#89600 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:08 am Subject: Re: What is a path in Buddhism? jonoabb Hi Tep > In AN 4.170 Yuganaddha Sutta: In Tandem, there are four kinds of > path. These four paths all lead to arahantship. > ... > "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity > preceded by insight. As he develops tranquillity preceded by insight, > the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As > he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are > abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. > ... > The 1st through 3rd path require both samatha and vipassana. Is the > fourth one similar to the DSG Abhidhamma Path? ;-)) I take the second path (the case where a monk has developed tranquillity preceded by insight) to be that of the person who attains enlightenment without having attained any particular level of samatha. Jon #89601 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 4a sarahprocter... Dear Friends, We spent the day at Num's lovely house today, surrounded by trees in a very quiet part of Bangkok, with large open windows, tasty food and relaxing spots to rest when not discussing Dhamma. [Most enjoyable, thanks all!] The main participants were Robert, Azita, Betty, Sukin, Ivan and ourselves. 1. More on Han's points. Is there then no use in studying the Satipatthana or Anapanasati Sutta if w don't understand realities now? If there's no understanding of sati and various realities now, what's the use of these suttas? Different realities are appearing now, they cannot be the same ones. We need to understand more about dhammas now. A yogi - anyone who knows how to develop understanding, who's on the path I also read out Nina's commentary note about 'yogic power is the power of meditation' etc,#89539. KS stressed in this context the 'patience' aspect of viriya, the long path. Patience as the highest austerity. Without patience, no panna 2. More on the patisandhi (birth citta), series of cittas, bhavangas, D.O. and the role of vitakka From the moment of birth, nothing appears at all, just vipaka cittas, accumulated from life to life, but no way 'to come ou' until the mind and sense door processes begin with manodvaravajjana and pancadvaravajjana cittas. One moment of citta experiencing an object, vitakka with all but the 10 dvi panca vinnana cittas. Birth by conditions, ayuhana (accumulated kamma), and then no one can stop kusala and akusala. Only a citta at birth, everything unknown like a seed. The patisandhi citta no one knows, its object not through the 6 doorways, followed by bhavanga cittas. Conditioned avijja and sankhara. Past avijja led to sankhara (kamma) resulting in patisandhi. The 'nonsense' of the whole last life gone. Each moment arose and passed away. It seemed so important at the time, just as everything seems so important now. This life will be the same for next life - it will be past 'nonsense' again. Even that which just past is past nonsense, getting closer and closer to the understanding of the present dhamma. The collection of kusala and akusala lying dormant. Nothing happened to be known for the first moments or next cittas of this life until the javana manasikara (manodvaravajjana citta) and following javana cittas. Life as being like an open doorway with nothing left at all. Reality at this moment, otherwise no way to let go of self, which leads to detachment. Seeing and hearing as 'accidentally' arising without vitakka, but conditioning other cittas, accompanied by vitakka which doesn't 'let go'. 3. Sila - 'manners', any deeds, conditioned by kusala and akusala. Indriya samvara sila - more understanding of the danger of not being aware at the moment of seeing, hearing and so on. Understanding, but not necessarily satipatthana. The importance of following the rules for monks, otherwise there is uddhacca and kukucca (restlessness and worry). They hinder the development of understanding - all akusala is a hindrance when it arises. 4.All kusala as a condition for right understanding only with right understanding as parami. Even jhana - if no right understanding of it when it appears, it cannot lead to the path. 5.Akusala conditioning kusala only by nat. decisive support condition. Lobha always 'wrong'. Trying to develop metta - not understanding lobha, not kusala. Giving with a miniscule amount of kusala only, when in effect, asking for something in return to be contd #89602 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 4b sarahprocter... contd. 6.Cariya of cittas (see Ptsm) refering to the behaviour of cittas vinnana cariya - all ahetuka cittas anana cariya - all akusala cittas nana cariya - development of the path, especially vipassana nanas and lokuttara cittas. After seeing or hearing, usually there are akusala cittas and the cycle continues. Only nana cariya gets rid of the cycle. 7. NEP - 2 meanings, cause & result path of practice and supramundane path 8. Tep's sutta, Avijja Sutta, AN 10:61 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/88728 The Four frames of reference - Satipatthana Mindfulness and alertness - any sati. Don't forget the common use of terms as used at the time. For example, sampajanna, such as sappaya sampajanna, knowing what's suitable - just a common meaning. Also the one as quoted back by me in #88816,88776. "...Knowledge, precedes merit......shame and remorse....to the knowing, seeing one, right view arises.....right thoughts......." As I wrote, vijja, panna, samma dithi etc are synonyms. Degrees and levels. Knowledge (vijja) refers to any understanding (not yet satipatthana understanding). The understanding leads to kusala, hiri, ottappa and to the path, just as the avijja (in preceding para) leads to akusala, miccha ditthi and the wrong path. Vijja as one of the ten punnakiriya vatthu, not nec. 8fold path understanding in suttas. 9. Samadhi - dict definition as given by Connie from PED #85286. It shows a lack of understanding. The same in Thai - it all depends on the translator's understanding. Also Connie's commentary note in #89359 (details of processes)which I found interesting. "Sounds good to know, but useless when beyond one's limit!" Searching for the meaning, lobha cheats again - no detachment. Different kusala and akusala cittas in the rapidly succeeding processes, who can know? Trying to know, not the way. 10. Samatha - all kusala a support? Only a support when there is understanding of the path. comments in the texts about samatha object and choice, like knowing whether hot food is suitable, knowing the 'carita' or character. 11. Cleanliness as given in the Vinaya (and Satipatthana Sutta commentary). Not a strict rule, different accumulations. Vinaya in a cold climate, 3 robes etc. only. Difficult to lead the monk's life. Depends on saddha. to be contd #89603 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:12 am Subject: Re: Just studying & Sariputta jonoabb Hi Alex > > The development of jhana does not make one ready to receive > >Dhamma. > > But being Kusala Kamma it IS very helpful. Agreed, all kusala supports the development of insight. However, a person who has developed jhana but no (i.e., relatively little) insight is still a beginner as far as the path taught by the Buddha is concerned. > Leads to 4 fruits: From Stream to Arhatship. (DN29) Do you mean the Pasadika Sutta? On the internet I can only find a summary (see at the end of this post). However, the summary doesn't seem to support your contention that jhana leads to the 4 stages of enlightenment. Would you mind quoting the particular passage you rely on? Thanks. > Ending of Mental Fermentations depend on Jhana (it would be YOUR > inference to claim that this sutta is applicable only to 'them') > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.036.than.html This sutta discusses the attaining of enlightenment by monks who have attained the different levels of jhana. In each case, the attainment of enlightenment is described in the following terms: "He regards whatever phenomena there that are connected with form, feeling, perception, fabrications, & consciousness, as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a disintegration, an emptiness, not-self. He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.'" This is a description of insight knowledge leading to enlightenment. The same description is given in the case of each of the levels of jhana. So I do not read the sutta as saying that it is jhana that leads to enlightenment. > Samadhi is proximate condition to "knowledge and vision of things as > they really are" > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.023.bodh.html Samadhi in this context is a reference to the mental factor of samadhi, not to jhana citta. > Jhana is the only 4 Meditative absorptions thay Buddha praised. MN108 > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.108.than.html But this doesn't mean that jhana leads to enlightenment. > Jhana blinds mara -MN25 Sorry, but can't find a copy of this sutta on-line. > MN Suttas that mention Jhana: > 1,4,6,8,13,19,35,30,31,36,38,43,45,53,53,59,64,65,66,76,77,78,79,85, > 106, 107,108,111,112, 113, 119,121, 128, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141,152 > > DN# 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,16,17,22,19,26,27,29,31,32 Yes, but do any of these suttas actually say or directly imply what you have been saying about jhana? You seem to be relying on the sheer number of suttas mentioning jhana as proof that jhana is a requirement!! Jon DN 29: Pasadika Sutta The Venerable Ananda accompanied by bhikkhu Cunda went to see the Buddha to give him the news about the death of Nigantha Nataputta, the leader of a well-known sect, and the schism that had arisen amongst his disciples. The Buddha told them that it was natural and to be expected to happen in a Teaching which was not well taught, not well imparted, not conducive to emancipation, and not taught by one who was supremely enlightened. In contrast, the Buddha explained that when the Teaching was well taught, well imparted by one who was supremely enlightened, there were no wrong views, no speculations about past or future or about atta. In the Teaching of the Buddha, bhikkhus were taught the Four Methods of Steadfast Mindfulness by which wrong views and speculations were laid aside. http://www.dhammaweb.net/Tipitaka/view.php?id=29 #89604 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 4c sarahprocter... contd - P.M. session *********** 1.Going with the flow, with lobha vs going with the flow, not disturbed, not struggling. Not going with the flow, when interrupted with sati, but still a flow. 1. Rupas. Ann's qu about why the 4 characteristics (upacaya,santati, jarataa, aniccataa) are included in the 28. See #85655 for more. They have to be the characteristic of rupas only. Rupas last longer than namas.....just the way it is! We can only refer to these characteristics of nipphana (concrete) rupas, i.e. those with sabhava. Included in anipphana rupa is akasa rupa (space element). All rupas, therefore any kind of space is included. 2. Pain, referred pain Howard & Nina's discussion #85991 and also one between Han and Larry. People say "I have a pain in my leg". A strong idea of body which sanna remembers, even when there's no pain. Until anatta is understood, there's always atta sanna -a foot, a leg, a hip, a place. Actually, just moments of painful/unpleasant feeling and the 7 rupas experienced through the body-sense. We cannot refer to a painful bodily sensation (rupa), just hardness, softness etc experienced by body-consciousness and unpleasant feeling. 3. Degrees of indiryas, sati, panna etc as weak indriyas from the beginning of satipatthana 4. clear and obscure objects - just depends whether it falls away before or after javana cittas. Han wrote in detail on this, but I've misplace the # (Maybe he can add it in). [getting too tired to search!] 5.Jivitindriya, Han's comments before #84284. Jivitindriya as nama is the reason nama is different from rupa. It needs the cetasika jivitindriya as a support. Cannot say it's role is to make sure one citta follows another. Also, cannot say jivitindriya rupa 'sees to it that when one ruupa falls away another arises in its place.' It doesn't have ananatara paccaya. 6. Anicca, dukkha and anatta - the order in the suttas. When anicca and dukkha of realities known, means anatta already understood. So much ignorance in a day. Uncountable dhammas in a day. When there's right understanding, it's a dhamma, anatta. When there's wrong understanding, viriya is stressed instead of panna. 7. Vitakka or vicara predominating? Rinze's #88823 For example, when talking, vitakka is predominating, because a lot of thinking. It doesn't help to know all the different ingredients and how much of each. Can you know? The first thing is to understand nama and rupa. 8. Yamaka - sanna and ditthi as given by Chew in #84971 "Wrong views based on perception are wrong view mental factor. They are perception. They are not perception aggregate. Perception aggregate is perception mental factor." Wrong views 'based' on sanna (ditthi vipallasa and sanna vipallasa). 'Based on...' The need to understand sanna with cittas in different contexts, but always referring to sanna cetasika. E.g Scott's#85341 in which he quotes ".....does perception arise before knowledge....", then his helpful footnote from the comy that perception refers to jhana sanna (can be kama sanna, rupa sanna, arupa sanna), knowledge refers to vipassana. 9. Nibana - has to be the dhamma one can never be attached to in oreder to eradicate defilements. 10. Speaking about attainments before on DSG - no purpose at all. Let go! What is the motive (if not a blind belief). 11. Tathagata as I was discussing with James #84320, a discussion about no people, no Buddha, no beings. I had quoted: "In truth and reality, here and now the Tathagata is not to be found." Yamaka Sutta, SN 22:85. It could have referred to any beings as 'not to be found', not just the 'Tathagata'. Rob K mentioned that the commentary confirms this. 12. Patisambhidas - accomplished skills with wisdom. All ariyans have patisambhidas, but there are degrees. When the texts specifically mention arahats with patisambhidas, it is to those with particularly accomplished skills in the 4 areas. Degrees of panna stressed. 13. Pariyatti WILL lead to patipatti by conditions. Pariyatti - the elimination of gross kilesa, but cannot eradicate wrong view, even if no wrong views arise for a time. Must still be further hearing etc. 14. 2 kinds of bhava. in D.O. as leading to jati, only referring to kamma bhava. This leads to upapati bhava (5 khandhas conditioned by kamma) and jati. 15. Anupubbi - gradual training. Cittas become purified stage by stage. Why can't one give? Because of attachment. Which is easier to give - material things or the idea of self? And so on. ****** A long day and there may well be errors, so I'll welcome any corrections or additions by anyone else who attended. Metta, Sarah p.s Will reply to any posts from Hong Kong next week after settling back.... ============= #89605 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:13 am Subject: Re: Just studying & Sariputta jonoabb Hi Alex > > What made Alara Kalama and Udakka Ramaputta so ready to receive > > dhamma could only be panna developed in previous lifetimes. > > Any sutta quotes? No sutta quotes handy as I type (poolside at our hotel in Bangkok). But see all the Thera- and Theri-Gatha stories, which recount how enlightenment was finally attained after developing insight lifetime after lifetime under many Buddhas. > I guess we need to stop Studying Buddhism because it all talks about > something uneeded or 'not for us' sort of thing... Not at all. We simply need to consider the *context and detail* of what was said, and not jump to conclusions from the mere mention of jhana. > > It's important to understand what the path factors are. They are > not a list of skills to be separately developed in order to reach the > > path. They are the *components of the actual path-moment*, i.e., > > mental factors accompanying the magga-citta. > > Then what about all the suttas where Ariyan aren't described merely > as path moments? Sorry, but I don't get your point here. I'm saying that the 8 path- factors (samma-ditthi to samma-samadhi) are components of the actual path-moment, rather than a list of skills to be separately developed. > > The path factors are not stipulations or *requirements* to be > > fulfilled, so there is no "requirement for jhana". > > So according to this, there isn't requirment to abstain from killing > either - abstention from killing, stealing, lying, rape, etc is > merely a path moment.... We better change the Vinaya then... Not so. Apart from the path factors that are the 3 (mental factor) abstentions, there are also the precepts and the vinaya dealing with abstentions. > Sorry to burst your bubble but things don't just arise out of blue sky. Agreed. Nothing I've said is in contradiction to this. (Bubble still intact ;-)) > The enlightenment of a Buddha (and of the great disciples) is based > on jhana, since the attainment is of the highest order It would be > wrong to draw any inference from this as to jhana being a > prerequisite for enlightenment generally. > > I think that the inference is that "those attainments are required > only for Buddha and those monks". I wouldn't say that jhana was *required* for enlightenment. However, only a being who has attained enlightenment based on jhana can be a Buddha or a chief disciple. Jon #89606 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:15 am Subject: Re: Just studying... How to properly study Abhidhamma> jonoabb Hi Alex > > > How many times do I need to remind that 4 fruits of Jhana are: > > stream-Arahatship > > > > Which sutta do you have in mind here? > > DN29 See my comments on this sutta in an earlier post. No mention that I can see of jhana leading to enlightenment. > > This passage talks about the jhana consciousness itself. There is > no mention here of post-jhana brightness and clarity. > > 1st), those who have experienced Jhanas say that there is post Jhana > brightness and clarity. But we are discussing whether or not something is stated in Buddha's teaching. If it's not in the texts, but is only apparent to those who claim to have experienced jhanas, should we place any importance on it? > Even if not then, > > 2nd) So this Brightness is during the jhana consciousness. During or > immedetely after one uses it for destruction of fetters. If it's not in the texts, it's just more (unsupported) speculation about jhana. Jon #89607 From: "connie" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:19 am Subject: Re: Vism.XVII,296 297 nichiconn Path of Purity, pp.699-700 "Five causes Now" are craving and the rest. In the Pali are mentioned craving, grasping, becoming. When becoming is mentioned, the activities which precede it or which are associated with it are also mentioned; together with craving and grasping, (ignorance) which is associated {read sampayuttaa} therewith is mentioned. Or, that ignorance by which the deluded man does acts is mentioned. Thus are the five. Hence was it said: "From the maturity of sense-organs here delusion is ignorance, effort is activities, desire is craving, clinging is grasping, volition is becoming. Thus these five states here in karma-becoming are causes of rebirth in the future." {Pa.tisambhidaa i, 52.} In that passage by the phrase "from the matureity of sense-organs here" is shown confusion of one with mature sense-organs at the time of doing karma. The rest is plain in meaning. [581] "And yet to come a fivefold fruit" - these are the five beginning with consciousness, which are mentioned along with birth. And of them is old-age-and-death. Hence was it said: "In future rebirth is consciousness, descent is name-and-form, sensory organism is sense-organ, the being touched is touch, the being felt is feeling." {Ibid.} Thus these five states in a future karma-becoming are causes of karma done here. Such are the spokes of twenty modes. #89608 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:21 am Subject: Re: [Relentless Training:] .. Reverse Logical Thinking.. jonoabb Hi Tep > T: I am suggesting that weak metta is not powerful like metta- > cetovimutti; the same way that a few drops of rain are not powerful > like a torrential rainfall. Plain and simple! Agreed: "weak metta is not powerful like metta-cetovimutti". > Strong kusala can be > developed now given that there are right kinds of nutriment to > support the development, regardless of an existing weak kusala. I don't know of any support in the texts for the proposition that "Strong kusala can be developed now ... regardless of existing weak kusala." I don't read the sutta quotes that follow as supporting that proposition. > AN 2.19 : "Develop what is skillful, monks. It's possible to develop > what is skillful. If it were not possible to develop what is > skillful, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But > because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to > you, 'Develop what is skillful.' > MN 9: "And what are the roots of skillful things? Lack of greed... > lack of aversion... lack of delusion... These are termed the roots of > skillful things." > ... > > >Jon: Sorry, but you've lost me here. Grateful if you could explain > what you mean by "the Buddha only allows his monks to maintain samma- > sankappa 100% of the time." > > T: First, recall that 'samma sankappa' means "no thought of > sensuality, no thought of ill-will, and no thought of harmfulness". > Secondly, the Buddha said in this Itivuttaka-sutta {Iti IV.11; Iti > 115} : "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.". Putting the two reasons together, it means the monks must > strive for perfection in the three right thoughts. Clear now? I do not see any "must" in what you have quoted above, only descriptions of the way things are: at moments of akusala, there can be no samma-sankappa. Jon #89609 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:22 am Subject: [dsg] Pali term for wrong view about kamma etc? ( was Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no scottduncan2 Dear Phil (and Mike), Regarding: P: "Thanks. I'd also like the Pali for number 5 above for the sake of making future discussions more to the point. I think it's kammasomethingditthi maybe..." 5. "And what is wrong view? `There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed; no fruit or result of good and bad actions; no this world or other world; no mother or father; no beings who are reborn spontaneously; no good and virtuous individuals in the world who have realised for themselves by direct knowledge and declare this world and the other world. This is wrong view." Katamaa ca bhikkhave, micchaadi.t.thi: natthi dinna.m, natthi yi.t.tha.m, natthi huta.m, natthi suka.tadukka.taana.m kammaana.m phala.m vipaako, natthi aya.m loko, natthi paro loko, natthi maataa, natthi pitaa, natthi sattaa opapaatikaa, natthi loke sama.nabraahma.naa sammaggataa sammaapa.tipannaa, ye ima.m ca loka.m para.m ca loka.m saya.m abhi~n~naa sacchikatvaa pavedentiiti. Aya.m bhikkhave, micchaadi.t.thi. Sincerely, Scott. #89610 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:25 am Subject: Re: Buddha taught UNDERSTANDING. Here is what it means. jonoabb Hi Alex > Jon, no disrespect meant but, > > How much Vipassana & Samatha Bhavana have you done? Can you speak > from your own experience (and what was it?) I don't know what this has to do with our discussion to date. We are discussing the meaning of the teachings given by the Buddha. > > Yes, this is understanding, but it's understanding of the kind > > necessary for the development of samatha/jhana. > > AND Noble 8Fold path. Intention of Renunciation is directly linked > to Right Intention and indirectly present in ALL other 7 factors. But the passage you quoted was talking about the stages of jhana only, to my reading: "The Buddha has said that until he didn't fully understand the drawbacks of sensuality and *understood* the reward of renunciation, he couldn't enter and remain in the first Jhana." The understanding required to "enter and remain in the first Jhana" is not the understanding of insight development. > If anything, Buddha taught MORE "samatha" than other ascetics since > he went further then 8th Jhana, he taught irodha Samapatti (cessation > of perception & feelings). Jhana is mentioned in many, many suttas. But to understand its role in the development of insight, it's necessary to consider exactly *what* is said about it (not just count up the number of suttas!!). > Jon, what experience did you have? It appears to me that you are > merely talking from theory, and as we know the theoretical aspects of > Buddhist path were argued even when Buddha was alive. Is this an attempt to change the subject? ;-)) We are discussing certain suttas that you have cited as supporting a meaning that, on a close examination, just isn't to be found in those suttas. Jon #89611 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:36 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... scottduncan2 Dear Howard, A little more regarding: Howard: "...do you not consider the three characteristics, dependent origination, and the four noble truths to fall under right view?..." Scott: I was reading MN 117 just now: "Therein, bhikkhus, right view comes first. And how does right view come first? One understands wrong view as wrong view and right view as right view: this is one's right view" Tatra bhikkhave, sammaadi.t.thi pubba"ngamaa hoti. Katha~nca bhikkhave, sammaadi.t.thi pubba"ngamaa hoti: micchaadi.t.thi.m micchaadi.t.thiiti pajaanaati. Sammaadi.t.thi.m sammaadi.t.thiiti pajaanaati. Saassa hoti sammaadi.t.thi. Scott: Note that 'understands' is 'paajaanati', which confirms that it is pa~n~naa which is right view. Note 1100 in the ~Na.naamoli/Bodhi translation paraphrases the commentary: "Pubbangamaa, lit. 