he quickly abandons, dispels, demolishes, & wipes that thought out of existence, then a monk lying down with such ardency & concern is called continually & continuously resolute, one with persistence aroused." Whether walking, standing, sitting, or lying down, whoever thinks evil thoughts, related to the household life, is following no path at all, smitten with delusory things. He's incapable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. But whoever -- walking, standing, sitting, or lying down -- overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/khuddaka/iti/iti4.html ================================ T: But I do not have any hope to convince you. ;-)) Tep === Messages 88950 - 88955 of 88955 Yahoo!My Yahoo!Mail Search: Welcome, nichiconn [Sign Out, My Account] Groups Home -Blog -Help nichiconn · nichicon@hotmail.com | Group Member - Edit Membership Start a Group | My Groups dhammastudygroup · Dhamma Study Group (DSG) Home Messages Post Files Photos Links Yahoo! Groups Tips Did you know... Want your group to be featured on the Yahoo! Groups website? Add a group photo to Flickr. Best of Y! Groups Check them out and nominate your group. Messages Messages Help Message # Search: Advanced Start Topic Messages 88956 - 88958 of 88958 Oldest | < Older | Newer > | Newest Messages: Show Message Summaries (Group by Topic) Sort by Date #88956 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 8:39 pm Subject: Re: What are they doing!? Someone call DSG police! Save their panna!!! kenhowardau Hi Alex and other meditators, --------------- A: > Please tell me what Sariputta was doing? > =================== > ... at that time Ven. Sariputta was sitting not far from the Blessed One — his legs crossed, his body held erect — modest, content, solitary, unentangled, his persistence aroused, devoted to the heightened mind. --------------- What goes through your mind when you read extracts like that one? Do you think, "Sitting with legs crossed and back straight made Sariputta modest, content, solitary, (etc)," or do you think, "Being modest, content, solitary . .(etc), Sariputta sat with legs crossed and back straight?" Maybe neither of those thoughts goes through your mind, but if you had to choose, which would it be? Ken H #88957 From: "connie" Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 8:47 pm Subject: Re: Sila Always Comes First ! nichiconn Dear Tep, [Nina's message # 88942] Kh Sujin: N: She said that long, long ago. I think that in the last sense it is in the case of the arahat. T: Nina's suggestion implies that the five spiritual faculties (indriya) and the five powers (strengths, bala) become one through the arahant path (and fruition). But how ? c: Interesting, but I still read it as saying the basic qualities are what they are all along, only grown - that they don't qualify to be called powers, really, until they've grown to some extent (altho I suppose we could talk about weak & weakest power if we wished), but when the wee ones called faculties grow into Faculties. Like what SN 48:50 said: that ""Whatever conviction / discernment he has, is his faculty of conviction / discernment." I think we could speak similarly of the daily nicenesses that are like tiny sprinklings of metta; however weak or insubstantial the little sprout, who knows how it will grow? Same with the unwholesome, except for slanting and inclining the other way. peace, connie #88958 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 10:17 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,291-293 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 291. 3. Then: (a) There were five causes in the past, (b) And now there is a fivefold fruit; (c) There are five causes now as well, (d) And in the future fivefold fruit. It is according to these twenty spokes called 'qualities' that the words 'its spokes are twenty qualities' should be understood. 292. (a) Herein, [as regards the words] 'There were five causes in the past', firstly only these two, namely, ignorance and formations, are mentioned. But one who is ignorant hankers, and hankering, clings, and with his clinging as condition there is becoming; therefore craving, clinging and becoming are included as well. Hence it is said: 'In the previous kamma-process becoming, there is delusion, which is 'ignorance'; there is accumulation, which is 'formations'; there is attachment, which is 'craving'; there is embracing, which is 'clinging'; there is volition, which is 'becoming; thus these five things in the previous kamma-process becoming are conditions for rebirth-linking here [in the present becoming]' (Ps.i,52). 293. Herein, 'In the previous kamma-process becoming' means in kamma-process becoming done in the previous birth. 'There is delusion, which is ignorance' means that the delusion that there then was about suffering, etc., deluded whereby the man did the kamma, was ignorance. 'There is accumulation, which is formations' means the prior volitions arisen in one who prepares the things necessary for a gift during a month, perhaps, or a year after he has had the thought 'I shall give a gift'. But it is the volitions of one who is actually placing the offerings in the recipients' hands that are called 'becoming'. Or alternatively, it is the volition that is accumulation in six of the impulsions of a single adverting that is called 'formations', and the seventh volition is called 'becoming'. Or any kind of volition is called 'becoming' and the accumulations associated therewith are called 'formations'. 'There is attachment, which is craving' means that in one performing kamma whatever attachment there is and aspiration for its fruit as rebirth-process becoming is craving. 'There is embracing, which is clinging' means that the embracing, the grasping, the adherence, which is a condition for kamma-process becoming and occurs thus, 'By doing this I shall preserve, or I shall cut off, sense desire in such and such a place', is called clinging. 'There is volition, which is becoming' means the kind of volition stated already at the end of the [sentence dealing with] accumulation is becoming. This is how the meaning should be understood. ************************ 291. atiite hetavo pa~nca, idaani phalapa~ncaka.m. idaani hetavo pa~nca, aayati.m phalapa~ncakanti.. etehi pana viisatiyaa aakaarasa"nkhaatehi arehi viisatiaakaaraaranti veditabba.m. 292. tattha atiite hetavo pa~ncaati avijjaa sa"nkhaaraa caati ime taava dve vuttaa eva. yasmaa pana avidvaa paritassati, paritassito upaadiyati, tassupaadaanapaccayaa bhavo. tasmaa ta.nhupaadaanabhavaapi gahitaa honti. tenaaha ``purimakammabhavasmi.m moho avijjaa, aayuuhanaa sa"nkhaaraa, nikanti ta.nhaa, upagamana.m upaadaana.m, cetanaa bhavoti ime pa~nca dhammaa purimakammabhavasmi.m idha pa.tisandhiyaa paccayaa''ti (pa.ti0 ma0 1.47). 293. tattha purimakammabhavasminti purime kammabhave, atiitajaatiya.m kammabhave kariyamaaneti attho. moho avijjaati yo tadaa dukkhaadiisu moho, yena muu.lho kamma.m karoti, saa avijjaa. aayuuhanaa sa"nkhaaraati ta.m kamma.m karoto yaa purimacetanaayo, yathaa ``daana.m dassaamii´´ti citta.m uppaadetvaa maasampi sa.mvaccharampi daanupakara.naani sajjentassa uppannaa purimacetanaayo. pa.tiggaahakaana.m pana hatthe dakkhi.na.m pati.t.thaapayato cetanaa bhavoti vuccati. ekaavajjanesu vaa chasu javanesu cetanaa aayuuhanaa sa"nkhaaraa naama. sattame bhavo. yaa kaaci vaa pana cetanaa bhavo. sampayuttaa aayuuhanaa sa"nkhaaraa naama. nikanti ta.nhaati yaa kamma.m karontassa phale upapattibhave nikaamanaa patthanaa, saa ta.nhaa naama. upagamana.m upaadaananti ya.m kammabhavassa paccayabhuuta.m ``ida.m katvaa asukasmi.m naama .thaane kaame sevissaami ucchijjissaamii''tiaadinaa nayena pavatta.m upagamana.m gaha.na.m paraamasana.m, ida.m upaadaana.m naama. cetanaa bhavoti aayuuhanaavasaane vuttaa cetanaa bhavoti evamattho veditabbo. #88959 From: "connie" Date: Mon Aug 11, 2008 10:56 pm Subject: Re: Vism.XVII,291-293 nichiconn Path of Purity, pp.698-99: (The spokes of twenty modes.) Five causes in the Past and Now a fivefold fruit; Five causes Now, and yet to come a fivefold fruit. {Compendium 190.} "The spokes of twenty modes" should be understood by way of the spokes which are termed these twenty modes. Of these, by "Five causes in the Past" are meant these two: ignorance and activities. But because a man with no knowledge craves and, in craving, grasps, and becoming arises in him through grasping, therefore craving, grasping and becoming also are meant here. Therefore was it said: "In the previous karma-becoming, confusion is ignorance; effort is activities; desire is craving; clinging is grasping; volition is becoming. Thus these five states of the previous karma-becoming are the causes of the present rebirth." {Pa.tismbhidaa i, 52} In this passage, "in the previous karma-becoming" means, in karma-becoming that is past, the meaning being: - when karma-becoming is made in a past birth. "Confusion is ignorance" is that confusion which at that time is in regard to ill and so on, and by means of which a man who is confused does a deed. "Effort is activities" means, the previous volitions which have arisen in him who is doing a deed, such volitions, for instance, as a thought, that he will give alms, and who is getting ready the materials thereof for a month or a year. [580] The volition of one who places gifts in the hands of those who receive them is called becoming. Or any volition in six apperceptions with one adverting is called the activities of effort; the seventh volition is becoming. Or any voltion is becoming; the associated volition is activities of effort. "Desire is craving": - this means that craving which is a wish, and aspiration for a resultant birth-becoming entertained by one who is doing a deed. "Clinging is grasping" - the clinging, the seizure, the perversion which proceeds in such a way as "By doing this deed, which is the cause of karma-becoming, I shall enjoy, or cut off the pleasures of sense in such and such a place" is known as grasping. "Volition is becoming" means, volition spoken of at the end of effort is becoming. Thus should the meaning be understood. #88960 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 12:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? - THERE IS SUCH A METHOD!!! sarahprocter... Hi Tep, (Alex, Herman & all), More on 'focussing'....(part 1) --- On Sat, 2/8/08, Tep wrote: >>S: Mindfulness has to develop very naturally and will do so if there is firm intellectual understanding of what its characteristic is and what the objects of mindfulness are. While there is a strong trying or urging to have 'Super mindfulness' and a focus on the movements of the feet (or any other object), no understanding will develop. Instead, attachment, craving for results, for 'me' will be developing. ... >T: A "firm intellectual understanding" of any subject matter (e.g. a high-school algebra; Biology; Engineering) is an important supporting factor in all kinds of study that develop skill. Mindfulness and awareness of "the objects of mindfulness" are natural in such a study as well as in other mundane, worldly mental activities that require attention and non-distraction in order to develop a knowledge and skill to do anything useful. ..... S: I don't think that mindfulness (i.e sati) is natural in such studies as those you mention above or in 'mundane, worldly activites that require attention...' I would say attachment and ignorance are very natural in developing such skills. There is wisdom when pursuing such skills, but it's not panna, the right understanding as taught by the Buddha. The point is, however, that sati (which can only arise with sobhana cittas) can begin to develop at such times, naturally, when there are the right conditions. ..... T:> It is not necessary for the student to have "the strong trying or urging to have 'Super mindfulness' on the subject of study" in order to succeed. The sense of self, which is unavoidable in all non-ariyans, does not hinder mundane development of understanding. So it does not make sense to keep on talking about the Self Demon. ..... S: I think that wrong view, especially self-view, is the only real hindrance to the development of satipatthana. When our thoughts and deeds are motivated by an idea of self, there won't be any development of right understanding or bhavana. .... T:> I have not found a warning given by the Blessed One, even once, in the suttas that "attachment, craving for results, for 'me' will be developing" in a monk, while they are practicing kayagatasati on the body postures and movements. .... S: At moments of right understanding of rupas appearing through the body-sense, for example, there is no wrong view or attachment. So if this understanding is being developed, there's no need to mention it. If, however, there is an attempt to focus or be aware of 'body postures and movements', this is not kayagatasati because there is no understanding of any namas or rupas at such times. .... T:> DN 22: The Modes of Deportment "The Four Kinds of Clear Comprehension <....> "And further, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, in going forwards (and) in going backwards, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in looking straight on (and) in looking away from the front, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in bending and in stretching, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in wearing the shoulder-cloak, the (other two) robes (and) the bowl, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in regard to what is eaten, drunk, chewed and savored, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in defecating and in urinating, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in walking, in standing (in a place), in sitting (in some position), in sleeping, in waking, in speaking and in keeping silence, is a person practicing clear comprehension. "Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally.. . and clings to naught in the world. Thus, also, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body." [Soma Thera translated.] .... S: Yes, very naturally, understanding presently appearing namas and rupas whilst walking, looking, bending, getting dressed, eating, going to the bathroom, standing, sitting, sleeping, speaking or keeping silence i.e whilst following our normal daily activities. What do we take so very often for self? Surely our bodies, taken for something, taken for mine and others'. So even this body we're so obsessed with can be understood as just an idea we have. What is experienced now through the senses are only visible objects, sounds, smells, tastes and tangible objects - no body at all. .... >T: Carefully reading the above sutta quotes with mindfulness and understanding, it should be clear to anyone that the following interpretation of the Buddha's words is a wrong view that should be corrected before it is too late: >>Sarah: "While there is a strong trying or urging to have 'Super mindfulness' and a focus on the movements of the feet (or any other object), no understanding will develop. Instead, attachment, craving for results, for 'me' will be developing." .... S: So do you believe that trying to have 'super mindfulness' and focussing on any object will lead to the development of satipatthana? to be contd. #88961 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 12:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? - THERE IS SUCH A METHOD!!! sarahprocter... Hi Tep, (Alex, Herman & all), More on 'focussing'. ...(part 2) I'd just like to add a few further comments on 'focussing' from a couple of my old messages to others: 1) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/35083 >S:Just a few quick points in note form: 1. Focussing as used in some translations is usually based on the term 'sampajanna'. Sampajanna is panna or wisdom or clear comprehension. Sati sampajanna refers to right awareness and right understanding and other factors accompanying moments of satipatthana. 2. Dhammas are conditioning and arise and fall away far quicker than the fastest blink of an eye....understanding has to be with detachment, not focussing or concentrating on a preferred object, otherwise there's bound to be more craving again. 3. The only rupas experienced through the body-sense are heat/cold, motion/pressure and hardness/softness. I'd like to see the sutta which says that 'everything is manifested as a sensation on the body.....' Selecting just particular rupas ('sensations') with the idea that this will lead to emancipation from suffering is sure to be embedded in more craving as I see it. 4. You mentioned that 'Vipassana is done by focussing your attention to certain parts of the body......sweeping/scanning motion.....' etc. ..........Vipassana is not something that is 'done' but again refers to insight or understanding which is anatta. <......> (as quoted from an earlier message of Jon's): >Jon: Section on Mental Objects 2. The Aggregates "And, further, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating mental object in the mental objects of the five aggregates of clinging. "How, O bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental objects in the mental objects of the five aggregates of clinging? "Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu thinks: 'Thus is material form [rupa]; thus is the arising of material form; and thus is the disappearance of material form. Thus is feeling [vedana]; thus is the arising of feeling; and thus is the disappearance of feeling. Thus is perception [sanna]; thus is the arising of perception; and thus is the disappearance of perception. Thus are the formations [sankhara]; thus is the arising of the formations; and thus is the disappearance of the formations. Thus is consciousness [vinnana]; thus is the arising of consciousness; and thus is the disappearance of consciousness.' Thus he lives contemplating mental objects in mental objects, internally ... and clings to naught in the world. "Thus, indeed, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating mental object in the mental objects of the five aggregates of clinging." [ends] ********** 2) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15443 >QUOTE1. Sarah: When we were discussing the translations of the Satipatthana Sutta, Erik and I were discussing the limitations of 'focussing' and 'comprehending'. Afterwards, I checked the detail in the Satipatthana Sutta commentary and sub-commentary on the use of sati-sampajanna and quote below from Soma Thera's translation p.34: ***** "Sampajano = "Clearly comprehending." Endowed with knowledge called circumspection [sampaja��a]. Clearly comprehending = Discerning rightly, entirely and equally [samma samantato sama�ca pajananto]. Rightly = Correctly [aviparitam]. Entirely = By knowing in all ways [sabbakarapajananena]. Equally = By reason of proceeding through the conveying of higher and higher spiritual attainments [uparupari visesavaha-bhavena pavattiya]. Satima = "Mindful." Endowed with mindfulness that lays hold of the body as a subject of meditation, because this yogavacara (the man conversant with contemplative activity) contemplates with wisdom after laying hold of the object with mindfulness. There is nothing called contemplation without mindfulness. Therefore the Master said: "Mindfulness is necessary in all circumstances, O bhikkhus, I declare."[17] Necessary in all circumstances = Everywhere in the state of becoming, in every sluggish and unbalanced state of mind, it is desirable. Or, that by the help of which the other proper Factors of Enlightenment [bojjhanga] are capable of being developed, is "necessary in all circumstances." Here, contemplation takes place by means of wisdom that is assisted by mindfulness. To point out the things by the influence of which the meditation of the yogi prospers, is the purpose of the words, "Ardent, clearly comprehending, and mindful." " ***** I think the following quotes, (p.22) also help us to see importance of panna (wisdom) as being foremost, even when we are discussing satipatthana: ***** "Since there is nothing called spiritual development [bhavana] without laying hold on something whatsoever in material form, feeling, consciousness and mental objects [kaya vedana citta dhammesu ki~nci dhammam anamasitva] they (Santati and Patacara) too overcame sorrow and lamentation just by this Way of Mindfulness. For the hearers [savaka], namely, the disciples of the Buddha, there is no attainment of the Noble Path [Ariya Magga] possible, except by practicing the subject of meditation [kammatthana] of the Four Truths [Catu Sacca]. Spiritual development usually called meditation, is the development of wisdom [pa~n~na bhavana]. Just the contemplation of material form (corporeality), of feeling, consciousness or mental objects, constitutes the cultivation of the Arousing of Mindfulness." ***** Sarah: In the commentary notes under 'kayanupassi', we read more detail about the objects of sati-sampajanna, what read to be the paramattha dhammas (p33): ***** "In this body, apart from the above mentioned collection, there is seen