'the forerunner.' MA says that two kinds of right view are forerunners: the right view of insight, which investigates formations as impermanent, suffering as non-self; and the right view of the path, which arises as a consequence of insight and effects the radical destruction of defilements..." Sincerely, Scott. #89612 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:41 am Subject: Pali term for wrong view about kamma etc? ( was Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no philofillet Hi Scott and all Thanks for the below. I'm being very clumsy in the way I'm asking. What I am looking for rather than the whole section 5 is the name of the kind of wrong view described in section 5. I saw it somewhere once and I've been trying to google it... Thanks, if everyone knows what I'm trying to get at. i.e, a specific kind of wrong view that is described below. I just want the Pali term so I can use it rather than saying "the kind of wrong view that is about believing there is not results to deeds etc etc" which is how I usually have to describe it long-windedly. metta, phil > 5. "And what is wrong view? `There is nothing given, nothing > offered, nothing sacrificed; no fruit or result of good and bad > actions; no this world or other world; no mother or father; no beings > who are reborn spontaneously; no good and virtuous individuals in the > world who have realised for themselves by direct knowledge and declare > this world and the other world. This is wrong view." > > Katamaa ca bhikkhave, micchaadi.t.thi: natthi dinna.m, natthi > yi.t.tha.m, natthi huta.m, natthi suka.tadukka.taana.m kammaana.m > phala.m vipaako, natthi aya.m loko, natthi paro loko, natthi maataa, > natthi pitaa, natthi sattaa opapaatikaa, natthi loke > sama.nabraahma.naa sammaggataa sammaapa.tipannaa, ye ima.m ca loka.m > para.m ca loka.m saya.m abhi~n~naa sacchikatvaa pavedentiiti. Aya.m > bhikkhave, micchaadi.t.thi. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > #89613 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 3:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 8/30/2008 9:36:36 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, A little more regarding: Howard: "...do you not consider the three characteristics, dependent origination, and the four noble truths to fall under right view?..." Scott: I was reading MN 117 just now: "Therein, bhikkhus, right view comes first. And how does right view come first? One understands wrong view as wrong view and right view as right view: this is one's right view" Tatra bhikkhave, sammaadi.t.thi pubba"ngamaa hoti. Katha~nca bhikkhave, sammaadi.t.thi pubba"ngamaa hoti: micchaadi.t.thi.m micchaadi.t.thiiti pajaanaati. Sammaadi.t.thi.m sammaadi.t.thiiti pajaanaati. Saassa hoti sammaadi.t.thi. Scott: Note that 'understands' is 'paajaanati', which confirms that it is pa~n~naa which is right view. Note 1100 in the ~Na.naamoli/Bodhi translation paraphrases the commentary: "Pubbangamaa, lit. 'the forerunner.' MA says that two kinds of right view are forerunners: the right view of insight, which investigates formations as impermanent, suffering as non-self; and the right view of the path, which arises as a consequence of insight and effects the radical destruction of defilements..." Sincerely, Scott. ============================== Developmentally, the right view that comes first is some degree of intellectual understanding. But right view as insight certainly cannot cannot come first. That comes late in the game. after much cultivation and acquiring of auspicious "accumulations". With metta, Howard #89614 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 7:10 am Subject: Re: Warnings .... Is Nibbana not a dhamma? ... dhammanusarin Hello Howard (Han, Alex),- I am glad to read your input that is about the most subtle subject to understand intellectually. It is true that "we will never see this matter clearly until awakening". >Howard: Nibbanic extinction is an event, an occurrence - the obliteration of something, namely the obliteration of the three poisons. The realization of nibbana, i.e., awakening (or bodhi), certainly involves extinction, but I cannot construe nibbana itself, whatever it's exact nature, to be an event in time. T: Any occurrence in life (as I have seen) is conditioned, but Nibbana is unconditioned. What is the Anguttara Nikaya definition of extinction? It is the end of obstructions. What are the obstructions ? The five strands of sensual pleasures, among other things, are the obstructions. >Howard: As regards the Udana quote, I conceive of nibbana as the sole reality: a seamless, luminous realm that is misperceived, due to avijja, as our samsaric world ("the appearance realm of separate things"). T: If it is a reality, then it can be experienced as a mind object. The adjectives 'seamless' and 'luminous' describe a few characteristics of Nibbana. Han Tun once showed us the 33 descriptions of Nibbaana : > Hi Tep and others, > > The Buddha mentioned 33 epithets for Nibbaana in Samyutta Nikaya, > SN 43, 12 to 44. (English translations by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi) > > (1) asankhata, the unconditioned > (2) anata.m, the uninclined due to absence of inclination through craving > (3) anaasava, the taintless > (4) sacca, the truth > (5) paara, the far shore > (6) nipu.na, the subtle > (7) sududdasa, the very difficult to see > (8) ajajjara, the unaging > (9) dhuva, the stable > (10) apalokita, the undisintegrating > (11) anidassana, the unmanifest > (12) nippapa~nca, the unproliferated through the absence of proliferation by craving, conceit, and wrong view > (13) santa, the peaceful > (14) amata, the deathless > (15) pa.niita, the sublime > (16) siva, the auspicious > (17) khema, the secure > (18) ta.nhakkhaya, the destruction of craving > (19) acchariya, the wonderful > (20) abbhuta, the amazing > (21) aniitika, the unailing > (22) aniitika dhamma, the unailing state > (23) Nibbana > (24) avyaapajjha, the unafflicted > (25) viraaga, the dispassion > (26) suddhi, the purity > (27) mutti, the freedom > (28) anaalaya, the unadhesive > (29) diipa, the island > (30) le.na, the shelter > (31) taa.na, the asylum > (32) sara.na, the refuge > (33) paraaya.na, the destination > > Yours truly, > Han > ....................................... Even with these 33 descriptive words put together, the picture of Nibbana is not clearer to me. Why do some people value intellectual understanding too much? Tep === #89615 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 3:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... Is Nibbana not a dhamma? ... upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 8/30/2008 10:10:43 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: Even with these 33 descriptive words put together, the picture of Nibbana is not clearer to me. Why do some people value intellectual understanding too much? =========================== The good reason would be that it is about all we have to go on at this point. The bad, and far more common, reason is clinging to ideas and the felt need to pigeonhole. Holding a perspective isn't necessarily bad, of course, so long as it is viewed as just a tenative "pointer" that is probably way off-base, and so long as it is held onto quite lightly. Until we KNOW what is what, it is all just perspective and opinion. With metta, Howard #89616 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 7:32 am Subject: Re: What is a path in Buddhism? dhammanusarin Hi Jon, - Just a thought. > > "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity > > preceded by insight. As he develops tranquillity preceded by > insight, > > the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. > > As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters > > are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. > > ... > > The 1st through 3rd path require both samatha and vipassana. > > Is the fourth one similar to the DSG Abhidhamma Path? ;-)) > > Jon: > I take the second path (the case where a monk has developed > tranquillity preceded by insight) to be that of the person who > attains enlightenment without having attained any particular level of > samatha. 'Tranquillity preceded by insight' indicates BOTH insight and tranquillity(samatha) are developed. Tep === #89617 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 7:44 am Subject: Re: [Relentless Training:] .. Reverse Logical Thinking.. dhammanusarin Hi, Jon - A few more comments. > Jon: > I don't know of any support in the texts for the proposition that > "Strong kusala can be developed now ... regardless of existing weak > kusala." I don't read the sutta quotes that follow as supporting > that proposition. > > > AN 2.19 : "Develop what is skillful, monks. It's possible to > develop > > what is skillful. If it were not possible to develop what is > > skillful, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But > > because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to > > you, 'Develop what is skillful.' > > MN 9: "And what are the roots of skillful things? Lack of greed... > > lack of aversion... lack of delusion... These are termed the roots of skillful things." > > ... T: You're right. If you look for a perfect matching word by word in the suttas, then you will never find it in a million years. ........................ > Jon: > I do not see any "must" in what you have quoted above, only > descriptions of the way things are: at moments of akusala, there > can be no samma-sankappa. > T: You're right again, Jon. No perfect wordings (to make your heart contented) will ever be found. But maybe you were looking so hard at the "trees" that you did not see the "forest" ? Tep === #89618 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 7:48 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "Developmentally, the right view that comes first is some degree of intellectual understanding. But right view as insight certainly cannot cannot come first. That comes late in the game after much cultivation and acquiring of auspicious 'accumulations'." Scott: No, I don't think it is correct to suggest that there is a class of 'right view' that is not a function of pa~n~naa. Intellectual understanding of the Dhamma - that is intellectual understanding which participates in or is grounded in right view - is right view because it is paajaanati (which is 'understanding' based on pa~n~naa) and not just thinking about concepts it is 'insight' but of a lesser degree (given that it is 'right view'). If the principle of 'development' is to be invoked, then it is more precise to recall that it is the development of something, in this case pa~n~naa. And that it is development from one point to another point. And that earlier points in development are the base upon which later points rest. This is known as epigenesis in the world. These so-called 'auspicious accumulations' are no more than the later stages of an incremental development of pa~n~naa which starts 'small' and gets 'big', as it were. Sincerely, Scott. #89619 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 7:54 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... Is Nibbana not a dhamma? ... dhammanusarin Hi, Howard, - I appreciate the fast turnaround. >Howard: Holding a perspective isn't necessarily bad, of course, so long as it is viewed as just a tenative "pointer" that is probably way off-base, and so long as it is held onto quite lightly. Until we KNOW what is what, it is all just perspective and opinion. T: Yes, that point is very important: so long as there is no harmful attachment, holding on to a view "isn't necessarily bad". Keeping that point in mind can cut down at least 50% of the unnecessary quarrel. Tep === #89620 From: han tun Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 7:55 am Subject: Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 4a hantun1 Dear Sarah, Since you have mentioned my name in the report, I will have to say something. 1. More on Han's points. Is there then no use in studying the Satipatthana or Anapanasati Sutta if we don't understand realities now? If there's no understanding of sati and various realities now, what's the use of these suttas? Different realities are appearing now, they cannot be the same ones. We need to understand more about dhammas now. A yogi - anyone who knows how to develop understanding, who's on the path I also read out Nina's commentary note about 'yogic power is the power of meditation' etc,#89539. KS stressed in this context the 'patience' aspect of viriya, the long path. Patience as the highest austerity. Without patience, no panna ------------------------------ Han: Let me bring in the excerpt from Satipa.t.thaana sutta once again. (translation by Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi) Quote: 4. “And how, bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu abide contemplating the body as a body? Here a bhikkhu, going to the forest or to the root of a tree or to an empty hut, sits down; having folded his legs crosswise, set his body erect, and established mindfulness in front of him, ever mindful he breathes in, mindful he breathes out. Breathing in long, he understands: ‘I breathe in long’; or breathing out long, he understands: ‘I breathe out long.’ Breathing in short, he understands: ‘I breathe in short’; or breathing out short, he understands: “I breathe out short.’ He trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in experiencing the whole body [of breath]’; he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out experiencing the whole body [of breath].’ He trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in tranquillizing the bodily formation’; he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out tranquillizing the bodily formation.’ Just as a skilled turner or his apprentice, when making a long turn, understands: ‘I make a long turn’; or, when making a short turn understands: ‘I make a short turn’; so too, breathing in long, a bhikkhu understands: ‘I breathe in long’ … he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out tranquillizing the bodily formation.’ End Quote. ------------------------------ Han: In the above instruction by the Buddha, nothing was mentioned by the Buddha about [If there's no understanding of sati and various realities now, what's the use of these suttas? Different realities are appearing now, they cannot be the same ones. We need to understand more about dhammas now.] Whoever mentioned that the suttas are useless without having the above requirements is like saying that the Buddha’s instructions are inadequate or not clear enough so that he/she must complement the Buddha’s instructions to arrive at the right teaching. I do not think it is necessary for me to elaborate on the attributes of the Dhamma. The Buddha’s Teachings are always clear and complete. In SN 11. 3 Dhajagga Sutta, the Buddha said: no ce ma.m anussareyyaatha, atha dhamma.m anussareyyaatha: "svaakkhaato bhagavataa dhammo sandi.t.thiko akaaliko ehipassiko opanayiko paccatta.m veditabbo vi~n~nuuhii"ti. If you cannot recollect me, then you should recollect the Dhamma thus: ‘The Dhamma is well expounded by the Blessed One, directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, applicable, to be personally experienced by the wise.’ (translation by Bhikkhu Bodhi). Therefore, I bow down to someone who is more learned than the Buddha, and who sees the need to lay down some requirements to be able to understand and practice the Buddha’s Teachings! Thank you very much. Han #89621 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 4:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... Is Nibbana not a dhamma? ... upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 8/30/2008 10:55:08 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: Hi, Howard, - I appreciate the fast turnaround. >Howard: Holding a perspective isn't necessarily bad, of course, so long as it is viewed as just a tenative "pointer" that is probably way off-base, and so long as it is held onto quite lightly. Until we KNOW what is what, it is all just perspective and opinion. T: Yes, that point is very important: so long as there is no harmful attachment, holding on to a view "isn't necessarily bad". Keeping that point in mind can cut down at least 50% of the unnecessary quarrel. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: And 80% of DSG discussions! LOLOL! -------------------------------------------------- Tep ========================= With metta, Howard P. S. Please note the signature quotation below. /Seekers, when ignorance is abandoned and true knowledge has arisen in an aspirant, then with the fading away of ignorance and the arising of true knowledge she or he no longer clings to sensual pleasures, NO LONGER CLINGS TO VIEWS, no longer clings to rules and observances, no longer clings to a doctrine of self. When that one does not cling, he or she is not agitated. When not agitated, that one attains Nibbana and understands: 'Birth is destroyed, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more coming to any state of being'/ (From the Cula-Sihanada Sutta) #89622 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:27 am Subject: Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... dhammanusarin Hi Scott (and Howard), - You may never imagine how delightful (more than gladdened) I am to read your dialog on right view and "understanding" with our good friend Howard. Why am I delighted? Because this conversation touches on the points I made in the long discussion we had in # 83903, 83924, 83948, 83955 and in other conversations with Nina, Jon, Sarah. =================================== Dear Howard, A little more regarding: Howard: "...do you not consider the three characteristics, dependent origination, and the four noble truths to fall under right view?..." Scott: I was reading MN 117 just now: "Therein, bhikkhus, right view comes first. And how does right view come first? One understands wrong view as wrong view and right view as right view: this is one's right view" Tatra bhikkhave, sammaadi.t.thi pubba"ngamaa hoti. Katha~nca bhikkhave, sammaadi.t.thi pubba"ngamaa hoti: micchaadi.t.thi.m micchaadi.t.thiiti pajaanaati. Sammaadi.t.thi.m sammaadi.t.thiiti pajaanaati. Saassa hoti sammaadi.t.thi. Scott: Note that 'understands' is 'paajaanati', which confirms that it is pa~n~naa which is right view. Note 1100 in the ~Na.naamoli/Bodhi translation paraphrases the commentary: "Pubbangamaa, lit. 'the forerunner.' MA says that two kinds of right view are forerunners: the right view of insight, which investigates formations as impermanent, suffering as non-self; and the right view of the path, which arises as a consequence of insight and effects the radical destruction of defilements..." Sincerely, Scott. ============================== Developmentally, the right view that comes first is some degree of intellectual understanding. But right view as insight certainly cannot cannot come first. That comes late in the game. after much cultivation and acquiring of auspicious "accumulations". With metta, Howard ............................................................... Howard is right about the right view as insight knowledge of the Noble Truths; it is way beyond intellectual understanding. See MN 2 and MN 141. These two suttas are critically important if you want to have right understanding of right view ! Tep === #89623 From: "nidive" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:37 am Subject: Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) nidive Hi Andrew L., > P.S.: Does anyone know how we can assure that in future lives we > find the spiritual path and not get lost? Yes, I know. Become a sotapanna in this life. This is taught by the Buddha himself. ------------------------------------------------------------------ http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.179.than.html 'Hell is ended; animal wombs are ended; the state of the hungry shades is ended; states of deprivation, destitution, the bad bourns are ended! I am a stream-winner, steadfast, never again destined for states of woe, headed for self-awakening!' ------------------------------------------------------------------ A sotapanna is headed for the very same self-awakening as the self- awakening of a Buddha. Golden Rule: Save yourself first before you attempt to save others. Swee Boon #89624 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:51 am Subject: Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... scottduncan2 Dear Tep, You are so funny! T: "You may never imagine how delightful (more than gladdened) I am to read your dialog on right view and "understanding" with our good friend Howard...Howard is right about the right view as insight knowledge of the Noble Truths; it is way beyond intellectual understanding. See MN 2 and MN 141. These two suttas are critically important if you want to have right understanding of right view !" Scott: My point exactly! I'd have to read them and understand them wouldn't I? ;-) Seriously, we won't agree on this Tep. Big things grow from small things. They don't just start big. Sincerely, Scott. #89625 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 9:18 am Subject: Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... dhammanusarin Dear Scott (Howard, Alex), - Thank you for replying sarcastically. > Scott: > You are so funny! > > T: "You may never imagine how delightful (more than gladdened) I am to > read your dialog on right view and "understanding" with our good > friend Howard...Howard is right about the right view as insight > knowledge of the Noble Truths; it is way beyond intellectual > understanding. See MN 2 and MN 141. These two suttas are critically > important if you want to have right understanding of right view !" > > Scott: My point exactly! I'd have to read them and understand them > wouldn't I? ;-) Seriously, we won't agree on this Tep. Big things > grow from small things. They don't just start big. > You have an attitude of many C-grade students, Scott, and that's is sad (not funny!). All C- and D- students do not start to prepare "big" for an exam until a day or two before the exam date. Sincerely, Tep === #89626 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 9:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Reviewer's Comments : 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Part II dhammanusarin Dear Nina, - > N: I join Sukin in his appreciation. I also see it this way: giving > an opportunity to > > sort out my thoughts and test my own understanding. > I find this with several of the posts, also from others, like Han. > Nina. It was very kind of you to think of my (cheap) review comments so positively like that. Sincerely, Tep === #89627 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Scott) - In a message dated 8/30/2008 12:18:57 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: Dear Scott (Howard, Alex), - Thank you for replying sarcastically. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm, not really, at least not as it seemed to me. Perhaps a bit tongue in cheek. BTW, is your "thank you" not a tad sarcastic, Tep? ;-) ----------------------------------------- > Scott: > You are so funny! > > T: "You may never imagine how delightful (more than gladdened) I am to > read your dialog on right view and "understanding" with our good > friend Howard...Howard is right about the right view as insight > knowledge of the Noble Truths; it is way beyond intellectual > understanding. See MN 2 and MN 141. These two suttas are critically > important if you want to have right understanding of right view !" > > Scott: My point exactly! I'd have to read them and understand them > wouldn't I? ;-) Seriously, we won't agree on this Tep. Big things > grow from small things. They don't just start big. > You have an attitude of many C-grade students, Scott, and that's is sad (not funny!). ------------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm, I'd say we're all at best C- students of the Dhamma, because the central curriculum consists of practica, as far as that essential core curriculum goes, we're barely squeaking through Dhamma 101! -------------------------------------------- All C- and D- students do not start to prepare "big" for an exam until a day or two before the exam date. Sincerely, Tep ============================ With metta, Howard #89628 From: "purist_andrew" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 10:05 am Subject: Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) purist_andrew --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > > Dear Andrew, > > The whole fact that (Gotama in previous lives) was a worldling who > disliked Buddha (Kassapa) until he has met him and was converted, > tells me wide & clear when Gotama started the Buddhist path. Please tell me, when? Regards, Andrew L. #89629 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 10:21 am Subject: Pali term for wrong view about kamma etc? ( was Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no scottduncan2 Dear Phil, Regarding: P: "What I am looking for rather than the whole section 5 is the name of the kind of wrong view described in section 5. I saw it somewhere once and I've been trying to google it..." Scott: Oh, I know what this is, I think. Nyanatiloka: "Akiriya-ditthi: The false view or opinion of the inefficacy of action: That neither moral good nor moral evil action have any delayed consequences for anyone. This wrong view was taught by Puurana-Kassapa" Scott: Is this it? Sincerely, Scott. #89630 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 10:35 am Subject: Pali term for wrong view about kamma etc? ( was Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no scottduncan2 Dear Phil, From the Saama~n~naphala Sutta, DN 2: 16. "Once, Lord, I went to see Puura.na Kassapa. Having exchanged courtesies, I sat down to one side and said: 'Good Kassapa, just as there are these various craftsmen,...they enjoy here and now the visible fruits of their skills...Can you, Kassapa, point to such a reward visible here and now as a fruit of the homeless life? 17. "At this, Lord, Puura.na Kassapa said: 'Your majesty, by the doer or instigator of a thing, by one who cuts or causes to be cut, by one who burns or causes to be burnt, by one who causes grief or weariness, by one who agitates or causes agitation, who causes life to be taken or that which is not given to be taken, commits burglary, carries off booty, commits robbery, lies in ambush, commits adultery, tells lies, no evil is done. If with a razor-sharp wheel one were to make this earth one single mass and heap of flesh, there would be no evil as a result of that, no evil would accrue. Or if one were to go along the north bank of the Ganges killing, slaying, cutting, or causing to be cut, burning or causing to be burnt, there would be no evil as a result of that, no evil would accrue. Or if one were to go along the north bank of the Ganges giving and causing to be given, sacrificing and causing to be sacrificed, there would be no merit as a result of that, no merit would accrue. In giving, self-control, abstinence and telling the truth, there is no merit, and no merit accrues." Sincerely, Scott. #89631 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 10:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 8, no 3 nilovg Hi Howard, Op 30-aug-2008, om 14:44 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > At the sessions, people were still wondering what could be done in > order not to sit in idleness and wait for the arising of paññå. > There is no self who is “not doing anything”. > > ================================ > Nina, why do you bring up the matter of "self" every time someone > speaks > of practice? You don't bring it up when writing of study and > contemplation > of Abhidhamma and "the ancient commentaries". This 'not doing > anything"> is a red herring. It is beside the point. Should people > tell you > that there is no self who makes trips to the bodhi tree or who > writes books > on the Dhamma? The matter of "no self" is a crucial one, but it is > wrong to > use it a hammer to beat down intentional activities urged by the > Buddha. ------ N: Let us look at the context again: < There is no self who is “not doing anything”. Each citta which arises performs a function. Even when one thinks that one is not doing anything sati can arise and be mindful of thinking as not self. When there is right understanding of the object of mindfulness, there cannot be laziness. When there are conditions for sati, it arises before there is any intention to be aware.