no body, man, woman or anything else. Beings engender wrong belief, in many ways, in the bare groups of things mentioned above. Therefore the men of old said: What he sees that is not (properly) seen; What is seen, that he does not (properly) see; Not seeing (properly) he is shackled clean; And he, the shackled fool, cannot get free. What he sees = What man or woman he sees. Why, is there no seeing of man or a woman with the eye? There is. "I see a woman," "I see a man." -- these statements refer to what he sees by way of ordinary perception. That perception, owing to wrong comprehension, does not get at the sense-basis [rupayatana] in the highest sense, philosophically, through the falsely determined condition of material form [viparita gahavasena miccha parikappita rupatta]. Or the meaning is: the absence of perception which is called the seeing of primary and derived materiality, beginning with things such as the hair of the head, owing to non-cognizability of the collective nature of an object like a man or woman by eye-consciousness [kesadibhutupadaya samuhasankhatam ditthi na hoti acakkhuvi~n~nana vi~n~neyyatta]. What is seen that he does not properly see = He does not see, according to reality by the eye of wisdom, the sense-basis which exists, the collection of primary and derived materiality beginning with hair of the head and the like [yam rupayatanam kesadibhutupadaya samuhasankhatam dittham tam pa~n~na-cakkhuna bhutato na passati]. Not seeing properly he is shackled = Not seeing this body as it actually is, with the eye of wisdom, he thinks: "This is mine, this am I, this is my self," and is bound with the fetter of defilement [imam attabhavam yathabhutam pa~n~nacakkhuna apassanto etam mama esohamasmi eso me attati kilesa bandhanena bajjhati]." < ******* S: In conclusion, I think it is right understanding (supported by the other path factors) of dhammas (realities) that is stressed as being the way, rather than any focussing on any selected objects. Metta, Sarah ========== #88962 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 12:37 am Subject: Re: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? - THERE IS SUCH A METHOD!!! szmicio Dear Sarah Your answers are always excellent. #88963 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 1:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? .. Ahara for the Hindrances .... sarahprocter... Hi Tep (Alex & all), Thanks for sharing good suttas for discussion as usual. --- On Tue, 5/8/08, Tep wrote: >T: It takes mindfulness and alertness for the growth of 'restraint of the senses' (indriya-samvara) which in turn becomes a nutriment for the three good conducts. The three good conducts then become a nutriment for Satipatthana, according to the Buddha : .... S: I would say, 'it takes mindfulness with right understanding for the growth of 'restraint of the senses' (indriya-samvara) which in turn becomes a nutriment for the three good conducts.....etc' .... "Now, I tell you, clear knowing & release have their nutriment. They are not without nutriment. And what is their nutriment? The seven factors for Awakening... And what is the nutriment for the seven factors for Awakening? The four frames of reference... And what is the nutriment for the four frames of reference? The three forms of right conduct... And what is the nutriment for the three forms of right conduct? Restraint of the senses... And what is the nutriment for restraint of the senses? Mindfulness & alertness... And what is the nutriment for mindfulness & alertness? Appropriate attention... And what is the nutriment for appropriate attention? Conviction.. . And what is the nutriment for conviction? Hearing the true Dhamma... And what is the nutriment for hearing the true Dhamma? Associating with people who are truly good... [ AN 10.61 Avijja Sutta taken from Wings to Awakening] .... S: So we see the importance of the association with the wise, hearing true Dhamma, wise attention etc for the development of satipatthana. .... T: So it is clear that there are two different kinds of mindfulness. Ordinary mindfulness- alertness (sati-sampajanna)... .... S: sati-sampajanna - not ordinary mindfulness, but sati accompanied by right understanding. .... T:...is useful as a nutriment for restraint of the sense doors. Sati-sampajanna is enough as a nutriment for restraint of the sense doors; it is NOT Satipatthana. The established mindfulness (Satipatthana) is at a higher level of development. .... S: It has to develop to become established satipatthana. ..... T:> Development of Satipatthana requires both 'restraint of senses' and 'three forms of right conduct' as supporting conditions. People with the three forms of good conduct normally DO NOT have hindrances. Yet, they have to further develop Satipatthana. .... S: Again, I think that as right awareness and right understanding develop, so does the 'restraint of senses' and 'three forms of right conduct' and the (very) gradual wearing away of the hindrances. For example, as right understanding grows, avijja is gradually eradicated until the fully developed right understanding of the arahat eradicated the last remnants of avijja for good. Thanks again for the suttas and your helpful comments for consideration, Tep. Metta, Sarah ======== #88964 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 1:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just studying... sarahprocter... Dear Tep, --- On Wed, 6/8/08, Tep wrote: T:> I wonder how many readers read a long post with steady attention from the first to the last word? However, no-one can deny that your long quote this time is a very useful guideline for Dhamma discussion. The Buddha's warning against misguided discussion is also very valuable. Thank you. ... S: Thank you too for your kind attention and comments here and elsewhere. ... T:>-- "Having studied the doctrine they do not intelligently consider the meaning of the text. And the meaning not being considered with understanding, those acquired doctrines do not lend themselves to close insight. These people study the doctrine for the purpose of annoying others or of freeing themselves from the criticism or scoffing of others." -- Don't learn the Dhamma (discourses, etc.) "for the sake of criticising others and for winning in debates" because "those teachings, being wrongly grasped by them, conduce to their harm and sufering for a long time." -- "Finally, the saint, who has acquired a complete knowledge of the aggregates, got rid of the corruptions, developed the Path, penetrated the Fruition of Arahantship, realized the Truth of Cessation, and extinguished the intoxicants, studies merely for the purpose of preserving the tradition, and of guarding the lineage of the doctrine. This is the study of the treasurer." >May we all adopt the "study of the treasurer" for our own great benefit ! .... S: Yes, indeed. Helpful reminders for us all..... Apologies (as usual) for slow replies. Metta, Sarah ======== #88965 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 1:24 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 5, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, Several people found the discussions about seeing and visible object, hearing and sound too academical. Why do we have to know these realities? Are seeing and hearing not part of our life? We see and hear pleasant and unpleasant objects, and soon after seeing or hearing has fallen away, attachment, aversion and ignorance are bound to arise. We are very ignorant of seeing, hearing and all the other phenomena of our life. If there is no mindfulness of seeing and hearing we shall continue to cling to the concept of “I see”, “I hear”. Should we not find out more about seeing and hearing? Seeing and visible object, hearing and sound, and all the other realities which appear should be known as they are: not self. If mindfulness does not arise we shall continue to cling to the concepts of “I” and of “this or that person”, and that will cause us much trouble. Phra Dhammadhara said: “We think of that terrible man next door, but if a brief moment of mindfulness can arise, we shall know that what is seen is not that man, only visible object.” In reality no person exists. Through the eyesense only visible object can be seen. When we touch someone, hardness, softness, heat or cold may appear, but no person. All these characteristics can be studied in order to know them as they are: only fleeting elements, devoid of self. When we hear harsh words, the characteristic of sound may appear. We do not hear words. We remember the meaning of words and that is not hearing. We think of the words with displeasure and thus the problem is within us, not with the sound or with the other person. There is no self who experiences that sound, hearing experiences it. Can mindfulness sometimes arise? At such moments kusala cittas arise which study different characteristics. When there are conditions for mindfulness, there will be calm. We read in the “Lesser Discourse on the Simile of the Elephant’s Footprint” (Middle Length Sayings I, no. 27) about the monk who is mindful: “... Having seen visible object with the eye, he is not entranced by the general appearance, he is not entranced by the detail. If he dwells with this organ of sight uncontrolled, covetouness and dejection, evil unskilled states of mind might predominate. So he fares along controlling it; he guards the organ of sight, he comes to control over the organ of sight. Having heard a sound with the ear... Having smelt a smell with the nose... Having savoured a taste with the tongue... Having felt a touch with the body... Having cognized a mental object with the mind, he is not entranced by the general appearance, he is not entranced by the detail. If he lives with this organ of mind uncontrolled, covetouness and dejection, evil unskilled states of mind might predominate. So he fares along controlling it; he guards the organ of mind, he comes to control over the organ of mind. If he is possessed of this ariyan control of the (sense-) organs, he subjectively experiences unsullied well-being.” When we hear the word “control” we may think of a self who controls. However, sati, not self, “guards” the six doors. ******* Nina. #88966 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 2:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... sarahprocter... Dear Tep (Alex, Herman, Connie, Scott, all) --- On Fri, 8/8/08, Tep Sastri wrote: "However, knowing & seeing the eye as it actually is present, knowing & seeing forms... consciousness at the eye... contact at the eye as they actually are present, knowing & seeing whatever arises conditioned through contact at the eye — experienced as pleasure, pain, or neither-pleasure- nor-pain — as it actually is present, one is not infatuated with the eye... forms... consciousness at the eye... contact at the eye... whatever arises conditioned by contact at the eye and is experienced as pleasure, pain, or neither-pleasure- nor-pain. "For him — uninfatuated, unattached, unconfused, remaining focused on their drawbacks — the five clinging-aggregates head toward future diminution. The craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now this & now that — is abandoned by him. His bodily disturbances & mental disturbances are abandoned. His bodily torments & mental torments are abandoned. His bodily distresses & mental distresses are abandoned. He is sensitive both to ease of body & ease of awareness. ... " http://www.accessto insight.org/ tipitaka/ mn/mn.149. than.html ............ .. T: >I do not see any failure resulting from "remaining focussed" on the drawbacks of the five aggregates of clinging. ***** S: Here's another on-line translation without any mention of 'remaining focused' at the beginning of the second paragraph: http://mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima3/149-mahasa\ layatanika-e.html "To someone who learns and realizes, ear, sounds, ... re ... nose, scents, ... re ... tongue, tastes, re ... mind, thoughts, mind-consciousness, mind contact and whatever feelings pleasant or unpleasant or neither unpleasant nor pleasant born of mind contact, as they really are. Attachment does not arise for mind, thoughts, mind-consciousness, mind contact and whatever feelings pleasant or unpleasant or neither unpleasant nor pleasant born of that mind contact. Not attached, unyoked and not deluded he abides seeing the danger and does not accumulate in the five holding masses for the future. His craving, interest and greed, to be here and there in the future, cease. His bodily and mental troubles, anxiety and laments cease. Further he experiences bodily and mental pleasantness. Whatever his view, it becomes right view. Whatever his thoughts, they become right thoughts. Whatever his speech it becomes right speech. Whatever his actions, they become right actions. Whatever his effort, it becomes right effort. Whatever his mindfulness, it becomes right mindfulness. Whatever his concentration, it becomes right concentration." **** S: Perhaps someone (Scott?, Connie?) can help check the Pali for the following sentences: "For him — uninfatuated, unattached, unconfused, remaining *focused* on their drawbacks — the five clinging-aggregates head toward future diminution" vs "Not attached, unyoked and not deluded he abides seeing the danger and does not accumulate in the five holding masses for the future." What is the Nanamoli/Bodhi translation? Metta, Sarah ======= #88967 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 2:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Suicide, Antarabhava, can of dead worms sarahprocter... Dear Alex, (I enjoy some of your subject headings, btw:-)) --- On Fri, 8/8/08, Alex wrote: >> S: You've read the sutta about the speed of the mind and how >nothing compares with the speed of such cittas. A:> I agree that cittas happen lightning quick. >However, can Pujjhana go to Arahatship in the matter of few seconds where the cittas are quickly loosing their vividness? .... S: What do you mean by 'loosing their vividness'? Seeing consciousness still sees visible object, no matter the circumstances, no matter how close to cuti citta it arises. The same with hearing consciousness or any other cittas. ..... A:> Why can't we say that it was a Kamma-Vipaka of an Arahant that brought forth cuti citta? .... S: Yes, cuti citta is always the result of past kamma. .... A:> After all, you've said below (regarding Buddha's death) >> S: I wouldn't refer to it as a 'passive suicide'. Time for kamma to >bring its result, that's all. A:> Same with Arahat Channa. .... S: The cuti citta is the result of past kamma. Someone may take a knife or swallow pills, but it will depend on past kamma whether death will ensue. .... A:> Why can't cuti citta is followed by patisandhi citta of an "intermedeate being, gandhabba (call it as you will)" ? .... S: Because as soon as patisandhi citta follows the cuti citta, it is a new life in one of the realms as explained by the Buddha. (See lots in 'antarabhava' in U.P. You'll also enjoy the Kathavatthu when you get to it, Alex.) ... >> S: As I said above, the (Kamma) vipaka refers to the painful bodily >cittas and feelings. The sense of being overwhelmed and intention to >take life are not vipaka. > .... A:>Take whose life? Is there a distinction between taking someone else's life and "one's own". .... S: Yes. One of the conditions for killing (as akusala kamma-patha) is there being another sentient being that is killed and the knowledge of such. Just like hurting another person, lying to another person etc is not the same as hurting oneself. Metta, Sarah ============ #88968 From: Sukinder Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 2:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni Sutta sukinderpal Hi Howard, (Herman and Jon), Sorry for the delay in responding. ======================== Sukin: > Moreover, do you not see a situation in which kusala at first arising > very little but accumulating more to then increase in frequency? Also > that a sense of urgency in the beginning to be invariably followed by > craving, but then as panna develops, including recognizing better the > harm in craving, that samvegha can then be followed by kusala cittas > including panna? Why need craving as driving force? > > ============================== Howard: > It seems to me that the Bhikkhuni Sutta is clear on this matter, Sukin: > > "'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 â€â€? through the ending of the > fermentations â€â€? 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. Sukin: The Sutta as quoted above, does seem to suggest ‘craving’ and ‘conceit’ being motivating forces up until Arahat, at which point they then become finally eradicated. But I think there is a difference on the one hand; craving and conceit to arise invariably being still ‘there’, including at those times when we “think aboutâ€? the Dhamma, and on another, to believe that these are direct and necessary conditions for reaching the goal wouldn’t you say so? Craving and conceit besides being possible ‘object’ of sati and panna, can also be natural decisive support condition for the same to arise following. However these being akusala, I don’t see them as being condition in other ways such as in the case of kusala cittas and panna itself. Were it a fact that craving and conceit are necessary conditions, the very idea of the Path being in fact the development of panna and as support that of kusala of all kinds, this would not make much sense to me. Let alone being accumulative and hence increasing the chance each time of them arising to then proliferate further, what you seem to be suggesting in fact, is that craving and conceit somehow *supports* the arising of kusala with panna? Am I misreading you?…… I think it is possible to read the Bhikkhuni Sutta as saying to the effect that craving and conceit, though these are akusala and the stuff of becoming and rebirth, that they *can* condition kusala with panna to arise, rather than that they *must*. Moreover I think that this must happen only to those with a good deal of accumulated panna such that the greater this panna is, the less the chance of being mislead. And this then brings us back to the need to be especially careful with suggestions that *we* could use the help of craving and conceit. Apparently those in whom these two have less influence are in a better position to make positive *use* of them, on the other hand those who are constantly being lead by these same dhammas, they could do well to *not* encourage them at any time. Furthermore, I note that ‘craving’ and ‘conceit’ are two of the three “papancasâ€?, the other one being ‘wrong view’. The latter in my opinion, not only does not help in the development of the Path, in fact it strongly hinders it. Indeed it seems to me, the problem of suggesting that craving and conceit being necessary, is in reality a problem of “wrong viewâ€?! And the chance of this particular dhamma being condition by natural decisive support for the development of understanding…… very remote I think. Metta, Sukin #88969 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 3:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Alex Was Wrong About Ekaggataa Re: Concentration with every citta sarahprocter... Hi Tep (Suan & all), --- On Fri, 8/8/08, Tep Sastri wrote: T:> In the sutta quote below (your message #88776) the sequential development that underlies several other suttas (e.g. Kundaliya Sutta, Avijja Sutta AN 10.61, Sekha-patipada Sutta MN 53, and so on) is clear. Do you agree or not? 3. "Monks, ignorance precedes demerit, followed by lack of shame and remorse. Monks, to the ignorant not seeing one, wrong view arises. To one with wrong view wrong thoughts arise, to one with wrong thoughts wrong speech, to one with wrong speech wrong action, to one with wrong action wrong livelihood, to one with wrong livelihood wrong endeavor, to one with wrong endeavor wrong establishment of mindfulness and to one with wrong establishment of mindfulness wrong concentration arises. .... S: Yes, Ignorance (avijja) is at the root of all akusala. When there is ignorance, there is no hiri and ottappa. With ignorance and wrong view, the wrong path follows. .... 