> There is no self who is “not doing anything": it is mere thinking and it is citta which doubts and wonders: should we do nothing, or should we do something? Thus, even thinking is such ways is citta, not self, but we do not realize this. We hear about anatta, read about it, but forget to come to know little by little all realities that appear as mere elements, not self. I am glad if someone reminds me that when writing it is citta that motivates writing now, thank you, Howard :-)) Otherwise I forget that it is citta, not self. Making trips to India or planning: it is citta, not self, thank you :-)) It is not a question of hammering it in, but we should realize how deeply rooted this clinging to "I" is, coming up all the time, no, matter what we are doing. I am glad (as always) you brought it up. As you say, it is so crucial. I am planning to post a few things I heard on recording about this subject. Nina. #89632 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 11:05 am Subject: Re: Is Nibbana a dhamma? ... truth_aerator Dear Tep and all, Regarding Ud8.1 & AN3.32. Is it about Arahat's "state" while alive, or after PariNibbana? Big difference. Best wishes, Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > > > Dear Alex, - > > I have a feeling that discussion of Nibbana is more difficult than > anatta and any other Teachings. So if you are in no hurrry and see no > reason to wrap it up fast, perhaps we can discuss this difficult > topic a few more times. I am no expert, by the way. > > Today let's define Nibbana using a few suttas that I can find for now. > > One definition of Nibbana is "extinction". Yet, there are several > kinds of extinction. Extinction here and now; final extinction; > extinction by that factor; extinction in this very life. > > See Anguttara Nikaya 005. Samannavaggo. The general section. > > http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- > Nikaya/Anguttara6/09-navakanipata/005-samannavaggo-e.html > > T: Nibbana is also referred to as a property(dhatu) and "dimension". > > "There is that dimension where there is neither earth, nor water, nor > fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor > dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of > nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non- perception; > neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And there, > I say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor staying; neither > passing away nor arising: unestablished, unevolving, without support > (mental object). This, just this, is the end of stress." [Ud 8.1] > > "This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all > fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of > craving; dispassion; cessation; Nibbana." [AN 3.32] > > ============================================= > > I think it is a good idea to go slowly, > when we do not see the way clearly. > > > Tep > === > #89633 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 11:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 4a nilovg Dear Han, Op 30-aug-2008, om 16:55 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Is there then no use in studying the Satipatthana or Anapanasati > Sutta if we don't understand realities now? > If there's no understanding of sati and various realities now, > what's the use of these suttas? Different realities are appearing > now, they cannot be the same ones. We need to understand more about > dhammas now. -------- N: I am thinking of the following solution to the dilemma: read more, not only these two suttas, but read the many suttas on Elements, on the doorways, on lobha coming in after seeing, hearing, etc. on wise attention, on unwise attention. Study the basics of Abhidhamma, but I know that you did. Then we see the satipatthaanasutta in a new light, we may better understand that the texts point indeed to the realities appearing through the six doors. Well, the Buddha spoke many, many times about the six doors. He spoke about not being misled by the outer appearance or the details of things. But we do, don't we? We are absorbed immediately by the outward appearance, the nimitta, instead of realizing that there must also be seeing, hearing, in order that there can be thinking stories about what is seen or heard. But we are so carried away by our thinking about what is seen or heard. So, the reading, the study can go together with considering realities of your own life, considering your experiences. No rule about first this, then that. That makes it all very interesting and lively, I would think. Please, do not misunderstand. No denial of the crucial importance of all the scriptures, but let us not forget the purpose of it all. Everyone has to develop understanding of 'his own' life. ****** Nina. #89634 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 11:16 am Subject: Re: Just studying & Sariputta truth_aerator Hi Jon and all, > "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > > > > What made Alara Kalama and Udakka Ramaputta so ready to receive > > > dhamma could only be panna developed in previous lifetimes. > > > > Any sutta quotes? > > No sutta quotes handy as I type (poolside at our hotel in >Bangkok). Please give me the sutta quote when you get the chance. > But see all the Thera- and Theri-Gatha stories, which recount how > enlightenment was finally attained after developing insight >lifetime after lifetime under many Buddhas. Are you sure you are talking about Thera/i gatha? I've read a number of them, nothing about previous Buddhas. I think you are refering to Apadana stories. Again when you have the time, please provide quotes. > The enlightenment of a Buddha (and of the great disciples) is >based on jhana, since the attainment is of the highest order It >would be wrong to draw any inference from this as to jhana being a > prerequisite for enlightenment generally. Please provide sutta quotes when you get the time. I don't like how you keep ignoring uncomfortable sutta instructions by saying that "it is for them, not us". --- notice that it is aimed for everyone --- The Buddha: 'The stream, the stream,' it is said. Now what is the stream? Sariputta: Just this noble eightfold path is the stream: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. The Buddha: Well said, Sariputta, well said. Just this noble eightfold path is the stream...'Streamwinner, streamwinner,' it is said. Now what is a streamwinner? Sariputta: Whoever is endowed with this noble eightfold path is called a 'streamwinner.' The Buddha: Well said, Sariputta, well said. Whoever is endowed with this noble eightfold path is called a 'streamwinner.' — SN 55.5 And of course you know the definition of samma-samadhi. I've quoted enough of that. ===================== [I though about including dozens of quotes and decided not to] Best wishes, Alex #89635 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 7:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 8, no 3 upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 8/30/2008 1:57:58 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: I am glad if someone reminds me that when writing it is citta that motivates writing now, thank you, Howard :-)) Otherwise I forget that it is citta, not self. Making trips to India or planning: it is citta, not self, thank you :-)) It is not a question of hammering it in, but we should realize how deeply rooted this clinging to "I" is, coming up all the time, no, matter what we are doing. I am glad (as always) you brought it up. As you say, it is so crucial. I am planning to post a few things I heard on recording about this subject. ============================ Good! I'm happy with your answer. I took exception to using the fact of not-self as a cudgel to beat down selective, disapproved-of practices. Your reply here, however, certainly pleases me! :-) With metta, Howard #89636 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 11:21 am Subject: Re: A Reviewer's Comments : 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Part II dhammanusarin Dear Sukin (and Nina), - Your rebuttal very well sums up most key ideas of the DSG Abhidhamma that I saw in several thousand posts over the years. These "key ideas" are the cornerstones of the DSG Abhidhammaikas' belief that is so incredibly unshakable. The true benefit I gained from the Review is a realization that peace is knowing when to stop and let go. The time for peace is now: now that I no longer see any advantage, even a little fun that I used to have ;-), in continuing to point out how such and such ideas of this or that person contradict with the Dhamma in the so-and-so suttas, according to what I understand. Best wishes to you, Tep === #89637 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 11:28 am Subject: Re: Is Nibbana a dhamma? ... dhammanusarin Hi Alex, - You asked an easy question : > Alex: > Regarding Ud8.1 & AN3.32. Is it about Arahat's "state" while alive, > or after PariNibbana? Big difference. > T: It is about the same thing -- cessation of dukkha. "This, just this, is the end of stress." [Ud 8.1] " ...the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Nibbana." [AN 3.32] Tep === #89638 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 12:23 pm Subject: Re: Is Nibbana a dhamma? ... truth_aerator Dear Tep and all, Cessation & having ceased are different in a sense of former being an unfinished process and the later being finished. An Arahant while alive does have physical dukkha, while after parinibbana there isn't any physical dukkha. Nibbana experienced by an Arahant during life is not exactly the same as after parinibbana. While we can say that Arahats consciousness isn't established anywhere, the same cannot be properly said about parinibbana. The Udana passage *may* be about Nibbana experienced when the Arahant is alive as I hope you see how it is incorrectly to state that "Arahant experiences parinibbana [after death]". Best wishes, Alex >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" >wrote: > > Hi Alex, - > > You asked an easy question : > > > Alex: > > Regarding Ud8.1 & AN3.32. Is it about Arahat's "state" while alive, > > or after PariNibbana? Big difference. > > > > T: It is about the same thing -- cessation of dukkha. > > "This, just this, is the end of stress." [Ud 8.1] > " ...the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Nibbana." [AN 3.32] > > > Tep > === > #89639 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 1:00 pm Subject: Re: Buddha taught UNDERSTANDING. Here is what it means. truth_aerator Hi Jon, >--- "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > > > Jon, no disrespect meant but, > > > > How much Vipassana & Samatha Bhavana have you done? Can you speak > > from your own experience (and what was it?) > >Jon: I don't know what this has to do with our discussion to date. >We are discussing the meaning of the teachings given by the Buddha. Everything. You build strawmens and attack them. The noble8fold path can be nicely done through Anapanasati (for example) And the teachings are 'come and see', not 'come and argue for 2,500 years obtuse points of philosophy. After all, Buddha has taught stress and its cessation. In deeper meditation levels there is less stress present AND as a culmination of N8P it can serve as a springboard for total liberation and N10fpath. > >Alex: Jon, what experience did you have? It appears to me that you >are merely talking from theory, and as we know the theoretical >aspects of Buddhist path were argued even when Buddha was alive. > >Jon: Is this an attempt to change the subject? ;-)) We are >discussing certain suttas that you have cited as supporting a >meaning that, on a close examination, just isn't to be found in >those suttas. > > Jon I think the attempt is yours, Jon. > > > Yes, this is understanding, but it's understanding of the kind > > > necessary for the development of samatha/jhana. > > > > AND Noble 8Fold path. Intention of Renunciation is directly linked > > to Right Intention and indirectly present in ALL other 7 factors. > > But the passage you quoted was talking about the stages of jhana > only, to my reading: > "The Buddha has said that until he didn't fully understand the > drawbacks of sensuality and *understood* the reward of > renunciation, he couldn't enter and remain in the first Jhana." > > The understanding required to "enter and remain in the first Jhana" > is not the understanding of insight development. > > If anything, Buddha taught MORE "samatha" than other ascetics since > he went further then 8th Jhana, he taught irodha Samapatti > (cessation > > of perception & feelings). > > Jhana is mentioned in many, many suttas. But to understand its >role > in the development of insight, it's necessary to consider exactly > *what* is said about it (not just count up the number of suttas!!). As I've showed, the 'understanding' deals with 'letting go' and letting go can be expressed not just in path attainments, but jhana attainments as well. I could go on, but I should remember and consider the turtle parable and stop the exchange. Best wishes, Alex #89640 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 1:17 pm Subject: Re: Buddhist teachings truth_aerator Hi Jon, > Jon > > DN 29: Pasadika Sutta > > The Venerable Ananda accompanied by bhikkhu Cunda went to see the > Buddha to give him the news about the death of Nigantha Nataputta, > the leader of a well-known sect, and the schism that had arisen > amongst his disciples. > >> The Buddha told them that it was natural and to be expected to >happen in a Teaching which was not well taught, not well imparted, >not conducive to emancipation, and not taught by one who was >supremely enlightened. > And it is funny how the exactly same thing has happened to Buddhist order itself. During Buddha's life itself there was/were schisms by Devadatta, and afterwards, 20 Buddhist sects have appeared. Different Abhidhammas and Sutras were written (and conviently attributed to the Buddha through some obscure mythology) expounding the right set of views and refuting the wrong sets of views. Best wishes, Alex #89641 From: "Tep" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 2:26 pm Subject: Re: Is Nibbana a dhamma? ... dhammanusarin Dear Alex (and Howard, ...), - From where I 'come to be', I understand that both Ud8.1 & AN3.32 are about Nibbana in the sense of the cessation of dukkha that is the same as extinction of craving which doesn't change after the arahant's realization of the cessation (nirodha). >Alex: Cessation & having ceased are different in a sense of former being an unfinished process and the later being finished. An Arahant while alive does have physical dukkha, while after parinibbana there isn't any physical dukkha. Nibbana experienced by an Arahant during life is not exactly the same as after parinibbana. T: The fact that Nibbana is different from Parinibbana is a different issue, I think. All kinds of Nibbana are about the same thing : cessation of dukkha. According to Mahasatipatthana Sutta, the truth of cessation of craving is found in the answer to the question: Where may this craving be abandoned, where may it be extinguished? The answer is: "Wherever in the world there are delightful and pleasurable things, there this craving may be discarded, there it may be extinguished." ....................................... >Alex: The Udana passage *may* be about Nibbana experienced when the Arahant is alive as I hope you see how it is incorrectly to state that "Arahant experiences parinibbana [after death]". T: Both sutta quotes *seem* to be concerned with Nibbana in the core meaning regardless of "experience" or point in time when the experience may occur. Discarding, extinguishing, abandoning, giving up (patinissaggo), release (mutti), doing away with(analayo) all mean the same as cessation(nirodha) or annihilation of craving. Let's look further to two different kinds of Nibbana in the Anguttara Nikaya. Extinction(nibbana) and Final Extinction(Parinibbana). What do you think extinction means and how it is different from final extinction with respect to cessation(nirodha) of cravings, hence cessation of dukkha? 7. Nibbanasuttam Extinction 005.07. Friend, it is said, extinction, for what is it said, extinction by The Blessed One? Here, friend, the bhikkhu secluding the mind from sensual desires ... re ... abides in the first higher state of the mind. Friend, mastering this, is extinction said The Blessed One. Again, friend, the bhikkhu overcoming thoughts and discursive thoughts ... re ... abides in the second higher state of the mind ... third higher state of the mind, ... fourth higher state of the mind Friend, mastering this, is extinction said The Blessed One. Again, friend, the bhikkhu overcoming all perceptions of matter and all perceptions of anger, not attending to various perceptions, with space is boundless abides in the sphere of space. Friend, mastering this, is extinction said The Blessed One ... re ... Again, friend, the bhikkhu overcoming all the sphere of neither perceptions nor non-perceptions abides in the cessation of perceptions and feelings. Friend, mastering this, is extinction said The Blessed One. 8. Parinibbanasuttam Final extinction 005.08. ûFriend, it is said, `final extinction,' for what is it said, final extinction by The Blessed One? Here, friend, the bhikkhu secluding the mind from sensual desires ... re ... abides in the first higher state of the mind. Friend, mastering this is final extinction said The Blessed One. Again, friend, the bhikkhu overcoming thoughts and discursive thoughts ... re ... abides in the second higher state of the mind ... third higher state of the mind, ... fourth higher state of the mind Friend, mastering this is final extinction said The Blessed One. Again, friend, the bhikkhu overcoming all perceptions of matter and all perceptions of anger, not attending to various perceptions, with space is boundless abides in the sphere of space. Friend, mastering this is final extinction said The Blessed One ... re ... Again, friend, the bhikkhu overcoming all the sphere of neither perceptions nor non-perceptions abides in the cessation of perceptions and feelings. Friend, mastering, this is final extinction said The Blessed One. ..................................... Sincerely, Tep === #89642 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 4:47 pm Subject: Pali term for wrong view about kamma etc? ( was Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no philofillet Hi Scott > Scott: Oh, I know what this is, I think. Nyanatiloka: > > "Akiriya-ditthi: The false view or opinion of the inefficacy of > action: That neither moral good nor moral evil action have any delayed > consequences for anyone. This wrong view was taught by Puurana- Kassapa" Thanks, and for the post that followed. I think this is it. I also think there was a form of wrong view with the root "kamma" in it somewhere. Anyone? This is very helpful for me, because as I was saying the other day it is this sort of wrong view that I struggle with these days, the kind of wrong view that says the Dhamma is just another religion cooked up by fearful minds, more sophisticated than Xtnty, for example, but a crock just the same... metta, phil #89643 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:05 pm Subject: Pali term for wrong view about kamma etc? ( was Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no scottduncan2 Dear Phil, Regarding: P: "...I also think there was a form of wrong view with the root "kamma" in it somewhere..." Scott: What about (not really 'wrong view' but they get in the way of things): "Aanantarika-kamma: the 5 heinous 'actions with immediate destiny' are: Killing father, killing mother, killing an Arahat, wounding a Buddha so he bleeds, creating schism in the Bhikkhu-Sangha," (Nyanatiloka)? Sincerely, Scott. #89644 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:19 pm Subject: Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 4a kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > > Since you have mentioned my name in the report, I will have to say something. > > 1. More on Han's points. Is there then no use in studying the Satipatthana or Anapanasati Sutta if we don't understand realities now? > If there's no understanding of sati and various realities now, what's the use of these suttas? Different realities are appearing now, they cannot be the same ones. We need to understand more about dhammas now. > A yogi - anyone who knows how to develop understanding, who's on the path > I also read out Nina's commentary note about 'yogic power is the power of meditation' etc,#89539. > KS stressed in this context the 'patience' aspect of viriya, the long path. Patience as the highest austerity. Without patience, no panna > > ------------------------------ > > Han: Let me bring in the excerpt from Satipa.t.thaana sutta once again. (translation by Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi) > Quote: > 4. “And how, bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu abide contemplating the body as a body? Here a bhikkhu, ------------------------------ > > Han: In the above instruction by the Buddha, nothing was mentioned by the Buddha about [If there's no understanding of sati and various realities now, what's the use of these suttas? Different realities are appearing now, they cannot be the same ones. We need to understand more about dhammas now.] > > Whoever mentioned that the suttas are useless without having the above requirements is like saying that the Buddha’s instructions are inadequate or not clear enough so that he/she must complement the Buddha’s instructions to arrive at the right teaching. > > I do not think it is necessary for me to elaborate on the attributes of the Dhamma. The Buddha’s Teachings are always clear and complete. > In SN 11. 3 Dhajagga Sutta, the Buddha said: > no ce ma.m anussareyyaatha, atha dhamma.m anussareyyaatha: "svaakkhaato bhagavataa dhammo sandi.t.thiko akaaliko ehipassiko opanayiko paccatta.m veditabbo vi~n~nuuhii"ti. > > If you cannot recollect me, then you should recollect the Dhamma thus: ‘The Dhamma is well expounded by the Blessed One, directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, applicable, to be personally experienced by the wise.’ > (translation by Bhikkhu Bodhi). > > Therefore, I bow down to someone who is more learned than the Buddha, and who sees the need to lay down some requirements to be able to understand and practice the Buddha’s Teachings! > > Thank you very much. > Han > ----------------- Hi Han, I know you don't want to get involved in discussions just now, so I will simply have my say. I am immensely grateful for the help I have received in understanding the Satipatthana Sutta. Before learning about the ancient commentaries, and before joining DSG, I had a very strange interpretation of it. I believed this sutta instructed me to be mindful (in the conventionally known sense) of breathing, walking, talking, eating, going to the toilet etc. There are many people who still hold that strange view. I am sorry for lowering the tone of the conversation, but I believe there are people who - in the name of satipatthana - literally concentrate on the way they move their bowels. I now know for sure that was *not* what the Buddha taught. And I owe that knowledge to K Sujin and DSG. Ken H #89645 From: han tun Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 8:24 pm Subject: Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 4a hantun1 Dear Nina (and Sarah), Thank you very much for your well-balanced comments. > > Extract from Sarah’s Report: Is there then no use in studying the Satipatthana or Anapanasati Sutta if we don't understand realities now? If there's no understanding of sati and various realities now, what's the use of these suttas? Different realities are appearing now, they cannot be the same ones. We need to understand more about dhammas now. -------- > Nina: I am thinking of the following solution to the dilemma: read more, not only these two suttas, but read the many suttas on Elements, on the doorways, on lobha coming in after seeing, hearing, etc. on wise attention, on unwise attention. Study the basics of Abhidhamma, but I know that you did. Then we see the satipatthaanasutta in a new light, we may better understand that the texts point indeed to the realities appearing through the six doors. Well, the Buddha spoke many, many times about the six doors. He spoke about not being misled by the outer appearance or the details of things. But we do, don't we? We are absorbed immediately by the outward appearance, the nimitta, instead of realizing that there must also be seeing, hearing, in order that there can be thinking stories about what is seen or heard. But we are so carried away by our thinking about what is seen or heard. So, the reading, the study can go together with considering realities of your own life, considering your experiences. No rule about first this, then that. That makes it all very interesting and lively, I would think. Please, do not misunderstand. No denial of the crucial importance of all the scriptures, but let us not forget the purpose of it all. Everyone has to develop understanding of 'his own' life. Nina. ---------------------------------------- Han: Only these two suttas were quoted because we were discussing only on the topic of “satipa.t.thaana.â€? You suggested to read many suttas. But for the purpose of satipa.t.thaana I dare say that only three books are absolutely necessary – DN 22 Mahaasatipa.t.thaana Sutta, MN 10 Satipa.t.thaana Sutta, and MN 118 Aanaapaanasati Sutta. For those who wish to read many suttas for this purpose, I have only admiration and respect. But for me, these three surttas are enough for the purpose of satipa.t.thaana. You talked about elements, and the doorways as a reason for wider reading. But they are there in Mahaasatipa.t.thaana Sutta, in kaayanupassanaa dhaatumanasikaara pabba, and dhammaanupassanaa aayatana pabba respectively. I find that Mahaasatipa.t.thaana Sutta is a concise but a complete sutta for many purposes. That’s why the Buddha had said “the four foundation of mindfulness is the direct path for the purification of beings, for the surmounting of sorrow and lamentation, for the disappearance of pain and grief, for the attainment of the true way, for the realization of Nibbaana.â€? I don’t know what more you want other than the Buddha’s guarantee to achieve, mentioned in this sutta. In this connection, I must admit that I am reading other suttas as well, but I must also admit that this is mainly for quoting in the discussions at DSG and other forum. In pre-WWII Burma, our Elders (lay-persons) were also not wide readers. I was sixteen and studying in the Tenth Standard in an Anglo-Vernacular High School when WWII spread to Burma. So I could still remember vividly the situation in Burma in those days. [I cannot say for other countries. I will only talk about Burma.] In those days you will find very few religious books in the houses – mostly consisting of Eleven Parittas, Mahaasatipa.t.thaana Sutta, Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta, an abridged version of Patthaana in Pali, and a few other books. The Elders left the task of wide reading to the monks. They only listened to the sermons by the monks. But their observance of siila was remarkable. Dacoits, robbery, rape and murder were very, very rare. In many houses the main doors were not locked during the night. Adultery cases were also rare. Most of the marriages were arranged by the parents, but there were very, very few cases of infidelity and divorces. However, if they did not achieve insight or did not have fortunate rebirths due to their lack of wide reading I would only be feeling sorry for them! On the same token, I could only feel sorry for them for their lack of understanding of the realities now. I never heard them speak about the ‘realities.’ Their emphasis was mainly on daana and siila, and bhaavaanaa consisted mainly of taking five, eight, and ten precepts, and counting of the prayer beads. I have nothing against the understanding of the realities now. But what I am unhappy is the “over-stressingâ€? of the importance of it, over and above other Teachings of the Buddha. Thus, I am happy to take your point that “the reading and the study can go together with considering realities of your own life, considering your experiences; no rule about first this, then that, and that makes it all very interesting and lively, I would think.â€? Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #89646 From: "gazita2002" Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 10:42 pm Subject: understanding now!! gazita2002 Hello Nina and other dhamma friends. Miissing your presence here in Bkk at the dhamma discussions, Nina. I'm not so good at note taking beec I dont want to miss anything that is being discussed. The one thing I come away with from these talks is mayb a growing understanding that only now, at this present moment, can there be any knowing a reality. Realiities cannot be known by thinking about them; only with sati and panna, the 2 cetasikas which arisee to know a reality when the conditions are right, and then they fall away. It is often stressed that if no understanding arises how can it develop? To me, its like if I dont sow the seed how can the flower grow. Sowing the seed is like listening and contemplating and I guess watering the plant is like continuing to listen and contemplate :-) Its important to know the difference bet. the moment of right understanding and the moment without, not to fool ourselves that we know the present moment. Seeing consciousness arises and falls away soooo quickly [as do all cittas] is there really knowing it or do we just think about it. Hope you and Lodwijk are well. Patience, courage and good cheer, azita #89647 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 12:18 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Corner: DN 33 Twos (22-25), Commentary. nilovg Dear friends, ------------ sutta: 'Powers of mindfulness and concentration. (Satibala~nca samaadhibala~nca.) ---------------- Co: The power of sati cannot be shaken by forgetfulness. The power of samaadhi, concentration, cannot be shaken by restlessness (uddhacca) ------------ Co Pali: Satibalanti assatiyaa akampanavasena satiyeva. Samaadhibalanti uddhacce akampanavasena samaadhiyeva. ------- N: In the course of the development of insight, after the three stages of tender insight have been reached, sati can become a power, it can arise in whatever circumstance one may be. One may be shaken by great loss, such as the loss of a dear person, or the loss of one’s health. Then one may find it difficult to continue being aware of naama and ruupa in daily life so long as sati is not a power. When sati and insight have become powers, they will arise, no matter where and when, and it will be realized that whatever is experienced are mere dhammas. ------------------ Sutta: Calm and insight (Samatho ca vipassanaa ca). ------ Co: Samatha is samaadhi, concentration. Vipassanaa is pa~n~naa. ------------- Co Pali: Samatho samaadhi. Vipassanaa pa~n~naa. -------- The Subco. adds to vipassanaa: it sees impermanence etc. in various ways. N: It penetrates the three characteristics thoroughly as different cittas arise experiencing objects through the six doors. -------- Sutta: The Sign (nimitta) of Calm and The Sign of Exertion (Samathanimitta~nca paggahanimitta~nca). ------------- Co: The sign of tranquillity (samatha nimitta): samatha must be made to occur again and again by means of a nimitta ------ Co Pali: Samathova ta.m aakaara.m gahetvaa puna pavattetabbassa samathassa nimittavasena samathanimitta.m --------- N: the mental image, for example of a kasina, is used to make calm develop. The subco. adds that nimitta is a cause (kaara.na). It states that the citta is composed (samaahita), not sluggish and not agitated, it follows the middle course of development. ---------- The sign of endeavour (exertion), paggaaha nimitta: this is explained in the same way as the sign of tranquillity. Co: paggaahanimittepi eseva nayo. -------- N: Understanding and perseverance are necessary to develop calm. Pa~n~naa must know when the citta is kusala with calm and how to make it grow by means of a meditation subject. The sign of endeavour is explained in the same way as the sign of tranquillity. When we read the terms endeavour or exertion, we should remember that these terms imply patience and perseverance. ------------- sutta: 'Exertion and non-distraction. (Paggaho ca avikkhepo ca.) Co: exertion (endeavour) is viriya (effort) and non-distraction (avikkhepo) is one-pointedness or concentration. Co Pali: Paggaaho viiriya.m. Avikkhepo (non-distraction) ekaggataa. --------- The Co states that there are six pairs, as mentioned in the previous paragraphs: sati and sampaja~n~na; the powers of reflection (pa.tisa"nkhaanabala) and mental development, bhaavanaabala, which is the seven factors of enlightenment; the powers of sati and samaadhi; calm and insight; the sign of tranquillity and the sign of endeavour; endeavour and non-distraction. -------- Co: Imehi pana sati ca sampaja~n~na~nca pa.tisa"nkhaanabala~nca bhaavanaabala~nca satibala~nca samaadhibala~nca samatho ca vippassanaa ca samathanimitta~nca paggaahanimitta~nca paggaaho ca avikkhepo caati chahi dukehi ------- Nina. #89648 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 12:23 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 8, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, “When there is mindfulness of nåma and rúpa one truly lives alone”, Khun Sujin reminded us. There may be many people around, but in reality there are no people. There is visible object, seeing, sound, hearing, there are many different realities which can be the object of mindfulness, one at a time. They do not belong to anyone. If one thinks of one person, of two or more people, there are people in one’s world. But in reality there are no people, only nåmas and rúpas which arise and fall away. Life exists only in one moment of experiencing an object. Sarah said that she found it difficult to know the moment when there is just seeing, different from paying attention to shape and form. Paying attention to shape and form is not seeing. Khun Sujin answered that right understanding is not a matter of catching this or that moment. The characteristic which appears should be known, we should not think of moment. If we think of this or that moment or if we believe that there is a particular order in the appearing of realities, we think of concepts instead of being aware of whatever presents itself. Sometimes there may be mindfulness of seeing, sometimes of thinking, sometimes of visible object. There is no rule with regard to the object sati will be aware of. We all are inclined to try to know the difference between seeing and paying attention to shape and form, and then we are clinging. Phra Dhammadhara asked, “Who is trying?” and I answered, “Self wants to know”. He replied that people usually give the correct answer, but, do they realize the truth? We forget to be mindful of clinging when it appears. When we keep on thinking of seeing instead of being mindful of seeing which appears now, seeing cannot be known as it is. When we have doubt about characteristics, or when we are discouraged about our lack of sati, these moments should also be studied. Any reality can be the object of mindfulness, no matter whether we like that object or not. ******* Nina. #89649 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 2:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] understanding now!! nilovg Dear Azita, thank you for your post and kind thoughts. I like your words as to the present moment. Lodewijk and I are well, both working hard, each on our own projects. Lodewijk helps me checking condiitons. Nina. Op 31-aug-2008, om 7:42 heeft gazita2002 het volgende geschreven: > Its important to know the difference bet. the moment of right > understanding and the moment without, not to fool ourselves that we > know > the present moment. > Seeing consciousness arises and falls away soooo quickly [as do all > cittas] is there really knowing it or do we just think about it. > Hope you and Lodwijk are well. #89650 From: "nidive" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 2:47 am Subject: Re: Is Nibbana a dhamma? ... nidive Hi Alex, > While we can say that Arahats consciousness isn't established > anywhere, the same cannot be properly said about parinibbana. > The Udana passage *may* be about Nibbana experienced when the > Arahant is alive as I hope you see how it is incorrectly to state > that "Arahant experiences parinibbana [after death]". An arahant does not ever experience nibbana after death. With the cessation of final consciousness, that is the cessation of all experience. Two Nibbanas: Nibbana Experienced and Nibbana Unexperienced. Swee Boon #89651 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 3:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 4a nilovg Dear Han, Thank you for your interesting and lively report on the book situation in Burma, pre- WWII. I understand. Also in Thailand there was a similar situation. The monks were the authority for their knowledge. Also people were inclined to say: Achara says so, and not look at the sources themselves. Even when I came first to Thailand about fortytwo years ago, many sources, including commentaries, were not available in Thai. As mentioned before, Khun Sujin played a great role in changing this situation. The commentaries to all the suttas are now available in Thai. Op 31-aug-2008, om 5:24 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > But for the purpose of satipa.t.thaana I dare say that only three > books are absolutely necessary – DN 22 Mahaasatipa.t.thaana Sutta, > MN 10 Satipa.t.thaana Sutta, and MN 118 Aanaapaanasati Sutta. For > those who wish to read many suttas for this purpose, I have only > admiration and respect. But for me, these three surttas are enough > for the purpose of satipa.t.thaana. You talked about elements, and > the doorways as a reason for wider reading. -------- N: You are right, the suttas you mention are very complete. The Buddha's instruction is really adequate, but, as to our faculties, are these up to standard? Are they weak or strong? Everybody must answer this for himself. Some people needed a very short instruction to attain enlightenment, some longer, some had to be led again and again (neyya puggala), and some could not attain enlightenment but knew just the terms (pada parama). To which group do we belong? Those who are dull-minded need many details, the same material as in the satipatthaanasutta but brought from different angles, with more aspects added. > --------- > H: I have nothing against the understanding of the realities now. > But what I am unhappy is the “over-stressing” of the importance of > it, over and above other Teachings of the Buddha. Thus, I am happy > to take your point that “the reading and the study can go together > with considering realities of your own life, considering your > experiences; no rule about first this, then that, and that makes it > all very interesting and lively, I would think.” ------- N: I think when the study is limited to only a few suttas, and one is all by himself, without a good friend in Dhamma, there is a danger of wrong interpretation and also of just attaching importance to names and terms. I am thinking of Ken's post: ----------- Han's other post: Now, one can be aware of the long breath and the short breath with pa~n~naa. Or another person can be aware of the long breath and short breath without pa~n~naa. The latter happens to me quite often. When my concentration is weak I am just aware of the physical feeling of the breath brushing over the tip of the nostril without knowing the characteristics of naama and ruupa – the ‘realities’ as you might say. If you say this kind of awareness is not sati, then I have no other explanation. ------- N: Kusala citta is always accompanied by sati. There is sati of daana, of siila, of samatha and of vipassanaa. It is important to know whether at a particular moment kusala citta arises or akusala citta, but realizing this is already a degree of pa~n~naa. Thus, this is not easy to know. It may help to find out for what purpose one sits and notices the breath. If it is for samatha, calm, it means that one sees the benefit of detachment from sense objects. Detachment has to be emphasized. These are questions each person must answer for himself. Sati without pa~n~naa can arise in the case of dana and sila, but not in the case of samatha or vipassana, thus, mental development or bhaavanaa. Even for a beginner, intellectual understanding, which is also pa~n~naa, is indispensable. But if one concentrates on breath just for the purpose of wellbeing, that is a different matter. It is not bhaavanaa, since that has to be accompanied by detachment, and understanding. ------- Nina. #89652 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 11:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 4a upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Han) - In a message dated 8/30/2008 11:19:47 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Han, I know you don't want to get involved in discussions just now, so I will simply have my say. I am immensely grateful for the help I have received in understanding the Satipatthana Sutta. Before learning about the ancient commentaries, and before joining DSG, I had a very strange interpretation of it. I believed this sutta instructed me to be mindful (in the conventionally known sense) of breathing, walking, talking, eating, going to the toilet etc. There are many people who still hold that strange view. I am sorry for lowering the tone of the conversation, but I believe there are people who - in the name of satipatthana - literally concentrate on the way they move their bowels. -------------------------------------------- Howard: LOLOL! (And I'm not laughing for the obvious reason!) If you think that there is no Dhamma to be learned then, or in any other particular context, then you don't understand the Dhamma. ------------------------------------------------ I now know for sure that was *not* what the Buddha taught. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Then you definitely know something that I do NOT know. :-) ------------------------------------------------ And I owe that knowledge to K Sujin and DSG. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Good to know that, Ken. ;-) ----------------------------------------------- Ken H ========================= With metta, Howard, Holder of "Strange Views" #89653 From: han tun Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 3:53 am Subject: Re:E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 4a hantun1 Dear Nina (and Sarah), I sincerely thank you very much for your kind comments, and I admire your patience and the ability to ‘tame’ a person like me. I know that I am a (pada parama), and a stubborn and rebellious type at that. If someone tells me not to do, I want to do it. If someone tells me something repeatedly I get fed up and most likely to retort back, “so what?â€? Sarah once told me that I get fed up if someone says something over and over again, but what if I say something over and over again? I will not respond to all the points in your post, which I accept them with gratitude. I will mention only one point which I like very much. > > Han's other post: Now, one can be aware of the long breath and the short breath with pa~n~naa. Or another person can be aware of the long breath and short breath without pa~n~naa. The latter happens to me quite often. When my concentration is weak I am just aware of the physical feeling of the breath brushing over the tip of the nostril without knowing the characteristics of naama and ruupa – the ‘realities’ as you might say. If you say this kind of awareness is not sati, then I have no other explanation. ------- > N: Kusala citta is always accompanied by sati. There is sati of daana, of siila, of samatha and of vipassanaa. It is important to know whether at a particular moment kusala citta arises or akusala citta, but realizing this is already a degree of pa~n~naa. Thus, this is not easy to know. It may help to find out for what purpose one sits and notices the breath. If it is for samatha, calm, it means that one sees the benefit of detachment from sense objects. Detachment has to be emphasized. These are questions each person must answer for himself. Sati without pa~n~naa can arise in the case of dana and sila, but not in the case of samatha or vipassana, thus, mental development or bhaavanaa. Even for a beginner, intellectual understanding, which is also pa~n~naa, is indispensable. But if one concentrates on breath just for the purpose of wellbeing, that is a different matter. It is not bhaavanaa, since that has to be accompanied by detachment, and understanding. Han: Excellent, Nina. I am very grateful for the above evaluation and advice. Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #89654 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 4:39 am Subject: Pali term for wrong view about kamma etc? ( was Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no philofillet Hi Scoot > Scott: What about (not really 'wrong view' but they get in the way of > things): > > "Aanantarika-kamma: the 5 heinous 'actions with immediate destiny' > are: Killing father, killing mother, killing an Arahat, wounding a > Buddha so he bleeds, creating schism in the Bhikkhu-Sangha," > (Nyanatiloka)? Thanks again. Your feedback has been very helpful. Metta, Phil #89655 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 6:23 am Subject: Sarcasm dhammanusarin Dear Howard (Scott), - I like your comment, such as the one below; it is a mirror for me to look at myself. > Tep to Scott: Thank you for replying sarcastically. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm, not really, at least not as it seemed to me. Perhaps a bit tongue in cheek. BTW, is your "thank you" not a tad sarcastic, Tep? ;-) ----------------------------------------- Yes, it is. Thank you for an unbiased comment -- telling a spade a spade. What is your opinion about sarcasm : is it akusala or not? In case it is, how can it be eliminated? .......................................... >Tep to Scott: You have an attitude of many C-grade students, Scott, and that's is sad (not funny!). ------------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm, I'd say we're all at best C- students of the Dhamma, because the central curriculum consists of practica, as far as that essential core curriculum goes, we're barely squeaking through Dhamma 101! -------------------------------------------- All C- and D- students do not start to prepare "big" for an exam until a day or two before the exam date. Sincerely, Tep ============================ T: Since the DSG Curriculum does not consider practice of the Dhamma, should it be accredited ? Tep === #89656 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 7:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 4a nilovg Dear Han, thanks for your kind words. Please say it over and over again when something is on your mind. That is better than swallow it, because then it will keep on troubling later on. I feel always happy to see your name on the list. I think: that is good, a post from Han. I missed you when you were absent. Best wishes, Nina. Op 31-aug-2008, om 12:53 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Sarah once told me that I get fed up if someone says something over > and over again, but what if I say something over and over again? #89657 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 5:16 am Subject: The Dalai Lama upasaka_howard Hi, all - I've read that the Dalai Lama has been admitted to the hospital for stomach pain and exhaustion. He is in my thoughts. I'm mentioning this for those of you who might be unaware of it and also wish to hold him warmly in your thoughts. With metta, Howard #89658 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 5:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarcasm upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Scott) - In a message dated 8/31/2008 9:23:56 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: Dear Howard (Scott), - I like your comment, such as the one below; it is a mirror for me to look at myself. > Tep to Scott: Thank you for replying sarcastically. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm, not really, at least not as it seemed to me. Perhaps a bit tongue in cheek. BTW, is your "thank you" not a tad sarcastic, Tep? ;-) ----------------------------------------- Yes, it is. Thank you for an unbiased comment -- telling a spade a spade. What is your opinion about sarcasm : is it akusala or not? In case it is, how can it be eliminated? ------------------------------------------------- Howard: I think it is usually unwholesome to some degree, being a species of expressed ill will. To what degree it is unwholesome, if at all, depends, of course, on intention. But the intention is rarely very kusala! ;-) As for eliminating it, I'm not a very good person to ask, as I'm often guilty of it! LOL! I suppose the best approach is the practice of guarding the senses through cittanupassana, recalling the Buddha and the Dhamma, and calming the mind and suppressing hindrances through samadhi. -------------------------------------------------- .......................................... >Tep to Scott: You have an attitude of many C-grade students, Scott, and that's is sad (not funny!). ------------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm, I'd say we're all at best C- students of the Dhamma, because the central curriculum consists of practica, as far as that essential core curriculum goes, we're barely squeaking through Dhamma 101! -------------------------------------------- All C- and D- students do not start to prepare "big" for an exam until a day or two before the exam date. Sincerely, Tep ============================ T: Since the DSG Curriculum does not consider practice of the Dhamma, should it be accredited ? ------------------------------------------ Howard: By what accrediting authority? ;-)) Evidently we both find much of value here, Tep. :-) -------------------------------------- Tep =========================== With metta, Howard #89659 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 11:20 am Subject: Re: Is Nibbana a dhamma? ... dhammanusarin Hello Swee and Alex, I am glad you join this discussion, Swee. .................... Hi Alex, > While we can say that Arahats consciousness isn't established > anywhere, the same cannot be properly said about parinibbana. > The Udana passage *may* be about Nibbana experienced when the > Arahant is alive as I hope you see how it is incorrectly to state > that "Arahant experiences parinibbana [after death]". An arahant does not ever experience nibbana after death. With the cessation of final consciousness, that is the cessation of all experience. Two Nibbanas: Nibbana Experienced and Nibbana Unexperienced. Swee Boon ...................... I am not clear why Alex is concerned about experiencing Nibbana after death. What you say makes sense, a common sense about cessation. BTW are you implying that "Nibbana Unexperienced" is Parinibbana? Tep === #89660 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 1:27 pm Subject: Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 4a kenhowardau Hi Howard, > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: > LOLOL! (And I'm not laughing for the obvious reason!) If you think that > there is no Dhamma to be learned then, or in any other particular context, > then you don't understand the Dhamma. > ------------------------------------------------ I need to qualify what I wrote. I am not saying there is no benefit from conventional mindfulness. I have heard, for example, the anecdotes about yoga masters who could control their internal organs with great benefits to their physical and mental health. Another conventional example we usually give on DSG is that of mindfulness while crossing the street . It is a good practice. It is especially good if it is motivated by conventional understanding of what we are looking for and why. But it is not satipatthana! And it never will be! :-) Ken H #89661 From: "liamvann" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 12:23 pm Subject: hello liamvann I was first interested in the dhamma in early 2006 when I saw a video about Thich Nhat Hanh. I started my meditation the next year, during my first meditations I was vey depressed. I was practising the zen tradition (I don't think that was the best for me). Then I heard ajahn brahm speak. I knew then the forest tradition was what i needed to be happy. #89662 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 2:32 pm Subject: Re: Is Nibbana a dhamma? ... truth_aerator Hello Tep, Swee and all, > > I am not clear why Alex is concerned about experiencing Nibbana >after death. Because Parinibbana(Nibbana after 5 aggregates are gone) isn't a "dhamma" perhaps? Thus all the talk in Udana and other similiar passages may be about experienced Nibbana during Arahants existence. Best wishes, Alex #89663 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 10:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 4a upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 8/31/2008 4:27:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: > LOLOL! (And I'm not laughing for the obvious reason!) If you think that > there is no Dhamma to be learned then, or in any other particular context, > then you don't understand the Dhamma. > ------------------------------------------------ I need to qualify what I wrote. I am not saying there is no benefit from conventional mindfulness. I have heard, for example, the anecdotes about yoga masters who could control their internal organs with great benefits to their physical and mental health. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, that's "nice" of course, but of only superficial worth. -------------------------------------------------------- Another conventional example we usually give on DSG is that of mindfulness while crossing the street . It is a good practice. It is especially good if it is motivated by conventional understanding of what we are looking for and why. But it is not satipatthana! And it never will be! :-) ------------------------------------------------- Howard: And what is mindfulness of what arises, Ken? Some pie in the sky? Nothing conceivably real? Something good only in theory and not relevant to our actual lives? Mindfulness develops in stages. There is weaker & there is stronger. There is no context, save unconsciousness, in which it is fully impossible, and there is no context in which, given adequate mindfulness and other wholesome conditions, insight into the tripartite nature of conditioned phenomena may not arise. No circumstances are too ordinary or conventionally crude for breakthroughs to occur. --------------------------------------------------- Ken H =========================== With metta, Howard #89664 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 3:13 pm Subject: Re: Is Nibbana a dhamma? ... dhammanusarin Dear Alex (and Swee), - I just only want to show you what I have seen with no intention to show that I truly understand Nibbana. > > Tep: > > I am not clear why Alex is concerned about experiencing Nibbana > >after death. > > Alex: Because Parinibbana(Nibbana after 5 aggregates are gone) isn't > a "dhamma" perhaps? Thus all the talk in Udana and other similiar > passages may be about experienced Nibbana during Arahants existence. > T: Nibbana doesn't change whether it is before or after the khandhas cease without a trace. Read the following "Extinction Here and Now", then carefully compare the text word by word with the other two cases I gave you earlier (i.e. Extinction and Final Extinction). Then you might agree with me. Sandi~n~nhikanibbaanasuttam Extinction here and now 005.06. Friend, it is said extinction is here and now, how far is extinction here and now as told by The Blessed One? Here, friend, the bhikkhu secluding the mind from sensual desires ... re ... abides in the first higher state of the mind. Friend, mastering this much, it is said extinction is here and now by The Blessed One. Again, friend, the bhikkhu overcoming thoughts and discursive thoughts ... re ... abides in the second higher state of the mind ... third higher state of the mind, ... fourth higher state of the mind Friend, mastering this much, it is said extinction is here and now, by Blessed One. Again, friend, the bhikkhu overcoming all perceptions of matter and all perceptions of anger, not attending to various perceptions, with space is boundless abides in the sphere of space. Friend, mastering this much, it is said extinction is here and now, by The Blessed One ... re ... Again, friend, the bhikkhu overcoming all the sphere of neither perceptions nor non-perceptions abides in the cessation of perceptions and feelings. Friend, without a mastery, for this much, it is said extinction is here and now, by The Blessed One. [endquote] ................... BTW the DSG mantra, "understanding now", fails when it comes to Nibbana. Tep === #89665 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 3:48 pm Subject: Re: hello dhammanusarin Hello Liamvann (and Alex), - Your message shows that you have a lot more to say ! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "liamvann" wrote: > > I was first interested in the dhamma in early 2006 when I saw a video > about Thich Nhat Hanh. I started my meditation the next year, during my > first meditations I was vey depressed. I was practising the zen > tradition (I don't think that was the best for me). Then I heard ajahn > brahm speak. I knew then the forest tradition was what i needed to be > happy. > T: 1. How did the "forest tradition" help you overcome that mental depression? It takes close to a genious to explain to this group about the benefits of the Forest Tradition (as spearheaded by Ajahn Mun Bhuridatta Thera). Thus they may challenge you with a thousand questions. 2. Are you now "happy" both on- and off-cushion? Thanks. Tep === #89666 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 3:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarcasm dhammanusarin Hello Howard, - I am happy for you that you have found "much value" in the DSG Abhidhamma path. > >T: Since the DSG Curriculum does not consider practice of the Dhamma, should it be accredited ? ------------------------------------------ >Howard: By what accrediting authority? ;-)) Evidently we both find much of value here, Tep. :-) -------------------------------------- Well, in my case I am hanging on here mostly because I am a lonely retiree. ;-)) Tep === #89667 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 4:06 pm Subject: Ugghatitannu, Vipancitannu, Neyya, Padaparama can someone translate pali please? truth_aerator Hello all, there are 4 types of induviduals: Ugghatitannu, Vipancitannu, Neyya & Padaparama. Can someone please translate what those terms mean? Thanks, Best wishes, Alex #89668 From: "liamvann" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 4:44 pm Subject: Re: hello liamvann When I sit, I think about the breath. It rises and it falls, as all things.I realize all things are temporary, and nothing belongs to me. Not even this body. I think about the impermanance of everything, sadly even the dhamma. How one stone throne in to a pond causes ripples threw out the entire pond. I conclude, you are going to die, youre friends, youre family, youre love, all are going to die. #89669 From: "liamvann" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 5:39 pm Subject: annata liamvann I do not study pali, or sutta. Instead i study mind. I've discovered that there is no original belief: there is no individual. You are the product of your family, religion, and peers.If shakyamuni were from israel he would be called "messia". #89670 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 7:48 pm Subject: Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 4a kenhowardau Hi Howard, ----- <. . .> H: > And what is mindfulness of what arises, Ken? Some pie in the sky? Nothing conceivably real? Something good only in theory and not relevant to our actual lives? ------ I am not sure which kind of mindfulness you are referring to here, Howard. So I don't know how to take your comment about 'pie in the sky' does it represent your sarcastic attitude or mine? :-) If by "mindfulness of what arises" you mean mindfulness of people and cars in the name of satipatthana then, yes, 'pie in the sky' would be my comment. :-) ------------------------- H: > Mindfulness develops in stages. There is weaker & there is stronger. There is no context, save unconsciousness, in which it is fully impossible, ------------------------- Yes, but weak mindfulness of conventional realities develops into strong mindfulness of conventional realities. Weak mindfulness of absolute realities develops into strong mindfulness of absolute realities. There is no link between the two lines of development. --------------------------- H: > and there is no context in which, given adequate mindfulness and other wholesome conditions, insight into the tripartite nature of conditioned phenomena may not arise. No circumstances are too ordinary or conventionally crude for breakthroughs to occur. ---------------------------- You insist on using the term 'mindfulness' in the conventional sense as if it were some kind of ongoing practice in preparation for insight. According to the Dhamma, samma-sati is a momentary conditioned dhamma that arises with insight. That is the only kind of [right] mindfulness the Dhamma teaches. Ken H #89671 From: "jessicamui" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 7:33 pm Subject: Questions regarding Ignorance jessicamui Dear Dhamma friends, In SN III 22.126-128, Buddha said that when the instructed noble disciple "understand" that the 5 aggregates are subject to arising and vanishing then one "has arrived at true knowledge". Regarding the above description (based on Bhikku Bodhi's translation), my question is that does "true knowledge" only applicable to the "instructed noble disciple" ? Does that mean only through real experience, i.e. the practice of insight mediation to "see" the 3 Marks, then it counts as "true knowledge"? What about understanding it intellectually through studying the Dhamma and reflection ? From Abhidhamma perspective, does ignorance exist in every mind moment ? If it exists in all, or some mind moments, can it be "removed" momentarily through reflecting the Dhamma ? Thanks in advance for your insight. Metta, Jessica #89672 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 9:58 pm Subject: Re: The Big Difference between 'No Self' and 'No Individuals' kenhowardau Hi Tep, We were talking about the "not-self strategy" as taught by Ven Thanissao. ------------- T: Before the mind can "relax", first it has to be calm and non- distracted (samadhi) by what is seen, i.e. concentrated mind. That "seeing the world *as it truly is* " is conditioned by concentration. [Upanisa Sutta] ------------- Yes, that is how I thought the theory went. And it is very different from the way I understand the Dhamma. I understand that, "seeing the world as it truly is" is something we can possibly do right now - provided we have heard the true Dhamma. In our case it may be just a sketchy, intellectual form of "seeing" but, if it is in accordance with the true Dhamma then it "as it truly is." ------------------------ T: > That concentration is important. That insight knowledge is important. Please be assured that there is no Tep's fabricated "theory"; it is just his understanding of the quoted sutta. Maybe you can have a little more positive thinking if you read the sutta yourself and then please tell me what you understand, so that we can be on the same footing. ------------------------ We have discussed many times the way I understand the suttas. I see them as descriptions of conditioned reality. They describe conditioned paramattha dhammas in their many different ways of arising. --------------------------- > > > T: The two points I have made are: (1) there is a self in the colloquial sense, but no reliable-and- lasting self; (2) whenever there is no grasping (upadana) in the khandhas, then the khandhas are seen as 'not self' (anatta). The self is there whenever there is upadana in the khandhas; that's why a self-view is a wrong view. > > KH: Please explain point 1. How is it different from the anatta interpretation that I and other DSG members have putting to you all these years, and that you have strongly rejected? We have been saying that people, cars, mountains etc, were concepts (pannatti) and did not exist in ultimate reality (paramattha dhammas). Is that the same as point 1? In point 2 you seem to be saying that non-grasping was the way taught by the Buddha. (I have always believed the Buddha taught a way of right understanding.) > T: I appreciate the clarification. In Point 1 the big difference is seen in the absence of emphasis on "ultimate realities" and "concepts". ------------------------- Thanks for that, but I still need more. "Absence of emphasis on ultimate realities and concepts" doesn't mean much to me. When you say there is a self "in the colloquial sense" but "no reliable-and-lasting self" do you mean there are concepts of people and mountains (and other lasting entities), but only namas and rupas are real (and all realities are devoid of a lasting entity)? Or do you mean something else? The central issue I am trying to get to in this conversation is the existence/non-existence of self (atta). Ven. T says the Buddha's teaching of anatta was not that there was "no self" it was simply a strategy that avoided the question of self. What do you say? ---------------- T: > In Point 2 I am saying that not-grasping of the khandhas is the dhamma taught by the Buddha with the purpose of letting go of self views and conceit. ----------------- Yes, that is Ven. T's line. According to his theory (as I understand it) the meditator can believe in a self so long as he doesn't think about it. Ven T goes so far as to say that the idea of no self would be contrary to the Dhamma, and contrary to the teaching of kamma-and- vipakka. What do you say? --------------------------------- T: > Now, about "right understanding", which is one of the most- confusing terms used by DSG Abhidhammikas, I believe the Buddha meant right knowledge or "samma~na~naa" which is the 9th magga factor in the Arahant path [See MN 117]. ---------------------------------- That would confine panna to the Arahant Magga-citta - a very tiny part of the Dhamma! Does Ven. Thanissaro teach that too, or is it your own theory? -------------------------------------------- > > KH: However, you avoid the question of ultimate existence and non- existence. So let me ask you: is there, in ultimate reality, a self or is there not? > T: Non-existence (Self does not exist) and Existence(Self exists) are two extreme views that the Buddha taught his disciples to avoid [SN 44.10]. That's why I have "avoided" them. ---------------------------------------------- Why are they extreme views? Is it (as Ven. T says) simply because they interrupt the meditator's concentration? No, it isn't that at all! As has been explained here countless times, both views are equally wrong *when they are held by extremists* (eternalists and annihilationists). According to the Middle Way's right view there is definitely no self. ------------------ > > KH: I think Ven Thanissaro takes the view that, if there was no self, there would be no kamma (no actions), and if there were no self to receive the results of actions there would be no vipakka. > T: I have explained before that Ajaan Thanissaro meant the self in colloquial sense, not the permanent/lasting self that travels from one life to another, accumulating kammas. > > KH: I think he also says if there were no self there would be enjoyment nibbana, so there would be no reason to practise vipassana. Therefore, he claims, the Buddha did not teach no-self, he simply taught a not-self strategy. Is that the way you see it? T: > This concept of Nibbana is more difficult to understand, Ken. In his Nibbana article he implies that it is wrong to compare mind with the fire that is gone when the flame dies down. TB : "We all know what happens when a fire goes out. The flames die down and the fire is gone for good. So when we first learn that the name for the goal of Buddhist practice, nibbana (nirvana), literally means the extinguishing of a fire, it's hard to imagine a deadlier image for a spiritual goal: utter annihilation. ... ...So the next time you watch a fire going out, see it not as a case of annihilation, but as a lesson in how freedom is to be found in letting go." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/nibbana.html T: I agree with him that mind(consciousness) "extinguishes" at nibbana so there will be no more birth. But I do not see anything wrong with the final annihilation of nama and rupa at Nibbana. That disagreement is perhaps my own ignorance. ------------------- Thanks for trying, Tep, but those explanations are all gobbledegook to me. I suggest you dissociate yourself from the "not-self strategy" teaching, and learn the real meaning of anatta. ------------------------------------- T: > Concerning your accusations that he says "there would be no reason to practise vipassana" ------------------------------------- I think I said "he says *if there was no self* then there would be no one to experience Nibbna and therefore no logical reason for practising vipassana." That is different from saying "Ven T teaches there would be no reason to practise vipassana" isn't it, Tep? Let's not inflame the situation more than necessary. -------------------- T: > and that his "not-self strategy" is not in-line with the Buddha's Teaching of anatta, I think you have gone too far. Several Dhamma talks that he gave at Wat Metta were about vipassana (read then at the ATI archive); vipassana on the anatta principle is indeed what he calls a "strategy" for letting go of upadanakkhandha. It is just a different wording, not a different idea from the Buddha's. Think more positively, please. --------------------- As we have seen from previous threads, all Buddhist writers and commentators agree: Ven T's teaching is heterodoxy. The "not-self strategy" is solely Ven T's interpretation - it is taught by no other Buddhist teacher. Ken H #89673 From: "rinzeee" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 10:06 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream rinzeee Dear Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Rinze, > > I'm appreciating all your discussions too. > Some times I feel I am too 'point blank' in my statements, that could be misconstrued for 'direct confrontation', which I would like to avoid at all cost! Because there is no personal satisfaction for me, other than to enlighten someone, or get enlightened in the process! > Sarah > p.s Pls consider putting a pic in the photo album along with any other new members. I wonder if you lived before in England or the States? Your lovely style of writing leads me to ask. Just curiosity, no need to answer. > ================ > Will do in due course. England or States..? No, not in this lifetime, anyway(heh, heh!) Went through the photo album of Nina's 80th B'day! Nice Pics! My apologies if I had hurt you guys in any way! May all be Happy! Rinze. #89674 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Aug 31, 2008 10:27 pm Subject: 1,2,3 => Success! bhikkhu0 Daily Words of the Buddha for 1 September 2008 The Blessed Buddha once said: SabbapÄ?passa akaranam, kusalassa upasampadÄ?, sacittapariyodapanak - etam buddhÄ?na sÄ?sanam. 1: Harmless, 2: Good and 3: Pure: Avoiding all Harm; Doing only Good; Purifying own Mind; So all Buddhas teach! Dhammapada 183 Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) ..... #89675 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 12:16 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 9, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 9. Our journey was a pilgrimage. We visited several places of worship in order to recollect the Buddha’s virtues and the virtues of the arahats who lived in Sri Lanka and had practised satipaììhåna until all defilements were eradicated. Khun Sujin encouraged us to keep on studying realities and developing satipatthåna. “It never is enough, it never is enough until one has attained arahatship”, she said. In Anurådhapura we stayed in the Government Agent’s residence, a peaceful place with trees all around it, in the old city of Anurådhapura. His house is within walking distance of the “Ruvanvelisåya”, the great stupa (dagaba) which King Dutthagåmaní started to build. Relics of the Buddha have been enshrined in this stupa. It is illuminated every night and there are always people walking around it and reciting stanzas. We visited the stupa several times and on one occasion, while we were walking around it, Khun Sujin spoke to our hostess about satipatthåna. She reminded us to be mindful of only one reality at a time, as it appears through one of the six doors. We should not mix up the six doorways. We cannot know visible object and tangible object, a reality appearing through the bodysense, at the same time. She said: “When a reality appears, it does so only through one doorway. Leave the other doorways alone.” Don’t we try to think of many “things” instead of being aware now? While walking on the stone precincts around the stupa, one may form up the idea of floor. That shows that there is no mindfulness. Throught the eyes only visible object appears, through the bodysense hardness may appear. If we do not mix up the different doorways, we shall find out that there is in reality no floor; there are only different nåmas and rúpas which appear one at a time. We are inclined to take seeing and other realities for permanent. Khun Sujin reminded us: “Each reality which appears falls away. The hardness now is not the same as hardness a moment ago. Seeing now is not the same as seeing a moment ago. If we think that it is the same it shows that there is no awareness.” Khun Sujin remarked: “If sati is not accumulated now, it is not possible to attain enlightenment. Enlightenment can be attained. In the Buddha’s time many attained it. The development of sati is very natural; it is not too difficult if we are not forgetful. But when sati does not arise, we should not have regret. When regret appears there can be mindfulness even of regret.” While one walks around the stupa and different realities are “studied”, the past time when arahats walked here and taught satipatthåna seems very near. They were never forgetful of realities. ****** Nina. #89676 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 1:01 am Subject: Re: The Big Difference between 'No Self' and 'No Individuals' .. Help Me!! .. dhammanusarin Dear KenH and Alex, Howard, Swee, Herman, - May I call for help from Alex, Howard, Swee and Herman to please give your thoughts about the conversation below? Ken, the reason I call for inputs from our friends, who know both of us well, is because I respect their impartial analysis and knowledge of Buddhism. I need their help also to comment on the several twists in your reply and any errors they see in my statements as well. Although I am leaving the communication door open, right now I have lost hope to continue discussion with you, Ken. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > We were talking about the "not-self strategy" as taught by Ven > Thanissao. > > ------------- > T: Before the mind can "relax", first it has to be calm and non- > distracted (samadhi) by what is seen, i.e. concentrated mind. > That "seeing the world *as it truly is* " is conditioned by > concentration. [Upanisa Sutta] > ------------- > > Yes, that is how I thought the theory went. And it is very different > from the way I understand the Dhamma. I understand that, "seeing > the world as it truly is" is something we can possibly do right now - > provided we have heard the true Dhamma. In our case it may be just a > sketchy, intellectual form of "seeing" but, if it is in accordance > with the true Dhamma then it "as it truly is." > > ------------------------ > T: > That concentration is important. That insight knowledge is > important. > Please be assured that there is no Tep's fabricated "theory"; it is > just his understanding of the quoted sutta. Maybe you can have a > little more positive thinking if you read the sutta yourself and then > please tell me what you understand, so that we can be on the same > footing. > ------------------------ > > We have discussed many times the way I understand the suttas. I see > them as descriptions of conditioned reality. They describe > conditioned paramattha dhammas in their many different ways of > arising. > > --------------------------- > > > > T: The two points I have made are: > (1) there is a self in the colloquial sense, but no reliable-and- > lasting self; > (2) whenever there is no grasping (upadana) in the khandhas, then the > khandhas are seen as 'not self' (anatta). The self is there whenever > there is upadana in the khandhas; that's why a self-view is a wrong > view. > > > > > KH: Please explain point 1. How is it different from the anatta > interpretation that I and other DSG members have putting to you all > these years, and that you have strongly rejected? We have been saying > that people, cars, mountains etc, were concepts (pannatti) and did > not exist in ultimate reality (paramattha dhammas). Is that the same > as point 1? > > In point 2 you seem to be saying that non-grasping was the way > taught by the Buddha. (I have always believed the Buddha taught a way > of right understanding.) > > > T: I appreciate the clarification. In Point 1 the big difference is > seen in the absence of emphasis on "ultimate realities" > and "concepts". > ------------------------- > > Thanks for that, but I still need more. "Absence of emphasis on > ultimate realities and concepts" doesn't mean much to me. > > When you say there is a self "in the colloquial sense" but "no > reliable-and-lasting self" do you mean there are concepts of people > and mountains (and other lasting entities), but only namas and rupas > are real (and all realities are devoid of a lasting entity)? Or do > you mean something else? > > The central issue I am trying to get to in this conversation is the > existence/non-existence of self (atta). Ven. T says the Buddha's > teaching of anatta was not that there was "no self" it was simply a > strategy that avoided the question of self. What do you say? > > ---------------- > T: > In Point 2 I am saying that not-grasping of the > khandhas is the dhamma taught by the Buddha with the purpose of > letting go of self views and conceit. > ----------------- > > Yes, that is Ven. T's line. According to his theory (as I understand > it) the meditator can believe in a self so long as he doesn't think > about it. Ven T goes so far as to say that the idea of no self would > be contrary to the Dhamma, and contrary to the teaching of kamma- and- > vipakka. What do you say? > > --------------------------------- > T: > Now, about "right understanding", which is one of the most- > confusing terms used by DSG Abhidhammikas, I believe the Buddha meant > right knowledge or "samma~na~naa" which is the 9th magga factor in > the Arahant path [See MN 117]. > ---------------------------------- > > That would confine panna to the Arahant Magga-citta - a very tiny > part of the Dhamma! > > Does Ven. Thanissaro teach that too, or is it your own theory? > > -------------------------------------------- > > > KH: However, you avoid the question of ultimate existence and non- > existence. So let me ask you: is there, in ultimate reality, a self > or is there not? > > > T: Non-existence (Self does not exist) and Existence(Self exists) > are two extreme views that the Buddha taught his disciples to avoid > [SN 44.10]. That's why I have "avoided" them. > ---------------------------------------------- > > Why are they extreme views? Is it (as Ven. T says) simply because > they interrupt the meditator's concentration? > > No, it isn't that at all! As has been explained here countless times, > both views are equally wrong *when they are held by extremists* > (eternalists and annihilationists). According to the Middle Way's > right view there is definitely no self. > > ------------------ > > > KH: I think Ven Thanissaro takes the view that, if there was no > self, there would be no kamma (no actions), and if there were no self > to receive the results of actions there would be no vipakka. > > > T: I have explained before that Ajaan Thanissaro meant the self in > colloquial sense, not the permanent/lasting self that travels from > one life to another, accumulating kammas. > > > > KH: I think he also says if there were no self there would be > enjoyment nibbana, so there would be no reason to practise vipassana. > Therefore, he claims, the Buddha did not teach no-self, he simply > taught a not-self strategy. Is that the way you see it? > > T: > This concept of Nibbana is more difficult to understand, Ken. In > his Nibbana article he implies that it is wrong to compare mind with > the fire that is gone when the flame dies down. > > TB : "We all know what happens when a fire goes out. The flames die > down and the fire is gone for good. So when we first learn that the > name for the goal of Buddhist practice, nibbana (nirvana), literally > means the extinguishing of a fire, it's hard to imagine a deadlier > image for a spiritual goal: utter annihilation. ... ...So the next > time you watch a fire going out, see it not as a case of > annihilation, but as a lesson in how freedom is to be found in > letting go." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/nibbana.html > > T: I agree with him that mind(consciousness) "extinguishes" at > nibbana so there will be no more birth. But I do not see anything > wrong with the final annihilation of nama and rupa at Nibbana. That > disagreement is perhaps my own ignorance. > ------------------- > > Thanks for trying, Tep, but those explanations are all gobbledegook > to me. I suggest you dissociate yourself from the "not-self strategy" > teaching, and learn the real meaning of anatta. > > ------------------------------------- > T: > Concerning your accusations that he says "there would be no > reason to practise vipassana" > ------------------------------------- > > I think I said "he says *if there was no self* then there would be no > one to experience Nibbna and therefore no logical reason for > practising vipassana." That is different from saying "Ven T teaches > there would be no reason to practise vipassana" isn't it, Tep? Let's > not inflame the situation more than necessary. > > -------------------- > T: > and that his "not-self strategy" is not in-line > with the Buddha's Teaching of anatta, I think you have gone too far. > Several Dhamma talks that he gave at Wat Metta were about vipassana > (read then at the ATI archive); vipassana on the anatta principle is > indeed what he calls a "strategy" for letting go of upadanakkhandha. > It is just a different wording, not a different idea from the > Buddha's. > > Think more positively, please. > --------------------- > > As we have seen from previous threads, all Buddhist writers and > commentators agree: Ven T's teaching is heterodoxy. The "not-self > strategy" is solely Ven T's interpretation - it is taught by no other > Buddhist teacher. > > Ken H > =========================== Thank you all. Tep === #89677 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 1:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ugghatitannu, Vipancitannu, Neyya, Padaparama can someone translate pali please? nilovg Dear Alex, Op 1-sep-2008, om 1:06 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > there are 4 types of induviduals: > Ugghatitannu, Vipancitannu, Neyya & Padaparama. > > Can someone please translate what those terms mean? -------- N: I quote from Kh Sujin's "Survey of Paramattha Dhammas": Nina. #89678 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 2:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is a path in Buddhism? jonoabb Hi Tep > 'Tranquillity preceded by insight' indicates BOTH insight and > tranquillity(samatha) are developed. > Yes, I agree. The first 3 ways of attaining arahantship all mention both insight and tranquillity, so both are being developed in each case. As I see it, the attainment of arahantship being described by these 3 ways is as follows: First way: Attainment of arahantship is preceded by high attainment of samatha (including jhana) Second way: Attainment of arahantship comes before attainment of jhana Third way: Attainment of arahantship is preceded by attainment of jhana *and* the attainment of arahantship is based on jhana. The aspect of enlightenment being *based on* the previously attained jhana is what distinguishes the third way from the first. Thanks for the comment. Jon #89679 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 2:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarcasm upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 8/31/2008 6:59:39 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: Hello Howard, - I am happy for you that you have found "much value" in the DSG Abhidhamma path. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Tep, you might try to be a bit more precise in your paraphrasing. I said nothing of a "DSG Abhidhamma path." I said, in speaking of being participants on this fine and welcoming list, and, as you do quote below: "Evidently we both find much of value here, Tep." ---------------------------------------------------- > >T: Since the DSG Curriculum does not consider practice of the Dhamma, should it be accredited ? ------------------------------------------ >Howard: By what accrediting authority? ;-)) Evidently we both find much of value here, Tep. :-) -------------------------------------- Well, in my case I am hanging on here mostly because I am a lonely retiree. ;-)) ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Geez, there's always bingo at an old folks' home! ;-)) ----------------------------------------------------- Tep ============================== With metta, Old codger retiree, Howard #89680 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 7:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Questions regarding Ignorance nilovg Dear Jessica, Op 1-sep-2008, om 4:33 heeft jessicamui het volgende geschreven: > In SN III 22.126-128, Buddha said that when the instructed noble > disciple "understand" that the 5 aggregates are subject to arising and > vanishing then one "has arrived at true knowledge". > > Regarding the above description (based on Bhikku Bodhi's translation), > my question is that does "true knowledge" only applicable to the > "instructed noble disciple" ? Does that mean only through real > experience, i.e. the practice of insight mediation to "see" the 3 > Marks, > then it counts as "true knowledge"? What about understanding it > intellectually through studying the Dhamma and reflection ? ------- N: First of all, let us make a cross reference to §113, on ignorance, in the same section. Here ignorance is defined as not knowing the body, its arising, its the ceasing and the way leading to its ceasing, and the same for the other khandhas. The Commentary states that this refers to not knowing the four noble truths. As to wisdom, here the opposite is said. Only the noble disciple, the ariyan disciple has realized the four noble truths. But in order to reach this stage there has to be pariyatti that leads to patipatti and this to pativedha, the realization of the truth. Pariyatti is not mere reflection. Also outside the Dhamma philosophers were pondering over the temporariness of all things in life. We have to understand what awareness and understanding of the phenomena of our life are, how to develop insight. I quote an old post: You can find in the suttas many explanations, beginning with Kindred Sayings V, Setting in Motion the Wheel of dhamma: Dhamma cakkha pavattana sutta. The Buddha's first sutta. We should not forget that there are three rounds of understanding the four noble Truths. I quote from a former post: -------- > > J: From Abhidhamma perspective, does ignorance exist in every mind > moment ? > If it exists in all, or some mind moments, can it be "removed" > momentarily through reflecting the Dhamma ? ------- N: Ignorance arises with each akusala citta, not with kusala citta. If one reflects wisely on Dhamma ignorance does not arise at that moment. There is also the latent tendency of ignorance, lying dormant in each citta, also in kusala citta. Latent tendencies do not arise, but they condition the arising of akusala citta. Only the arahat has eradicated the latent tendency of ignorance. -------- Nina. > #89681 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 3:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 4a upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 8/31/2008 10:48:50 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ----- <. . .> H: > And what is mindfulness of what arises, Ken? Some pie in the sky? Nothing conceivably real? Something good only in theory and not relevant to our actual lives? ------ I am not sure which kind of mindfulness you are referring to here, Howard. So I don't know how to take your comment about 'pie in the sky' does it represent your sarcastic attitude or mine? :-) If by "mindfulness of what arises" you mean mindfulness of people and cars in the name of satipatthana then, yes, 'pie in the sky' would be my comment. :-) --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I mean mindfulness of what actually arises, which is dhammas-in-relation: fleeting physical and mental phenomena, all conditioned, dependent, and not-self, and they are all that there is. Where are they to be found? Wherever we "look". Everything that seems to be other than these is just a collection of these, misconceived as a singular phenomenon. But mindfulness is not wisdom. It is staying present with what actually arises as opposed to getting lost in sloth & torpor or lost in thought, and it is the primary portal to wisdom. ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------- H: > Mindfulness develops in stages. There is weaker & there is stronger. There is no context, save unconsciousness, in which it is fully impossible, ------------------------- Yes, but weak mindfulness of conventional realities develops into strong mindfulness of conventional realities. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: No, that is not so. It develops into strong mindfulness of reality, en abling the eventual seeing through the veil of illusion. Eaten food doesn't develop into more food but into bodily tissues. Infants don't develop into infants, but into adults. We start where we are, not where we hallucinate that we are. -------------------------------------------------- Weak mindfulness of absolute realities develops into strong mindfulness of absolute realities. There is no link between the two lines of development. --------------------------- H: > and there is no context in which, given adequate mindfulness and other wholesome conditions, insight into the tripartite nature of conditioned phenomena may not arise. No circumstances are too ordinary or conventionally crude for breakthroughs to occur. ---------------------------- You insist on using the term 'mindfulness' in the conventional sense as if it were some kind of ongoing practice in preparation for insight. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Your mindfulness is a dream that you know nothing of. Mindfulness, staying present at ever-finer levels of observation, develops and strengthens only by consistently attending to what arises with great care and genuine *looking*. It begins with the maintaining of alertness. Mindfulness is a guarding of the mind, a monitoring that remembers to stay present. Cut off all the thinking, and LOOK! ---------------------------------------------------- According to the Dhamma, samma-sati is a momentary conditioned dhamma that arises with insight. That is the only kind of [right] mindfulness the Dhamma teaches. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: You think too much, Ken, and look too little. --------------------------------------------------- Ken H =========================== With metta, Howard /And how is a monk mindful? There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is how a monk is mindful. And how is a monk alert? When going forward & returning, he makes himself fully alert; when looking toward & looking away... when bending & extending his limbs... when carrying his outer cloak, his upper robe & his bowl... when eating, drinking, chewing, & savoring... when urinating & defecating... when walking, standing, sitting, falling asleep, waking up, talking, & remaining silent, he makes himself fully alert. This is how a monk is alert./ (From the Alanna Sutta) #89682 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 3:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Big Difference between 'No Self' and 'No Individuals' .. He... upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and all) - In a message dated 9/1/2008 4:01:47 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: Dear KenH and Alex, Howard, Swee, Herman, - May I call for help from Alex, Howard, Swee and Herman to please give your thoughts about the conversation below? =========================== I'm sorry, Tep, but I will bow out on this. I would find to too burdensome and wearying. With metta, Howard #89683 From: "jessicamui" Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 7:35 am Subject: Re: Questions regarding Ignorance jessicamui --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: <....> > N: Ignorance arises with each akusala citta, not with kusala citta. > If one reflects wisely on Dhamma ignorance does not arise at that > moment. There is also the latent tendency of ignorance, lying dormant > in each citta, also in kusala citta. Latent tendencies do not arise, > but they condition the arising of akusala citta. Only the arahat has > eradicated the latent tendency of ignorance. > -------- Dear Nina, Thank you very much for the reply. It helps my understanding about the topic greatly. But regarding the last part - about the presence of the Ignorance in the mind. If we contemplate the Dhamma through wise reflection, or through meditation, then there is not ignorance in the mind at that moment. But the sense of "I" still exists in the mind while we are doing good deeds like giving dana. Can we say that the ignorance exists if the "I"ness exists in the mind? Thanks again for your answers ! Jessica. #89684 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 10:04 am Subject: Re: Anatta sanna (attn: Ken, Tep and all) truth_aerator Dear Tep and Ken, "And what is the perception of not-self? There is the case where a monk — having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building — reflects thus: 'The eye is not-self, forms are not- self; the ear is not-self, sounds are not-self; the nose is not-self, aromas are not-self; the tongue is not-self, flavors are not-self; the body is not-self, tactile sensations are not-self; the intellect is not- self, ideas are not-self.' Thus he remains focused on not-selfness with regard to the six inner & outer sense media. This is called the perception of not-self. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.060.than.html Note: "having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building — *reflects* thus: " 2nd) Buddha has never said that there is no conventional self, or at least tried his best not to say it directly. Quite the opposite, he taught suffering and cessation of it. If there truly isn't anyone (not even conventional & impermanent person), then there is no suffering and no cessation of suffering as suffering requires someone impermanent to suffer. ============================================= "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings (sustenances), & biases. But one such as this does not get involved with or cling to these attachments, clingings, fixations of awareness, biases, or obsessions; nor is he resolved on 'my self.' He has no uncertainty or doubt that just stress, when arising, is arising; stress, when passing away, is passing away. In this, his knowledge is independent of others. It's to this extent, Kaccayana, that there is right view. "'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: [alex: Dependent Origination] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.015.than.html Buddha has frequently used "self grown great" (mahatta) or (attadipa), attakaro and many other similiar words. I suggest someone reads: http://www.attan.com/againstanatta.pdf A question: Doesn't the whole discussion "There is no Self" itself focuses on imaginary Self delusion that we are trying to get rid off? Buddha has taught that there *IS* a dependently arisen mind-body process that we call a person. But for whatever reason, he often refused to say that Atta exists or doesn't. Maybe it is something to be found out, and that finding out is through a specific purpose. Perhaps the awakening isn't in recieving ready made answers but through a process of achieving them. Best wishes, Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > > > Dear KenH and Alex, Howard, Swee, Herman, - > > May I call for help from Alex, Howard, Swee and Herman to please give > your thoughts about the conversation below? > > Ken, the reason I call for inputs from our friends, who know both of > us well, is because I respect their impartial analysis and knowledge > of Buddhism. > #89685 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 10:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ugghatitannu, Vipancitannu, Neyya, Padaparama can someone translate pali please? truth_aerator Dear Nina, > -------- > N: I quote from Kh Sujin's "Survey of Paramattha Dhammas": > that > with regard to the grasping of the Dhamma there are four types of > people: people who quickly grasp the Dhamma and can realize the >four noble Truths and attain enlightenment even during a discourse > (ugghatitaññú), Does "enlightment" refer to stream entry only, or Arhatship as well? If it means Arhatship, then very few if any people achieved Arhatship just by listening to Buddha's discource. MahaMoggallana, Sariputta, Anurrudha, Ananda and others couldn't. Rahula couldn't. Yet I suspect that in the case of two chief disciples, they were the highest class. Thank you very much for your reply, Best wishes, Alex #89686 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 10:16 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is a path in Buddhism? truth_aerator Hi Jon, Tep, Ken and all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott > wrote: > > Hi Tep > Second way: Attainment of arahantship comes before attainment of >jhana Sutta quote for 7 fold Arhat, please. Jhana is temporary letting go of unwholesome states and strong attention toward a wholesome dhamma, thus it is absurd to speculate about an Arhat (or any Ariya) being prior to any, however brief and momentary, attainment of Jhana or jhana like citta moment. Remember that ALL ariyas have 5 faculties, one of which is samadhi indriya. Even *IF* we consider Jhana to be momentary citta state, it still arises PRIOR to the moment of Arhatship (and perhaps prior to the moment of Stream entry) even if for a split second. Best wishes, Alex #89687 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 10:31 am Subject: Re: The Big Difference between 'No Self' and 'No Individuals' truth_aerator Dear KenH and all interested, > "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > We were talking about the "not-self strategy" as taught by Ven > Thanissao. > > ------------- > T: Before the mind can "relax", first it has to be calm and non- > distracted (samadhi) by what is seen, i.e. concentrated mind. > That "seeing the world *as it truly is* " is conditioned by > concentration. [Upanisa Sutta] > ------------- > > Yes, that is how I thought the theory went. And it is very >different from the way I understand the Dhamma. I understand >that, "seeing the world as it truly is" is something ***we can >possibly do*** right now - provided we have heard the true Dhamma. Dear Ken, how "we can possibly do" if there is no such thing as "I" and "practice" (do, doing, action)? You contradict yourself here. Second, are you saying that "Samadhi being proximate condition to seeing as it is" is theory only? Great. You aren't following a sutta and many other suttas, thus there is no reason for a Buddhist like Tep to argue with you. Furthermore the factors that are proximate to Samadhi, are also Jhana factors and Samadhi is often translated as 4 Jhanas. Remember that "Jhana is the path to awakening" MN36. I guess there is no reason to argue with Ken, because you aren't talking Buddhism. Still, I wish you all the best, Alex #89688 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 11:19 am Subject: Re: Anatta sanna (attn: Ken, Tep and all) dhammanusarin Dear Alex, - You wrote: > > Dear Tep and Ken, > ... ... > > Buddha has taught that there *IS* a dependently arisen mind-body process that we call a person. But for whatever reason, he often refused to say that Atta exists or doesn't. Maybe it is something to be found out, and that finding out is through a specific purpose. Perhaps the awakening isn't in recieving ready made answers but through a process of achieving them. > > > Best wishes, > > > Alex > > T: Plain and simple, Alex. He "often refused to say that Atta exists or doesn't" mainly because those two thinkings are extreme views. Read the following Sutta : "If, Aananda, when asked by the Wanderer: 'Is there a self?,' I had replied to him: 'There is a self,' then, Aananda, that would be siding with the recluses and brahmins who are eternalists. "But if, Aananda, when asked: 'Is there not a self?' I had replied that it does not exist, that, Aananda, would be siding with those recluses and brahmins who are annihilationists. [SN 44.10] The anatta view is a samma-ditthi and rightly it is a middle path that avoids extremes. Tep === #89689 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 11:39 am Subject: Re: Anatta sanna (attn: Ken, Tep and all) truth_aerator Dear Tep and all, >--- "Tep" wrote: > > Dear Alex, - > T: Plain and simple, Alex. He "often refused to say that Atta >exists or doesn't" mainly because those two thinkings are extreme >views. Read the following Sutta : > > > "If, Aananda, when asked by the Wanderer: 'Is there a self?,' I had > replied to him: 'There is a self,' then, Aananda, that would be > siding with the recluses and brahmins who are eternalists. Buddha has affirmed the Anatta of the 5 aggregates (or Sabbe Dhamma, 6 internal & 6 external AN 10.60). However, > "But if, Aananda, when asked: 'Is there not a self?' I had replied > that it does not exist, that, Aananda, would be siding with those > recluses and brahmins who are annihilationists. [SN 44.10] Saying Atta doesn't exist IS annihiliationism, nihilism. > The anatta view is a samma-ditthi and rightly it is a middle path > that avoids extremes. > > Tep > === It is interesting to go over Udana 8.3 " There *is*, monks, an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there would not be the case that emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated is discerned." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.8.03.than.html Hmmm. That has to be read many times... I had to reconsider few things.... Best wishes, Alex #89690 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 11:59 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is a path in Buddhism? dhammanusarin Dear Jon (Alex and others), - We started with this sutta quote from AN 4.170 Yuganaddha Sutta: In Tandem. Here the sutta describes four kinds of path. These four paths all lead to arahantship. ... [1] "There is the case where a monk has developed insight preceded by tranquillity. As he develops insight preceded by tranquillity, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. T: Samatha is developed first, then vipassana is developed to enter the arahant path. More development is done on this path. Both samatha & vipassana are required for arahantship. [2] "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity preceded by insight. As he develops tranquillity preceded by insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. T: This case is opposite to Case 1. Vipassana first, then samatha. Again, both samatha & vipassana are required for arahantship. [3] "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity in tandem with insight. As he develops tranquillity in tandem with insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. T: Both samatha & vipassana are developed in tandem. Again, both samatha & vipassana are required for arahantship. [4] "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated. In him the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. T: I have no idea what the Comm means ! But it is unmistakenly clear that it is samatha when "his mind grows steady inwardly, settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated". Again, because of samatha the arahant path is born, and he follows it to fruition. ====================== > > > Jon (#89600): I take the second path (the case where a monk has developed tranquillity preceded by insight) to be that of the person who attains enlightenment without having attained any particular level of samatha. > > Tep (#89616): 'Tranquillity preceded by insight' indicates BOTH insight and tranquillity(samatha) are developed. >Jonathan (#89678) :Yes, I agree. The first 3 ways of attaining arahantship all mention both insight and tranquillity, so both are being developed in each case. >As I see it, the attainment of arahantship being described by these 3 ways is as follows: First way: Attainment of arahantship is preceded by high attainment of samatha (including jhana) Second way: Attainment of arahantship comes before attainment of jhana Third way: Attainment of arahantship is preceded by attainment of jhana *and* the attainment of arahantship is based on jhana. >The aspect of enlightenment being *based on* the previously attained jhana is what distinguishes the third way from the first. ................................................. Thank you for the different comment because of different understanding. Tep === #89691 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 12:22 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What is a path in Buddhism? truth_aerator Dear Tep, Jon and others, >--- "Tep" wrote: > > Dear Jon (Alex and others), - > > [4] "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its >restlessness concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of >insight] well under control. There comes a time when his mind grows >steady inwardly, settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated. >In him the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues >it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his >fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. > > T: I have no idea what the Comm means ! But it is unmistakenly >clear that it is samatha when "his mind grows steady inwardly, >settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated". Again, because of >samatha the arahant path is born, and he follows it to fruition. Corruption of insight is one of the things that happen during intensive Vipassana practice. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mahasi/progress.html#ch4.4 Again, in the 4th we have BOTH samatha & vipassana practices. ===== Lets study 4 paths to the goal (AN Book 4, Patipaddavaggo) http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara2/4-catukkanipata/017-patipadavaggo-e.html There are 4 ways to the goal (quick or slow) & (pleasant or painful) 2x2=4 Speed is according to 5 faculties being sharp or dull. We can't change it right now. The mode of progress is dependent: a) On the amount of defilements present. b) Specific themes. Note: 5 Faculties are present in ALL modes. The emphasis is on how much they are developed & the amount of hindrances. If we consider ourselves to be with dull faculties & painful progress then what did the Buddha recommend? ============ "Here, bhikkhus, a certain one abides reflecting loathsomeness in the body, loathsomeness in food, detachment from all the world, seeing impermanence in all determinations and the perception of death is thoroughly established in him. He abides relying on these five powers of a trainer- Such as the powers of faith, shame remorse, effort and wisdom. The five faculties of faith, effort, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom are blunt in him as a result he realizes the destruction of desires slowly with successive leading. Bhikkhus, to this is said the difficult means and slow realization." 3. Asubhasuttam On loathsomeness AN 4:17 Patipadavaggo =================================================== Best wishes, Alex #89692 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 1:08 pm Subject: Re: What is a path in Buddhism? AN7.46 sanna sutta truth_aerator Continuation > If we consider ourselves to be with dull faculties & painful >progress then what did the Buddha recommend? > ============ > "Here, bhikkhus, a certain one abides reflecting loathsomeness in >the body, loathsomeness in food, detachment from all the world, >seeing impermanence in all determinations and the perception of >death is thoroughly established in him. Bhikkhus, to this is said >the difficult means and slow realization." >3. Asubhasuttam On loathsomeness AN 4:17 Patipadavaggo > =================================================== In AN7.46 there is a description of 7 practices for those interested. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an07/an07.046.than.html Anyone interested can read them and we can discuss them. Best wishes, Alex #89693 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 1:16 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What is a path in Buddhism? dhammanusarin Dear Alex (Jon and others), - I am grateful to you for giving me the clue about the ten "corruptions of insight" which are known as 'vipassanupakkilesa'. I learned this many years ago and forgot. The Visuddhimagga also discusses these ten vipassanupakkilesas in detail. >Alex: Corruption of insight is one of the things that happen during intensive Vipassana practice. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mahasi/progress.html#ch4.4 T: Another big gift of meditation you just gave me today is the "five powers of of a trainer" to be earnestly pursued by a pitiful practitioner (like me) who has dull faculties and painfully slow progress in both samatha & vipassana. It should be strongly noted that these "five powers of a trainer" is not the same as 'bala': since sati & samadhi are replaced with hiri & ottappa. I think I see the reason. Hiri & ottappa constantly remind and urge the practitioner to always be on alert to defend himself from the relentless attacks by kilesas, days and nights, nonstop. Thank you a whole lot, Tep === #89694 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 6:50 pm Subject: Re: The Big Difference between 'No Self' and 'No Individuals' .. He... kenhowardau Hi Howard, Tep and Alex, Tep wrote: ------------- > > May I call for help from Alex, Howard, Swee and Herman to please give your thoughts about the conversation below? ------------- to which Howard replied: -------------------------- > I'm sorry, Tep, but I will bow out on this. I would find to too burdensome and wearying. -------------------------- Who are you calling burdensome? :-) DSG has discussed the teachings of Thanissaro B many times. Both Tep and Alex have played central roles in some of those discussions. Authorities from the Buddhist world at large (not only from DSG) have been quoted. Ven Dhammanando has given his opinion. Always, the case has been proved beyond doubt that the Buddha *did* teach no-self and *did not* teach the not-self strategy. The latter was purely TB's invention. And so peace reigns over DSG for a time. Then, of course, the issue flares up again as if nothing had happened: --------- T: > Plain and simple, Alex. He "often refused to say that Atta exists or doesn't" mainly because those two thinkings are extreme views. Read the following Sutta : "If, Aananda, when asked by the Wanderer: 'Is there a self?,' I had replied --------- Tep and Alex, I don't mind if DSG goes over it all again. However, I would like to know why we are being asked to. Can you assure me that you are prepared to listen? Or are you on a mission to promote TB's eternalist teachings at all costs (regardless of what anyone says)? Ken H PS: Some evidence of previous discussions is to be found in UP's: Anatta3 -ATI, No-self?, Non-self?, Not-self? Thanissaro Bhikkhu's take.. 34543, 34774, 34782, 37725, 64891, 69792, 69824, 70888, 70915, 74918, 75388, 75509, 78903, 78959, 79144, 79156, 79167 #89695 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 7:05 pm Subject: Ven.TB isn't eternalist. Don't slander a good monk. truth_aerator KenH, Tep, Howard and all, >"kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Howard, Tep and Alex, > Tep and Alex, I don't mind if DSG goes over it all again. However, I > would like to know why we are being asked to. Can you assure me that > you are prepared to listen? Or are you on a mission to promote TB's > eternalist teachings at all costs (regardless of what anyone says)? > > Ken H Eternalism implies that Self is one of the 5 aggregates. Neither did Venerable TB, nor the Buddha has stated it. "in this discourse the Buddha explicitly phrases the not-self teaching in such a way as to refute any notion of cosmic self. Instead of centering his discussion of not-self on the five aggregates, he focuses on the first four aggregates plus two other possible objects of self-identification, both more explicitly cosmic in their range: (1) all that can be seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect; and (2) the cosmos as a whole, eternal and unchanging. In fact, the Buddha holds this last view up to particular ridicule, as the teaching of a fool, for two reasons that are developed at different points in this discourse: (1) If the cosmos were "me," then it must also be "mine," which is obviously not the case. (2) There is nothing in the experience of the cosmos that fits the bill of being eternal, unchanging, or that deserves to be clung to as "me" or "mine."" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.022.than.html That refutes Ven.TB being an eternalist. Period. End of discussion. Best wishes, Alex #89696 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Sep 1, 2008 3:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Big Difference between 'No Self' and 'No Individuals' .. He... upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Tep & Alex) - In a message dated 9/1/2008 9:50:26 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, Tep and Alex, Tep wrote: ------------- > > May I call for help from Alex, Howard, Swee and Herman to please give your thoughts about the conversation below? ------------- to which Howard replied: -------------------------- > I'm sorry, Tep, but I will bow out on this. I would find to too burdensome and wearying. -------------------------- Who are you calling burdensome? :-) ---------------------------------------------- Howard: LOL! I said "it," not "him"!!! ;-)) ========================= With metta, Howard #89697 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 12:22 am Subject: Ouch! and Samvega for Azita sarahprocter... Dear Azita & all, I was glad to see your note and yes, it all comes back to the understanding now whatever unexpected dhammas arise. The past 'nonsense' is all gone. Talking about the 'unexpected', in the evening after the Saturday at Num's house, Jon was pottering around and packing in our hotel room when I suddenly heard a loud scream, a very big 'ouch'. We'd bumped into a door-post and we knew immediately he had a fractured toe. It was hanging out at a 45 degree angle. Lots of arnica, ice and the night on the bathroom floor with his leg up on the side of the bath later and he was almost fit for our trip home - in wheel-chairs at both airports which usually involve a lot of walking. All a very new experience for him, but still the same realities appearing through the same door-ways. (At Hong Kong airport, we came out of one lift and he found himself amongst the South African paralympic athletes, all in their wheel-chairs!) Anyway, he's had great caring treatment everywhere and is in good hands (mostly mine(!), but also Dr Ma's) here, so is doing fine. As Nina will recall, I happen to be a fractured toe expert:-) More past 'nonsense' and back to my books. I believe this is the para out of the Vism which you were asking about with regard to the Pali: Vism IV, 63 (Nanamoli transl) with some of the Pali terms included by me: "How does he encourage the mind on an occasion(samaye)when it should be encouraged (sampaha.msitabba.m)? When his mind is listless owing to sluggishness in the exercise of understanding (pa~n~naapayogamandataaya)or to failure to attain the bliss of peace (upasamasukhaanadhigamena), then he should stimulate it by reviewing the eight grounds for a sense of urgency (tadaa na.m a.t.thasa.mvegavatthupaccavekkha.neni sa.mvejeti......" So, 'bliss of peace' which we were wondering about is a translation of 'upasama + sukha'. Upasama means calmness or peace as in 'recollection of peace'(upasama), and sukhaa means happiness as in sukha vedana (happy feeling). And as we were reminded, always sa.mvega with pa~n~naa and the other sammaa factors leading to further right effort, further understanding and so on. Enjoy the rest of your stay in Thailand with all that's good and wise. Metta, Sarah ======== #89698 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 12:47 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 9, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, The Bodhi-tree in Anurådhapura which is near to the “Ruvanvelisåya” is another place of worship we visited. The sacred tree stands on a high terrace and it is surrounded by a golden rail. Generally one does not have access to the tree, but one of the monks who was in attendance allowed us to go up to the terrace, in order to pay respect. One night the same monk arranged for about a hundred white lotus flowers which we placed all around the tree. The monks who were leading the procession around the tree chanted stanzas, and we had an opportunity to look at the new sprout of the tree that had grown recently, several months ago. It seems that we are far away from the Buddha’s time, but so long as satipaììhåna is taught and pratised we are not far away. The old city of Anurådhapura and its surroundings are full of stupas, old monuments and places of commemoration. One of our hosts took us in a jeep to Tantirimale, which is not far from Anurådhapura. Saògamitta and her retinue who brought the sapling of the Bodhi-tree from India, stopped in Tantirimale for a rest, on the way to Anurådhapura. A shoot of the Bodhi-tree was planted in this spot. Today one can still see this tree which grows on a rocky ground where nothing else will grow. In the olden times several saplings of the Bo- dhitree were planted in different places, and later on thirty-two saplings were distributed all over the island. Many relics of the Buddha have been brought from India to Sri Lanka. The relic of the Buddha’s right collarbone has been enshrined in “Thupåråma”, which is situated in Anurådhapura. A few families in Sri Lanka are in possession of very small particles of the Buddha’s relics. One of our hosts in Anurådhapura had in his shrineroom a particle of a relic of the Buddha and also a relic of an arahat which had been given to him by his aunt. It is said that so long as one practises the teachings the relics in one’s house will not vanish. But when one neglects the teachings they will disappear. Our host showed us the relics, and this was the first time he had shown them to people outside his family. He took the relics out of their caskets and we payed respect with flowers, incense and candles. We looked at the relics, thinking of the Buddha’s exhortation to be mindful of the reality appearing now. Again we found that the Buddha is so near while one studies the present reality. The Tooth relic of the Buddha which came to Sri Lanka in the fourth century A.C. had been enshrined in different capitals in the course of time. Today the relic is in the “Dalada Maligawa” in Kandy. Once a year a replica of the casket which contains the relic is carried around in procession: the “Kandy Perahera”. An elephant with a curled tusk, a “Tusker”, carries the casket around. The relic itself can never be taken outside the temple. The sanctuary where the relic has been enshrined is generally not open to the public, but we obtained permission to enter. Afterwards we walked around the shrineroom three times, paying respect at the “four quarters”. All these places of worship in Sri Lanka are occasions to recollect the Buddha and his techings and to be mindful of the present reality. Through mindfulness we can learn that life is only one moment of experiencing an object. ******* Nina. #89699 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 1:22 am Subject: Metta sarahprocter... Dear Friends, During the last session at the Foundation, we were discussing more on metta and the Metta Sutta. In passing, I made a comment about the last lines of the Metta Sutta as referring to the development of insight, the discerning of namas and rupas. For those who have attained jhanas, even these jhana factors have to be known as namas, as elements which don't belong to anyone at all. These are the lines I was referring to, taken here from Ven Samahita's full quote of the sutta: groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/47366 "He that do not traffic with the various views, Perfected in seeing what is right & wrong, Purged of lust for sense-pleasures, he will surely not come back here to any womb..." I wrote before (#47511) S:> Ven Samahita also quoted from the Lovingkindness Discourse in Khuddakapaa.tha (Minor Readings). This is interesting because in the last stanza and commentary to it, we read (quoting from PTS translation now): .... "And now, since lovingkindness is near to [wrong] view of self because it has creatures for its object, he therefore completed the teaching with the following stanza: "But he that traffics not with views Is virtuous with perfected seeing Till purged of greed for sense-desires He will surely come no more to any womb." "He did this as a preventative against [their straying into] the thicket of [speculative] views (see Mi 8) by showing those bhikkhus how the Noble Plane is reached through making that same loving-kindness jhana the basis for insight. "Its meaning is this. After emerging from the abiding in lovingkindness jhana, which was specified (detailed) thus ' This is Divine Abiding here, they say', [he discerns] the [non-material-form] ideas there [in that jhana] consisting in thinking and exploring and the rest [S: i.e jhana factors][which he defines as 'name'.][S: namas]Then, following on the defining, etc, of these [jhana factors as 'name'], he discerns the ideas of [material] form there, [which he defines as 'form'.][S: rupas] "By means of this delimitation of name-and-form 'he traffics not with views (di.t.thi~n ca anupagamma), [avoiding that by discerning] in the way stated thus 'A heap of mere determinations; No creature can be found herein' (S i 135), till he eventually becomes virtuous (siilavaa) with the kind of virtue that is supramundane since he is now perfected (sampanno) in the right view belonging to the Path of Stream Entry, which is called seeing (dassanena), and which is associated with that supramundane virtue" Later in the conclusion... "There the bhikkhus maintained lovingkindness in being, making that the basis, they established insight [into the three general characteristics of impermanence, suffering and not-self,] till all of them reached Arahantship...." < .... Metta, Sarah ========= #89700 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 1:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions regarding Ignorance nilovg Dear Jessica, Op 1-sep-2008, om 16:35 heeft jessicamui het volgende geschreven: > But regarding the last part - about the presence of the Ignorance in > the mind. If we contemplate the Dhamma through wise reflection, or > through meditation, then there is not ignorance in the mind at that > moment. But the sense of "I" still exists in the mind while we are > doing good deeds like giving dana. Can we say that the ignorance > exists if the "I"ness exists in the mind? ------- N: You observed very well when saying, Kusala cittas and akusala cittas alternate and since they arise and fall away so rapidly, it is not easy to discern different moments. At the moment of kusala citta, such as when giving daana, there is not at the same time clinging to self, no wrong view, di.t.thi or ignorance. Ignorance arises with every akusala citta, and wrong view does not arise with every citta, it arises only with four types of lobha- muulacitta, citta rooted in attachment. But those cittas are also accompanied by moha, ignorance. Ignorance covers up the true nature of realities, it does not know when there is kusala citta and when akusala citta. For instance, attachment can be accompanied by pleasant feeling or by indifferent feeling. Many moments of cittas rooted in attachment and accompanied by indifferent feeling arise in a day, but we do not know them. Whenever we want to go to another room, take hold of a plate or a glass, there is likely to be lobha, and ignorance covers up the truth. When wrong view arises there is a wrong interpretation of realities, it sees them in a distorted way. For instance, when someone else speaks harsh words to us, we may not accept that the hearing of unpleasant sound is vipaaka, the result of a past action we committed. We blame that person and believe that he is the real cause of the hearing of such unpleasant sound. When ignorance arises there is not always wrong view and when wrong view arises there is always ignorance. The person who has attained the first stage of enlightenment, the streamwinner, has eradicated wrong view, but he still has ignorance; akusala cittas still arise for him. Ignorance is completely eradicated by the arahat. You were speaking about a sense of self. We may cling to a sense of self just by lobha, not necessarily by wrong view, or with conceit and at the moment of conceit there is no wrong view at the same time. When there is conceit we find ourselves very important. When we firmly believe that the body is mine, the mind is mine, and we think that the mind lasts, there is wrong view. Thus, when noticing a sense of self it is not easy to know precisely whether that is just clinging without wrong view or with wrong view, or with conceit. ****** Nina. #89701 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 2:26 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 296, 297 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 296, 297. Intro: the following section (296) shows that five causes in the present life condition rebirth in the future. These five causes include: ignorance, kamma-formations, craving, clinging and volition which is kamma-process becoming. In paragraph 297 it is shown that there is a fivefold fruit: rebirth- linking, which is 'consciousness', descent [into the womb], which is 'mentality-materiality', sensitivity, which is 'sense base', contact and feeling.). ------------- Text Vis. 296: 'There are five causes now as well' means craving, and so on. Craving, clinging and becoming are given in the text. But when becoming is included, the formations that precede it or that are associated with it are included too. And by including craving and clinging, the ignorance associated with them, deluded by which a man performs kamma, is included too. -------- N: The Tiika adds to formations, sa”nkhaara, aayuuhana-sa”nkhaara, the kamma-formations that precede bhava, becoming (kamma-process becoming), or accompany it. --------- Text Vis.: So they are five. Hence it is said: 'Here [in the present becoming], with the maturing of the bases 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 here in the [present] kamma-process becoming are conditions for rebirth-linking in the future' (Ps.i,52). Herein, the words 'Here [in the present becoming], with the maturing of the bases' point out delusion existing at the time of the performance of the kamma in one whose bases have matured. The rest is clear. ------- N: The Tiika explains that when the sense-bases of a baby boy have not yet matured, there is an abundance of bhavangacittas and hence generating kamma capable of being kamma-formation (ayuuhana) is not possible. As to the phrase: this points to delusion that has become a condition for kamma, not merely delusion accompanying kamma. ---------- Text Vis.: 297. (d) 'And in the future fivefold fruit': the five beginning with consciousness. These are expressed by the term 'birth'. But 'ageing-and-death' is the ageing and the death of these [five] themselves. Hence it is said: 'In the future there is rebirth-linking, which is 'consciousness'; there is descent [into the womb], which is 'mentality-materiality'; there is sensitivity, which is 'sense base'; there is what is touched, which is 'contact'; there is what is felt, which is 'feeling'; thus these five things in the future rebirth-process becoming have their condition in kamma done here [in the present becoming]' (Ps.i,52]. So this [Wheel of Becoming] has twenty spokes with these qualities. ------------- Conclusion: As we read in the text: < These are expressed by the term 'birth'. But 'ageing-and-death' is the ageing and the death of these [five] themselves.