4. "Monks, knowledge precedes merit, followed by shame and remorse. Monks, to the knowing, seeing one, right view arises. To one with right view right thoughts arise, to one with right thoughts right speech, to one with right speech right action, to one with right action right livelihood, to one with right livelihood right endeavor, to one with right endeavor right establishment of mindfulness and to one with right establishment of mindfulness right concentration arises." .... S: Knowledge (vijjaa) leads to the development of all kinds of kusala dhammas. When kusala arises, there is hiri and ottappa. This leads to the development of the eightfold path, starting with samma ditthi. Vijjaa, pa~n~naa, sampaja~n~naa and sammaa di.t.thi are synonyms. Like in the sutta about satipatthana, there are degrees and levels. For example, now there may be right awareness and right understanding of dhammas. Can we truly say it is satipatthana or the eightfold path at this moment or is it just the foundation? ***** T: Is the "knowledge" that precedes merit same as ~naana? .... S: ~naana is also pa~n~naa cetasika, but usually it refers to the developed right understanding as in the vipassana nanas. If the knowledge (vijja) here is referring to the foundation understanding for the eightfold path to develop, then I don't think it's referring to nanas. On the otherhand, the first vijjaa may be referring to the mundane path (inc. vipassana nanas) and the eighfold factors may be referring to the supramundane path. I'm not sure and don't have texts to look at more carefully. Others may have further ideas. .... T: >I think it is an ordinary man's knowledge. .... S: This I don't think. ... T:> What is the Pali for the knowing and seeing that precede right view? Can you tell what kind of knowing and seeing can induce right view? .... S: Vijjaa and viddasuno (I think). Pariyatti->patipatti->pativedha for sure ....all with right understanding of dhammas. Sorry, Tep....limited resources with me. Others may help further. Metta, Sarah ========== #88970 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 12:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 5, no 2. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 8/12/2008 4:25:38 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Phra Dhammadhara said: “We think of that terrible man next door, but if a brief moment of mindfulness can arise, we shall know that what is seen is not that man, only visible object.â€? In reality no person exists. Through the eyesense only visible object can be seen. When we touch someone, hardness, softness, heat or cold may appear, but no person. All these characteristics can be studied in order to know them as they are: only fleeting elements, devoid of self. ============================= Useful considerations for developing detachment, Nina. On the other hand, and there always is that other hand, if "that terrible man next door" is a serial killer or a child molester, parents will be well-advised to keep their kids away! With metta and a drop of common sense, Howard #88971 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 12:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kayagatasati - Bhikkhuni Sutta upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin - In a message dated 8/12/2008 5:38:52 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sukinder@... writes: Sukin: The Sutta as quoted above, does seem to suggest ‘craving’ and ‘conceit’ being motivating forces up until Arahat, at which point they then become finally eradicated. But I think there is a difference on the one hand; craving and conceit to arise invariably being still ‘there’, including at those times when we “think aboutâ€? the Dhamma, and on another, to believe that these are direct and necessary conditions for reaching the goal wouldn’t you say so? ============================ The Buddha, himself, says that it is by craving and conceit that craving and conceit are abandoned. I would believe that to be so had the Buddha not taught that, because it is clear truth to me. but the Buddha *did* teach it, and I remain satisfied, for the time being at least, that it is so. With metta, Howard #88972 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 6:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... scottduncan2 Dear Sarah (Tep, Alex, Herman, Connie, all), S: Perhaps someone can help check the Pali for the following sentences: "For him â€" uninfatuated, unattached, unconfused, remaining *focused* on their drawbacks â€" the five clinging-aggregates head toward future diminution" vs "Not attached, unyoked and not deluded he abides seeing the danger and does not accumulate in the five holding masses for the future." The Paa.li (I hope): Tassa asaarattassa asa.myuttassa asammuu.lhassa aadiinavaanupassino viharato aayati.m pa~ncupaadaanakkhandhaa apacaya.m gacchanti... S: "What is the Nanamoli/Bodhi translation?" "When one abides uninflamed by lust, unfettered, uninfatuated, contemplating danger, then the five aggregates affected by clinging are diminished for oneself in the future..." Sincerely, Scott. #88973 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 7:30 am Subject: Re: What are they doing!? Someone call DSG police! Save their panna!!! nidive Hi Ken H, > Do you think, "Sitting with legs crossed and back straight made > Sariputta modest, content, solitary, (etc)," or do you think, > "Being modest, content, solitary . .(etc), Sariputta sat with legs > crossed and back straight?" > > Maybe neither of those thoughts goes through your mind, but if you > had to choose, which would it be? You can't choose! Since rupa depends on nama and nama depends on rupa, both conditions are necessary. Swee Boon #88974 From: "connie" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 7:58 am Subject: Re: Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... nichiconn Dear Sarah, All, S: Perhaps someone (Scott?, Connie?) can help check the Pali for the following sentences: "For him "uninfatuated, unattached, unconfused, remaining *focused* on their drawbacks" the five clinging-aggregates head toward future diminution" vs "Not attached, unyoked and not deluded he abides seeing the danger and does not accumulate in the five holding masses for the future." What is the Nanamoli/Bodhi translation? ======= cscd: Tassa asaarattassa asa.myuttassa asammuu.lhassa aadiinavaanupassino viharato aayati.m pa~ncupaadaanakkhandhaa apacaya.m gacchanti. MLDB: When one abides uninflamed by lust, unfettered, uninfatuated, contemplating danger, then the five aggregates affected by clinging are diminished for oneself in the future; ======= c: That's my best guess. Actually, the whole version linked to and quoted in #88966 barely sounds like the same sutta as that in MLDB (see below) to me! peace, connie MN 149, 9: "Bhikkhus, when one knows and sees the eye as it actually is, when one knows and sees forms as they actually are, when one knows and sees eye-consciousness as it actually is, when one knows and sees as it actually is [the feeling] felt as pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant that arises with eye-contact as conditions, then one is not inflamed by lust for the eye, for forms, for eye-consciousness, for eye-contact, for [the feeling] felt as pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor pleasant that arises with eye-contact as condition, then one is not inflamed by lust for the eye, for forms, for eye-consciousness, for eye-contact, for [the feeling] felt as pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant that ariese with eye-contact as condition. "When one abides uninflamed by lust, unfettered, uninfatuated, contemplating danger, then the five aggregates affected by clinging are diminished for oneself in the future; and one's craving -which brings renewal of being, is accompanied by delight and lust, and delights in this or that- is abandoned. One's bodily and mental troubles are abandoned, one's bodily and mental torments are abandoned, one's bodily and mental fevers are abandoned, [289] and one experiences bodily and mental pleasure. 10: "The view of a person such as this is right view. His intention is right intention, his effort is right effort, his mindfulness is right mindfulness, his concentration is right concentration. But his bodily action, his verbal action, and his livelihod have already been well purified earlier. Thus this Noble Eightfold Path comes to fulfilment in him by development. When he develops this Noble Eightfold Path, the four foundations of mindfulness also come to fulfilment in him by development; the four right kinds of striving also come to fulfilment in him by development; the four bases for spiritual power also come to fulfilment in him by development; the faculties also come to fulfilment in him by development; the five powers also come to fulfilment in him by devlopment; the seven enlightenment factors also come to fulfilment in him by development. These two things -serenity and insight- occur in him yoked evenly together. He fully understands by direct knowledge those things that should by fully understood by direct knowledge. He abandons by direct knowledge those things that should by abandoned by direct knowledge. He develops by direct knowledge those things that should by developed by direct knowledge. He realises by direct knowledge those things that should be realised by direct knowledge. #88975 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 9:12 am Subject: Re: Wise/Unwise reflection: MN2 indriyabala Hi, Alex, - I have one comment. > Alex: > Interestingly, no direct mention of "understanding nama-rupa", but > there is mention of understanding 4NT. > > > Any comments? > T: Rupa and nama are the union of mental phenomena (nama) and physical phenomena (rupa) that constitutes the five aggregates (khandha). We know that the 1st Noble Truth states that uppadanakkhandha is dukkha. "In short, the five clinging-aggregates are stressful." [MN 141] Tep === #88976 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 10:19 am Subject: Re: Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... indriyabala Hi Connie (Sarah, Scott and others), - Sarah called the troops : Perhaps someone (Scott?, Connie?) can help check the Pali for the following sentences: "For him "uninfatuated, unattached, unconfused, remaining *focused* on their drawbacks" the five clinging-aggregates head toward future diminution" vs "Not attached, unyoked and not deluded he abides seeing the danger and does not accumulate in the five holding masses for the future." What is the Nanamoli/Bodhi translation? ======= Connie (#88974): cscd: Tassa asaarattassa asa.myuttassa asammuu.lhassa aadiinavaanupassino viharato aayati.m pa~ncupaadaanakkhandhaa apacaya.m gacchanti. MLDB: When one abides uninflamed by lust, unfettered, uninfatuated, contemplating danger, then the five aggregates affected by clinging are diminished for oneself in the future; ======= C: That's my best guess. Actually, the whole version linked to and quoted in #88966 barely sounds like the same sutta as that in MLDB (see below) to me! ................................................. T: The corresponding translation by the Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu is : "For him — uninfatuated, unattached, unconfused, remaining focused on their drawbacks — the five clinging-aggregates head toward future diminution. " The only "trouble" to you and Sarah that I see seems to be the words "remaining focused". Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu explains what "remaining focused" means as follows: "Remaining focused" refers to the element of concentration in the practice, as the meditator holds to one particular frame of reference amid the conflicting currents of experience. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.22.0.than.html T: The Pali 'aadiinavaanupassino' given by CSCD above was rendered by the Venerable as "remaining focused on their drawbacks". And that makes equally good sense to me as "abides ... contemplating danger" (of the five aggregates of clinging). I do not see any reason to overreact, really ! Tep === #88977 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 10:32 am Subject: Re: Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... scottduncan2 Dear Tep, T: "The corresponding translation by the Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu is : 'For him uninfatuated, unattached, unconfused, remaining focused on their drawbacks the five clinging-aggregates head toward future diminution. ' The only 'trouble' to you and Sarah that I see seems to be the words 'remaining focused'. "Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu explains what 'remaining focused' means as follows: "'Remaining focused' refers to the element of concentration in the practice, as the meditator holds to one particular frame of reference amid the conflicting currents of experience." "...The Pali 'aadiinavaanupassino' given by CSCD above was rendered by the Venerable as "remaining focused on their drawbacks". And that makes equally good sense to me as "abides ... contemplating danger" (of the five aggregates of clinging). I do not see any reason to overreact, really !" Scott: I'd suggest the word that the Venerable is taking liberties with is 'viharati', not 'aadiinavaanupassino'. PTS PED: "Viharati [vi+harati] to stay, abide, dwell, sojourn (in a certain place); in general: to be, to live; appld: to behave, lead a life..." Sincerely, Scott. #88978 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 12:04 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 5, no 2. nilovg Hi Howard, I agree, a drop of common sense won't do harm. Remember, a moment of awareness is o so brief and comes in between a lot of thinking of people and circumstances. That thinking is not to be avoided, it is natural. So there is no danger of moving away from worldly life. Parents will take care of their children, they may even be more careful, not negligent, less thinking of their own pleasures, when satipatthaana is developed in daily life. Nina. Op 12-aug-2008, om 13:26 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Useful considerations for developing detachment, Nina. On the other > hand, and there always is that other hand, if "that terrible man > next door" is a > serial killer or a child molester, parents will be well-advised to > keep their > kids away! > > With metta and a drop of common sense, > Howard #88979 From: mlnease Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 12:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... m_nease Hi Scott (And All), Scott wrote: > > > Dear Sarah (Tep, Alex, Herman, Connie, all), > > S: Perhaps someone can help check the Pali for the following sentences: > > "For him â€" uninfatuated, unattached, unconfused, remaining *focused* > on their drawbacks â€" the five clinging-aggregates head toward future > diminution" vs "Not attached, unyoked and not deluded he abides seeing > the danger and does not accumulate in the five holding masses for the > future." > > The Paa.li (I hope): > > Tassa asaarattassa asa.myuttassa asammuu.lhassa aadiinavaanupassino > viharato aayati.m pa~ncupaadaanakkhandhaa apacaya.m gacchanti... Weren't we in Mahaasa.laayatanikasutta.m, MN.III.5.7? I can't seem to locate this passage-- Thanks in advance. mike #88980 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 1:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... scottduncan2 Dear Mike, M: "Weren't we in Mahaasa.laayatanikasutta.m, MN.III.5.7? I can't seem to locate this passage--" Scott: I'm probably wrong again. I was thinking it was MN 149. Sincerely, Scott. #88981 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 1:34 pm Subject: Re: Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... indriyabala Hi Scott, - I am a little dense today. > > Scott: I'd suggest the word that the Venerable is taking liberties > with is 'viharati', not 'aadiinavaanupassino'. > > PTS PED: > > "Viharati [vi+harati] to stay, abide, dwell, sojourn (in a certain > place); in general: to be, to live; appld: to behave, lead a life..." > Can you elaborate a bit more? Do you mean he mis-translated 'viharati' as 'remaining focused'? I don't think so, since I have seen him using 'dwell' (for viharati) in several other sutta translations. I think he knows Pali at least as well as you do. Tep === #88982 From: "Chew" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 9:23 am Subject: Nibbana is nama chewsadhu Hi, Sis Nina, In the Chapter 1 of your book - THE FOUR PARAMATTHA DHAMMAS, I found this: "The fourth paramattha dhamma is nibbana. Nibbana is the end of defilements. Nibbana can be experienced through the mind-door if one follows the right Path leading towards it: the development of the wisdom which sees things as they are. Nibbana is nama. However, it is not citta or cetasika. Nibbbna is the nama which does not arise and fall away; it is the nama which is an unconditioned reality (in Pali:visankhara dhamma). It does not arise, because it is unconditioned and therefore it does not fall away. Citta and cetasika are namas which experience an object; nibbana is the nama which does not experience an object, but nibbana itself can be the object of citta and cetasika which experience it, Nibbana is not a person, it is not-self; it is anatta. " Can you please explain on why Nibbana is also called "Nama"? Which we normally only called Citta and Cetasikas as "Nama". Thank you. With respect, Chew #88983 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 2:01 pm Subject: Re: What are they doing!? Someone call DSG police! Save their panna!!! kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi Ken H, > > > Do you think, "Sitting with legs crossed and back straight made > > Sariputta modest, content, solitary, (etc)," or do you think, > > "Being modest, content, solitary . .(etc), Sariputta sat with legs > > crossed and back straight?" > > > > Maybe neither of those thoughts goes through your mind, but if you > > had to choose, which would it be? > > You can't choose! > > Since rupa depends on nama and nama depends on rupa, both conditions > are necessary. > Hi Swee Boon, Thanks for your answer. It wasn't quite what I was looking for but, never mind, it raises some interesting questions of its own. Are you saying that those things are rupas? Sorry if I am trivialising, but are you suggesting there can be crossed rupas and straight rupas? Ken H #88984 From: "connie" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 2:32 pm Subject: Subject: Re: Sila Always Comes First ! nichiconn Dear Scott, All, As to what serve the function[s?] of restraint: Expositor: p.128 << The eight 'restraints' are those of the eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue, the skin, the moving body, speech and mind. In the ultimate sense they are five principles, namely: virtue, mindfulness, knowledge, patience and energy. >> S: That is, without it (or them), there would be no restraining of the senses. Speech and bodily action would be unrestrained. And these are ruupa, of course, so it must be naama which serves the function of restraint. I don't think, therefore, that there could be siila without sati, and I don't think sati can be willed into action. I wonder what the factors might be which lead to the development of sati? c: yes, seems always more of the running around together than one thing at a time... but there's more abhidhamma study: learning which cetasikas can and don't (no matter how much one would will it) arise together. And to complete the ingredients for "flux", throw in ruupa & the corresponding rules for that category. Basically, in terms of restraint: << Connected Discourses, I:8,4 -- 722 "It is through an inversion of perception That your mind is engulfed by fire. Turn away from the sign of beauty Provocative of sensual lust. 723. See formations as alien, As suffering, not as self. Extinguish the great fire of lust; Don't burn up again and again. 724 "Develop the mind on foulness, One-pointed, well concentrated; <406> Apply your mindfulness to the body, Be engrossed in revulsion. 725 "Develop meditation on the signless, And discard the tendency to conceit. Then, by breaking through conceit, You will be one who fares at peace." SN V:35,134 -- There are, bhikkhus, forms cognizable by the eye that are agreeable and those that are disagreeable. [One should train so that] these do not persist obsessing one's mind even when they are repeatedly experienced. When the mind is not obsessed, tireless energy is aroused, unmuddled mindfulness is set up, the body becomes tranquil and untroubled, the mind becomes concentrated and one-pointed. Seeing this fruit of diligence, bhikkhus, I say that those bhikkhus still have work to do with diligence in regard to the six bases for contact. >> Scott: Yes, different aspects of dhammas functioning as controlling forces and at different strengths. And here, I think, comes again the need to consider that we are dealing with impersonal dhammas. The lack of clinging which occurs as a function of 'guarding the senses' has to do, perhaps, as much with sati as with the relative depth to which pa~n~naa would have penetrated the dhammas in relation to the characteristic of anatta - that is, the five aggregates are not a self. When sati is present, the senses are guarded. Anyway... c: basic agreement. we're assuming sati sampaja~n~na but yeah, without wisdom, mindfulness is weak... and probably misdirected. peace, connie For this discipline is twofold, of restraint, namely, and of elimination, each of which is fivefold. - Expositor (p.454) #88985 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 3:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? - Super mindfulness ... indriyabala Hello Sarah, - I think in message # 88960 you are contradicting yourself, or being inconsistent, with your earlier message 88625, i.e. when you said that mindfulness could be developed by anyone with intellectual understanding. Sarah (#88625): Mindfulness has to develop very naturally and will do so if there is firm intellectual understanding of what its characteristic is and what the objects of mindfulness are. While there is a strong trying or urging to have 'Super mindfulness' and a focus on the movements of the feet (or any other object), no understanding will develop. Instead, attachment, craving for results, for 'me' will be developing. T: I agree with you about developing mundane mindfulness in general, i.e. it is supported by intellectual understanding of the objects of sati. [That's why I showed my approval in my previous reply: A "firm intellectual understanding" of any subject matter (e.g. a high-school algebra; Biology; Engineering) is an important supporting factor in all kinds of study that develop skill. Mindfulness and awareness of "the objects of mindfulness" are natural in such a study ...] But the following message surprises me because you have reversed the earlier position! [Flip-flopping?] Sarah (#88960): I don't think that mindfulness (i.e sati) is natural in such studies as those you mention above or in 'mundane, worldly activites that require attention...' I would say attachment and ignorance are very natural in developing such skills. There is wisdom when pursuing such skills, but it's not panna, the right understanding as taught by the Buddha. T: Why should anyone be concerned with the developing of the ariyans' "right understanding" while studying Biology, for example? S (continuing..): The point is, however, that sati (which can only arise with sobhana cittas) can begin to develop at such times, naturally, when there are the right conditions. T: The flip-flopping confuses me badly! I do not see why sati "can only arise with sobhana cittas". Don't you have sati even when you are reading a book, writing a letter, or cooking a food? If mindfulness can only arise with sobhana cittas, then you will never be mindful on reading or writing or cooking, etc. Then you will never ever understand the content of the book you read; you will not write coherently; you will end up with a food that nobody can eat. ................................... T: Our discussion is not complete without a sutta discussion, right? DN 22: The Modes of Deportment "The Four Kinds of Clear Comprehension <....> "And further, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, in going forwards (and) in going backwards, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in looking straight on (and) in looking away from the front, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in bending and in stretching, ... ... >T: Carefully reading the above sutta quotes with mindfulness and understanding, it should be clear to anyone that the following interpretation of the Buddha's words is a wrong view that should be corrected before it is too late: >>Sarah: "While there is a strong trying or urging to have 'Super mindfulness' and a focus on the movements of the feet (or any other object), no understanding will develop. Instead, attachment, craving for results, for 'me' will be developing." .... S: So do you believe that trying to have 'super mindfulness' and focussing on any object will lead to the development of satipatthana? T: Frankly, Sarah, that crazy belief never occurs to me. A right effort to be mindful of an object (of mindfulness) does not require that kind of trying to have "super mindfulness". It is not the issue in DN 22 or in any other sutta! BTW "Focussing" on an object of mindfulness (or awareness) only "refers to the element of concentration in the practice, as the meditator holds to one particular frame of reference" as explained by Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu's introduction to DN 22 ( that I already talked about in another today post). Tep === #88986 From: "connie" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 3:16 pm Subject: Re: Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... nichiconn Dear mike, Tep, m: Weren't we in Mahaasa.laayatanikasutta.m, MN.III.5.7? I can't seem to locate this passage-- c: yep, that's the one. I assume you've seen #88974 by now so I'll just say thanks for asking because I'm glad to see I'm not the only who had a problem with more than just a couple of words in trying to match the english versions! peace, connie > "For him "uninfatuated, unattached, unconfused, remaining *focused* > on their drawbacks" the five clinging-aggregates head toward future > diminution" vs "Not attached, unyoked and not deluded he abides seeing > the danger and does not accumulate in the five holding masses for the > future." > #88987 From: "connie" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 3:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... nichiconn Dear Mike, Scott, M: "Weren't we in Mahaasa.laayatanikasutta.m, MN.III.5.7? Scott: I'm probably wrong again. I was thinking it was MN 149. c: same difference. part 3, ch.5's 7th sutta, or 149th of the whole book. peace, connie #88988 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 3:49 pm Subject: Re: Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... scottduncan2 Dear Tep, T: "Can you elaborate a bit more? Do you mean he mis-translated 'viharati' as 'remaining focused'? I don't think so, since I have seen him using 'dwell' (for viharati) in several other sutta translations..." Scott: I'm saying that I think 'viharati' is the verb in question (I'm not saying I know it is): "...asaarattassa asa.myuttassa asammuu.lhassa aadiinavaanupassino viharato ..." And that whether one uses 'dwells' or 'remaining focused' it is being done 'uninflamed by lust, unfettered, uninfatuated, contemplating danger'. I'd suggest that this is more a way of living - given the meaning of viharati - whether coming or going, rather than another putative instruction to 'meditators'. I'm suggesting that the Venerable's commentary suggests why he would choose to use 'remaining focused' instead of 'dwells'. Do you think he based his commentary on the ancient commentaries? Sincerely, Scott. #88989 From: mlnease Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 3:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... m_nease Hi Connie, connie wrote: > > > Dear mike, Tep, > > m: Weren't we in Mahaasa.laayatanikasutta.m, MN.III.5.7? I can't seem to > locate this passage-- > > c: yep, that's the one. I assume you've seen #88974 by now Yes I have, thanks-- > so I'll just > say thanks for asking because I'm glad to see I'm not the only who had a > problem with more than just a couple of words in trying to match the > english versions! My pleasure--thanks for all the effort. mike #88990 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 3:55 pm Subject: Re: What are they doing!? Someone call DSG police! Save their panna!!! truth_aerator Dear Ken & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Hi Alex and other meditators, > --------------- > A: > Please tell me what Sariputta was doing? > > =================== > > ... at that time Ven. Sariputta was sitting not far from the > Blessed One — his legs crossed, his body held erect — modest, > content, solitary, unentangled, his persistence aroused, devoted to > the heightened mind. > --------------- > > What goes through your mind when you read extracts like that one? >Do > you think, "Sitting with legs crossed and back straight made > Sariputta modest, content, solitary, (etc)," or do you >think, "Being > modest, content, solitary . .(etc), Sariputta sat with legs crossed > and back straight?" > > Maybe neither of those thoughts goes through your mind, but if you > had to choose, which would it be? > > Ken H Initial panna made him know the benefits of meditation, and that proper meditation ultimately gave him total "modesty, contentness, & solitary state of mind (arahatship)" . Sitting posture is the means to the end and not the end itself. If sitting posture itself was the cause, then all chickens would be enlightened long time ago... The magic is in calming the mind through proper wisdom and in seeing through that calm mind with panna for the destruction of the taints. Best wishes, Alex #88991 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 4:04 pm Subject: Re: Dogmatism. Focussing on Anything is Wrong? truth_aerator Dear Tep and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > T: The corresponding translation by the Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu > is : "For him — uninfatuated, unattached, unconfused, remaining > focused on their drawbacks — the five clinging-aggregates head >toward future diminution. " The only "trouble" to you and Sarah >that I see seems to be the words "remaining focused". Lets not forget that in such beloved "satipatthana" there are many passages of focusing on "body in the body", "feelings in the feelings" and so on. This refutes the idea of "passive observation". Furthermore the who dogmatic attitude of "focussing is *always* wrong" is uncharacteristic of Awakened Buddha. ============================================================= If focussing causes akusala to diminish and kusala to grow, then it is skillful focusing. If focussing causes akusala to increase and kusala to wane, then it unskillful focusing. Period. Best wishes, Alex #88992 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 4:10 pm Subject: Re: Scholasticism & hair splitting truth_aerator Dear Sarah, Ken, Scott or anyone: Please explain the part about sitting crosslegged. Please explain the MN111 about Sariputta entering 9 Jhanas. Best wishes, Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > ***** > S: Here's another on-line translation without any mention of 'remaining focused' at the beginning of the second paragraph: > > http://mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima- Nikaya/Majjhima3/149-mahasalayatanika-e.html > > "To someone who learns and realizes, ear, sounds, ... re ... nose, scents, ... re ... tongue, tastes, re ... mind, thoughts, mind- consciousness, mind contact and whatever feelings pleasant or unpleasant or neither unpleasant nor pleasant born of mind contact, as they really are. Attachment does not arise for mind, thoughts, mind-consciousness, mind contact and whatever feelings pleasant or unpleasant or neither unpleasant nor pleasant born of that mind contact. > > Not attached, unyoked and not deluded he abides seeing the danger and does not accumulate in the five holding masses for the future. His craving, interest and greed, to be here and there in the future, cease. His bodily and mental troubles, anxiety and laments cease. Further he experiences bodily and mental pleasantness. Whatever his view, it becomes right view. Whatever his thoughts, they become right thoughts. Whatever his speech it becomes right speech. Whatever his actions, they become right actions. Whatever his effort, it becomes right effort. Whatever his mindfulness, it becomes right mindfulness. Whatever his concentration, it becomes right concentration." > **** > S: Perhaps someone (Scott?, Connie?) can help check the Pali for the following sentences: > > "For him â€" uninfatuated, unattached, unconfused, remaining *focused* on > their drawbacks â€" the five clinging-aggregates head toward future > diminution" vs "Not attached, unyoked and not deluded he abides seeing the danger and does not accumulate in the five holding masses for the future." > > What is the Nanamoli/Bodhi translation? > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======= > #88993 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 4:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] SN35: 153 (8) Is there a Method? - THERE IS SUCH A METHOD!!! indriyabala Hi Sarah (Nina, Jon, Herman, Alex), - Now let's move on to Focussing (part 2). ................... >Sarah (#88961): More on 'focussing'. ...(part 2) >I'd just like to add a few further comments on 'focussing' from a couple of my old messages to others: 1) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/35083 2) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15443 >S: In conclusion, I think it is right understanding (supported by the other path factors) of dhammas (realities) that is stressed as being the way, rather than any focussing on any selected objects. .................................... T: I'd like to formally note that in your older message 88426 you defined "understanding" differently from the above. [#88246] > > >Tep: 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. .... T: Further, your understanding of "understanding" is far different from your own quote of the Dispeller in the older message #80913. > N: I find that Sarah's quote of the Dispeller expresses what I feel > about it: on are all synonyms for understanding……………..it conforms to the > Truth of the Path and it conforms owing to conforming to the > highest meaning, nibbaana. And it accepts (khamati), bears, is able > to see all these reasons, thus it is > acceptance (khanti). `It sees' is di.t.thi (`view')……….and in > particular, the things (dhamma) called the five aggregates on being > studied (nijjjhaayamaanaa) again and again in accordance with > impermanence, suffering and no self, accept (khamanti) that study > (nijjhaana); thus it > is dhammanijjhaanakkhanti (`acceptance of study things')." The five khandhas: all conditioned nama and rupa. Before the three characteristics can be realized, they have to be seen as mere dhammas, not a person. ------- T: Clearly, that is "understanding" that belongs to trainers (sekha) who have right view. Best wishes, Tep === #88994 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 4:19 pm Subject: Can of almost dead worms in Antarabha after the suicide truth_aerator Dear Sarah and all interested, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > >> S: You've read the sutta about the speed of the mind and how > >nothing compares with the speed of such cittas. > > A:> I agree that cittas happen lightning quick. > > >However, can Pujjhana go to Arahatship in the matter of few >seconds > where the cittas are quickly loosing their vividness? > .... > S: What do you mean by 'loosing their vividness'? Have you ever fainted? Have you ever been close to? Don't you know that it is very hard (almost impossible) to figure out what is going on in the moment immeadetely prior to falling into unconscious, much less doing Patipada? Quiz: When a person cuts his juggular vein (or sleeping artery), how quickly he dies? How quickly he faints? So here we have a case not even Bahiya like pujjhana to Arahatship Blitzkrieg - but in semi or even (almost) fully unconscious state. >Seeing consciousness still sees visible object, no matter the >circumstances, no matter how close to cuti citta it arises. Never had double vision, or blurred vision or anything like that? Just figure the amount of redness in the eyes when someone cut his own neck and the total wreckage of the bodily system... > The same with hearing consciousness or any other cittas. Some people loose conscious by seeing someone else's blood. Here we have a guy who just cut his own neck in suicide. > ..... > A:> Why can't cuti citta is followed by patisandhi citta of > an "intermedeate being, gandhabba (call it as you will)" ? > .... > S: Because as soon as patisandhi citta follows the cuti citta, it >is a new life in one of the realms as explained by the Buddha. And one of the realms may be the Antarabhava (or just Bhava in DO). The Best of wishes to you, Alex #88995 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 5:00 pm Subject: Re: Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... indriyabala Dear Scott, - Thank you for the time and attention. ....................... >Scott: I'm saying that I think 'viharati' is the verb in question (I'm not saying I know it is): "...asaarattassa asa.myuttassa asammuu.lhassa aadiinavaanupassino viharato ..." And that whether one uses 'dwells' or 'remaining focused' it is being done 'uninflamed by lust, unfettered, uninfatuated, contemplating danger'. I'd suggest that this is more a way of living - given the meaning of viharati - whether coming or going, rather than another putative instruction to 'meditators'. T: Your suggestion is an opinion. So I am entitled to give one too. In my opinion, it is both. Buddhists meditate. Meditation is taught to meditators, not to thinkers/philosophers/debaters. Meditators meditate for results, e.g. to cut down hindrances; to dwell in mindfulness and awareness, etc.. So they have to know 'what' and 'how' in order to meditate and to assess whether or not a right result has been achieved. Therefore, an instruction is necessary. Several sutta teachings are instructions. >Scott: I'm suggesting that the Venerable's commentary suggests why he would choose to use 'remaining focused' instead of 'dwells'. Do you think he based his commentary on the ancient commentaries? T: It doesn't seem clear to me that you are clear about his explanation of "remaining focused" in the Introduction to DN 22. Using his other comments and dhamma talks (found in the Access To Insight archive) as a guide, I think he has minimally used the ancient commentaries. But that should not be a fair and adequate reason for you to disregard his translation and/or commentary. Tep === #88996 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 5:32 pm Subject: Re: Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... scottduncan2 Dear Tep, T: "...Using his other comments and dhamma talks (found in the Access To Insight archive) as a guide, I think he has minimally used the ancient commentaries. But that should not be a fair and adequate reason for you to disregard his translation and/or commentary." Scott: Yes, I did have the impression that he was advancing his own commentaries. I think that I'll continue to disregard the Venerable's commentaries and translations and stick to the Ancient Commentaries and alternate translations, for reasons both fair and adequate. Thanks, Tep. Sincerely, Scott. #88997 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 5:55 pm Subject: Re: Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > Scott: Yes, I did have the impression that he was advancing his own > commentaries. I think that I'll continue to disregard the Venerable's > commentaries and translations and stick to the Ancient Commentaries > and alternate translations, for reasons both fair and adequate. > > > Sincerely, > > Scott. Can you please explain why ancient commentaries are better than Ven. TB's? Best wishes, Alex #88998 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 6:10 pm Subject: Re: Dogmatism. Focussing on Anything is Wrong? indriyabala Dear Alex (Scott, Sarah, ..), - Thank you for the good reply below. In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > T: The corresponding translation by the Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu > is : "For him — uninfatuated, unattached, unconfused, remaining > focused on their drawbacks — the five clinging-aggregates head >toward future diminution. " The only "trouble" to you and Sarah >that I see seems to be the words "remaining focused". ............................. Alex: Lets not forget that in such beloved "satipatthana" there are many passages of focusing on "body in the body", "feelings in the feelings" and so on. This refutes the idea of "passive observation". >Furthermore the who dogmatic attitude of "focussing is *always* wrong" is uncharacteristic of Awakened Buddha. ============================= >If focussing causes akusala to diminish and kusala to grow, then it is skillful focusing. >If focussing causes akusala to increase and kusala to wane, then it unskillful focusing. >Period. ............................. Best wishes, Alex ========================= T: I am not sure if those who have claimed to possess of "panna of Satipatthana" actually understand that vitakka and vicara of the first jhana are supporting factors for establishing mindfulness on kaya, vedana, citta, and dhamma. That directed meditation is "focussing" as I understand it. Bhikkhunupassaya Sutta (SN 47.10) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn47/sn47.010.olen.html Tep === #88999 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Aug 12, 2008 6:22 pm Subject: Re: Scholasticism, .. Focussing on Anything is Wrong?... indriyabala Dear Alex (and Scott and KenH), - I say the Venerable Thanissaro Bhikkhu's choice to minimally depend on the ancient commentaries should not be a fair and adequate reason for Scott to disregard his commentaries. But Scott disagrees. > Scott: Yes, I did have the impression that he was advancing his own > commentaries. I think that I'll continue to disregard the Venerable's commentaries and translations and stick to the Ancient Commentaries and alternate translations, for reasons both fair and adequate. > Alex: Can you please explain why ancient commentaries are better than Ven. TB's? T: Simple question ! Because they are ancient, that's why. ;-) Tep ===