> These five are the fivefold fruit of rebirth- linking, which is 'consciousness', descent [into the womb], which is 'mentality-materiality', sensitivity, which is 'sense base', contact and feeling. Ageing and death are the consequences of birth. This shows that whatever arises is dukkha, it is led onwards to its cessation. The Tiika adds another summary that is also found in the “Dispeller of Delusion” (I, p. 237), stating that in the previous life there were five kamma-constituents (kammasambhaara) and now five resultant dhammas; and that now there are five kamma-constituents and in the future five resultant dhammas. Thus ten dhammas are kamma and ten are results. It states that The Tiika explains that as to the kamma-constituents, kamma- sambhaara, ignorance, craving and clinging that assist kamma are also kammasambhaara. The term sambhaara can be translated as accumulation or constituent part. The Tiika refers to the part of the five links that are kamma, as ignorance etc.(avijjaadayo, to begin with ignorance) and the part of the five links that are vipaaka as consciousness, etc. (vi~n~naa.naadayo, to begin with consciousness). These are abridgements or summaries (sa”nkhepo) of respectively kamma and vipaaka, it states. The Visuddhimagga texts on the Dependent Origination repeat all the time the causes of the past that give fruits at the present, and the causes at the present that will give fruits in the future. These texts with all their repetitions are awsome reminders. It is said again and again how much we cling and how this leads to rebirth again and again. ****** Nina. #89702 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 2:29 am Subject: BE AWARE OF THE RIGHT OBJECT AT THE RIGHT TIME (Intro) sarahprocter... Dear Robert K, Nina, Azita & all, Robert reminded us that it's about 20 years since Alan Driver (ex Phra Dhammadharo) died in the car crash and Nina also asked me to share any of his notes we came across. So this seems to be a good time to share some of his words. The following is from a 3-page article in his hand-writing. (I think it's probably the one that in our haste we had mistakenly taken to be "Be Here Now" when we were filing some papers.] I'll post it in extracts, but you're welcome, Robert, to paste these together to put on your website (or in the DSG files). Alan W may wish to do the same. ****** "This doctrine is profouond, hard to see, difficult to understand, calm, sublime, not within the sphere of logic, subtle, to be understood by the wise" BE AWARE OF THE RIGHT OBJECT AT THE RIGHT TIME ***** Metta, Sarah ======== #89703 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 2:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just studying & Sariputta jonoabb Hi Alex >>>> What made Alara Kalama and Udakka Ramaputta so ready to receive >>>> dhamma could only be panna developed in previous lifetimes. > > Please give me the sutta quote when you get the chance. Actually, I have never claimed that everything worth knowing about the teachings is expressly mentioned in the suttas. As you know, the orthodox Theravada teachings include all 3 Pitakas and their commentaries. However, if I come across a relevant sutta passage I'll certainly share it with you. In the meantime, please consider this passage from the sutta you quoted (MN 26), just before the mention of Alara Kalama and Udakka Ramaputta: "Just as in a pond of blue or red or white lotuses, some lotuses that are born and grow in the water thrive immersed in the water without rising out of it, and some other lotuses that are born and grow in the water rest on the water's surface, and some other lotuses that are born and grow in the water rise out of the water and stand clear, unwetted by it; so too, surveying the world with the eye of a Buddha, I saw beings with little dust in their eyes and with much dust in their eyes, with keen faculties and with dull faculties, with good qualities and with bad qualities, easy to teach and hard to teach, and some who dwelt seeing fear and blame in the other world.” What is your understanding of the distinction referred to by the Buddha between beings with little dust in their eyes and beings with much dust in their eyes, given that neither would have heard the Dhamma in that lifetime? >> But see all the Thera- and Theri-Gatha stories, which recount how >> enlightenment was finally attained after developing insight >> lifetime after lifetime under many Buddhas. >> > > Are you sure you are talking about Thera/i gatha? I've read a number > of them, nothing about previous Buddhas. I think you are refering to > Apadana stories. > Yes, my mistake. I was thinking of the commentarial accounts. > >> The enlightenment of a Buddha (and of the great disciples) is >> based on jhana, since the attainment is of the highest order It >> would be wrong to draw any inference from this as to jhana being a >> prerequisite for enlightenment generally. >> > > Please provide sutta quotes when you get the time. > Again, this kind of detail may not be mentioned in the suttas themselves. > I don't like how > you keep ignoring uncomfortable sutta instructions by saying that "it > is for them, not us". I'm not aware of doing this. Please feel free to bring it to my attention if it happens again ;-)) > --- notice that it is aimed for everyone --- > > The Buddha: 'The stream, the stream,' it is said. Now what is the > stream? > > Sariputta: Just this noble eightfold path is the stream: right view, > right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right > effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. > > The Buddha: Well said, Sariputta, well said. Just this noble > eightfold path is the stream...'Streamwinner, streamwinner,' it is > said. Now what is a streamwinner? > > Sariputta: Whoever is endowed with this noble eightfold path is > called a 'streamwinner.' > > The Buddha: Well said, Sariputta, well said. Whoever is endowed with > this noble eightfold path is called a 'streamwinner.' > > — SN 55.5 > Thanks for the sutta quote. Would you mind explaining its significance to the point we have been discussing (jhana as a prerequisite for enlightenment). Thanks. > And of course you know the definition of samma-samadhi. I've quoted > enough of that. > Yes. And I've given my comments on the significance of samma-samadhi being described in terms of the 4 jhanas. Again, please explain the significance. You yourself agree, if I'm not mistaken, that jhana is not a prerequisite for enlightenment at stream-entry level. > [I though about including dozens of quotes and decided not to] ;-)) Thanks. One or two at a time is as much as I can handle ;-)) Jon #89704 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 2:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha taught UNDERSTANDING. Here is what it means. jonoabb Hi Alex > Everything. You build strawmens and attack them. The noble8fold path > can be nicely done through Anapanasati (for example) > > And the teachings are 'come and see', not 'come and argue for 2,500 > years obtuse points of philosophy. > I'm sorry you see it that way, Alex. From my perspective, I'm simply questioning the textual basis claimed by you as support for your views about the development of the path (such as in the passage that follows). I would not consider this "arguing points of philosophy" (abstruse or otherwise)! > After all, Buddha has taught stress and its cessation. In deeper > meditation levels there is less stress present AND as a culmination > of N8P it can serve as a springboard for total liberation and > N10fpath. > OK, I won't ask you for sutta passages this time. I'll just say that it doesn't sound like anything I've come across in my reading of the teachings ;-)) >> Jhana is mentioned in many, many suttas. But to understand its >> role >> in the development of insight, it's necessary to consider exactly >> *what* is said about it (not just count up the number of suttas!!). >> > > As I've showed, the 'understanding' deals with 'letting go' and > letting go can be expressed not just in path attainments, but jhana > attainments as well. > > I could go on, but I should remember and consider the turtle parable > and stop the exchange. OK, if you'd like to stop the exchange, I'm happy to let you have the last word. Jon #89705 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 2:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ugghatitannu, Vipancitannu, Neyya, Padaparama can someone translate pali please? nilovg Dear Alex, Op 1-sep-2008, om 19:09 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > people who quickly grasp the Dhamma and can realize the > >four noble Truths and attain enlightenment even during a discourse > > (ugghatitaññú), > > Does "enlightment" refer to stream entry only, or Arhatship as well? ------- N: Any of the four stages of enlightenment or even the highest, arahatship. It depended on the accumulated wisdom whether a person could go through all four stages, one after the other, to reach arahatship while listening, or whether he could attain one of the three lower stages and attain arahatship later on. Anyway, the person who attained the first stage became an ariyan, assured for liberation from the cycle. -------- > > A: If it means Arhatship, then very few if any people achieved > Arhatship > just by listening to Buddha's discource. > > MahaMoggallana, Sariputta, Anurrudha, Ananda and others couldn't. > Rahula couldn't. Yet I suspect that in the case of two chief > disciples, they were the highest class. ------- N: There were a great number of arahats during the time of the Buddha. And even at the time of the first Council, there were five hundred who attended and rehearsed the texts. ***** Nina. #89706 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 2:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhist teachings jonoabb Hi Alex >> Jon >> >> DN 29: Pasadika Sutta >> >> The Venerable Ananda accompanied by bhikkhu Cunda went to see the >> Buddha to give him the news about the death of Nigantha Nataputta, >> the leader of a well-known sect, and the schism that had arisen >> amongst his disciples. >> >> The Buddha told them that it was natural and to be expected to >> happen in a Teaching which was not well taught, not well imparted, >> not conducive to emancipation, and not taught by one who was >> supremely enlightened. >> Thanks for the general comments (below) on this sutta. However, they don't explain your earlier statement that "DN29 (Pasadika sutta) says that 4 results are obtained from Jhana: Stream ...-> Arhatship." Would you mind quoting the particular passage you have in mind. Thanks. Jon > And it is funny how the exactly same thing has happened to Buddhist > order itself. During Buddha's life itself there was/were schisms by > Devadatta, and afterwards, 20 Buddhist sects have appeared. > > Different Abhidhammas and Sutras were written (and conviently > attributed to the Buddha through some obscure mythology) expounding > the right set of views and refuting the wrong sets of views. > > > Best wishes, > > Alex > #89707 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 2:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] BE AWARE OF THE RIGHT OBJECT AT THE RIGHT TIME (1) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, "This doctrine is profouond, hard to see, difficult to understand, calm, sublime, not within the sphere of logic, subtle, to be understood by the wise" BE AWARE OF THE RIGHT OBJECT AT THE RIGHT TIME by Phra Dhammadharo Following is an explanation of these words. In what sense "Be"? This is not to imply the existence of a "self" or "being" that can be aware, for an inference of this sort would be a manifestation of Di.t.thi; it would contravene the cardinal teaching of the Blessed One which he compassionately taught as follows: "Whether the Tathaagathas appear or not, O Bhikkhus, it remains a fact, an established principle, a natural law that all conditioned things are transient (anicca), sorrowful (dukkha) and that everything is soulless (anatta). This fact the Tathaagatha realizes, understands and when He has realized and understood it, announces, teaches, proclaims, establishes, discloses, analyses, and makes it clear that all conditioned things are transient, sorrowful and that everything is soulless." (Anguttara Nikaaya. Part 1 p.286). The imperative is not intended, as it should be understood from the preceeding* that there is no 'self' to control 'oneself' let alone control another. It should be taken in the sense that awareness is the aim or goal. ****** Metta, Sarah * (S: there are a few words I'm having difficulty reading. I'll ask Jon to check what I type later against the original.) ======= #89708 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 3:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is a path in Buddhism? jonoabb Hi Alex >> Second way: Attainment of arahantship comes before attainment of >> jhana >> > > Sutta quote for 7 fold Arhat, please. > It is not a matter of lacking any of the path factors. There is samma-samadhi, but no (prior) mundane jhana. > Jhana is temporary letting go of unwholesome states and strong > attention toward a wholesome dhamma, thus it is absurd to speculate > about an Arhat (or any Ariya) being prior to any, however brief and > momentary, attainment of Jhana or jhana like citta moment. > The development of samatha/jhana and the development of insight are 2 separate kinds of development. Both involve panna, but the function of the panna is different. In samatha/jhana, panna sees the disadvantage of akusala and of the sense-door impressions that are the object of so much attachment; in insight panna sees the true nature (and 3 characteristics) of conditioned dhammas. The panna of samatha/jhana does not see dhammas as they are and so does not lead to a reduction in the clinging to an idea of 'self' or the clinging to future becoming. This is why samatha/jhana does not in and of itself make the development of insight any easier or quicker. > Remember that ALL ariyas have 5 faculties, one of which is samadhi > indriya. Even *IF* we consider Jhana to be momentary citta state, it > still arises PRIOR to the moment of Arhatship > There is no statement in the suttas (or elsewhere in the texts) to the effect that jhana must arise prior to a moment of enlightenment. There is only the description of the path-factor samma-samadhi in terms of the 4 jhanas. > (and perhaps prior to > the moment of Stream entry) even if for a split second. > I'm not sure what you mean here. I understood your position to be that jhana becomes a requirement at anagami level only. Jon #89709 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 4:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is a path in Buddhism? jonoabb Hi Tep > Dear Jon (Alex and others), - > > We started with this sutta quote from AN 4.170 Yuganaddha Sutta: In > Tandem. Here the sutta describes four kinds of path. These four paths > all lead to arahantship. > ... > [1] "There is the case where a monk has developed insight preceded by > tranquillity. As he develops insight preceded by tranquillity, the > path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he > follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are > abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. > > T: Samatha is developed first, then vipassana is developed to enter > the arahant path. More development is done on this path. Both samatha > & vipassana are required for arahantship. > > [2] "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity > preceded by insight. As he develops tranquillity preceded by insight, > the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As > he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are > abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. > > T: This case is opposite to Case 1. Vipassana first, then samatha. > Again, both samatha & vipassana are required for arahantship. > The Nyanaponnika/Bodhi anthology quotes from the commentary ("AA") and sub-commentary ("AT") on this second case: <> I take the reference to "one who makes insight the vehicle" to be a reference to the person who attains enlightenment without first having attained mundane jhana. > Thank you for the different comment because of different > understanding. > And thanks for your comment, too, Tep. Jon #89710 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 4:33 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is a path in Buddhism? truth_aerator Hi Jon, Tep and all, >Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex > > >> Second way: Attainment of arahantship comes before attainment >of > >> jhana > >> > > > > Sutta quote for 7 fold Arhat, please. > > > > It is not a matter of lacking any of the path factors. There is > samma-samadhi, but no (prior) mundane jhana. Samma-samadhi does happen prior to path or fruit, and if Jhana (leading to Stream) can and is praised by the Buddha, then it shows that there is Mundane Jhana. Period. > > Jhana is temporary letting go of unwholesome states and strong > > attention toward a wholesome dhamma, thus it is absurd to >speculate about an Arhat (or any Ariya) being prior to any, however >brief and > > momentary, attainment of Jhana or jhana like citta moment. > > > > The development of samatha/jhana and the development of insight are >2 separate kinds of development. No sutta evidence for two paths. Lets talk Buddhism or something else, but lets not confuse that something else with Buddhism. There is also NO path that lacks samadhiindriya in Buddhism. Even painful & slow way (perhaps the only available for most neyya/padaparama) includes Jhanas. Painful way, btw, doesn't mean "dry vipassana w/o Jhana". MahaMoggallana had painful way and he did all 9 samadhis. Painful way = lots of hindrances hindering Jhana. Best wishes, Alex #89711 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 4:43 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Just studying & Sariputta truth_aerator Hi Jon, >--- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex > As you know, the orthodox Theravada teachings include all 3 Pitakas >and their commentaries. I believe in 4 Nikayas + First 6 or so books of KN. > What is your understanding of the distinction referred to by the >Buddha between beings with little dust in their eyes and beings with >much dust in their eyes, Between more and less hindrances. > given that neither would have heard the Dhamma in that > lifetime? But they could have heard "impure" Dhamma that worked at removal of some preliminary (but not all) hindrances and setting up some diluted version of 5 faculties. His two teachers were close to Buddha Dhamma and wouldn't need much guidance. They probably were in the highest category. > >> The enlightenment of a Buddha (and of the great disciples) is > >> based on jhana, since the attainment is of the highest order It > >> would be wrong to draw any inference from this as to jhana being a > >> prerequisite for enlightenment generally. > >> > > > > Please provide sutta quotes when you get the time. > > > > Again, this kind of detail may not be mentioned in the suttas >themselves. Then I'll disagree with what isn't found in the suttas. The suttas say that samadhi-indriya (and others) are present in all ariyas (not just chief disciples). Thus it doesn't exclude later Generations. > > > --- notice that it is aimed for everyone --- > > > > The Buddha: 'The stream, the stream,' it is said. Now what is the > > stream? > > > > Sariputta: Just this noble eightfold path is the stream: right view, > > right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right > > effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. > > > > The Buddha: Well said, Sariputta, well said. Just this noble > > eightfold path is the stream...'Streamwinner, streamwinner,' it is > > said. Now what is a streamwinner? > > > > Sariputta: Whoever is endowed with this noble eightfold path is > > called a 'streamwinner.' > > > > The Buddha: Well said, Sariputta, well said. Whoever is endowed with > > this noble eightfold path is called a 'streamwinner.' > > > > — SN 55.5 > > > > Thanks for the sutta quote. Would you mind explaining its significance > to the point we have been discussing (jhana as a prerequisite for > enlightenment). Thanks. Stream enterer (not just Chief Disciple) possesss N8P which includes 4 Jhanas. I'll take Ven. Sariputtas words over your own. Best wishes, Alex #89712 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 4:54 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddha taught UNDERSTANDING. Here is what it means. truth_aerator Hi Jon, > Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex > > > Everything. You build strawmens and attack them. The noble8fold >path can be nicely done through Anapanasati (for example) > > > > And the teachings are 'come and see', not 'come and argue for >2,500 years obtuse points of philosophy. > > > > I'm sorry you see it that way, Alex. Same could be said to you. > From my perspective, I'm simply questioning the textual basis >claimed by you as support for your views about the development of >the path (such as in the passage that follows). I would not >consider this "arguing points of philosophy" > (abstruse or otherwise)! I don't know if you are serious or joking in the above. Anyhow, what you could do is this: Prove that Stream Enterer do not require samadhi-indriya at all. Prove that Stream Enterer do not require samma-samadhi at all. Prove that samadhi-indriya never contains Jhana. Prove to me that Buddha did NOT recomend or praise wholesome 'mundane' Jhana. Prove to me that non-Jhana path today is better than Jhana path. > > After all, Buddha has taught stress and its cessation. In deeper > > meditation levels there is less stress present AND as a >culmination of N8P it can serve as a springboard for total >liberation and N10fpath. > OK, I won't ask you for sutta passages this time. I'll just say that it > doesn't sound like anything I've come across in my reading of the > teachings ;-)) Of course not. I am talking suttas, not Khan Sujinism. Best wishes, #89713 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 5:06 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhist teachings truth_aerator Jon, > Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex > ...explain your earlier statement that "DN29 (Pasadika sutta) says >that 4 results are obtained from Jhana: Stream ...-> Arhatship." >Would you mind quoting the particular passage you have in mind. >Thanks. > > Jon What word don't you understand (or don't want, or don't believe) in: "those who are given to these four forms of pleasure-seeking - how many fruits, how many benefits can they expect?" And, you should reply: "They can expect four fruits, four benefits. What are they? The first is when a monk by destruction of three fetters has become a Stream-Winner, no more subject to rebirth in lower worlds, firmly established, destined for full enlightenment; [Alex: 2nd and higher are higher fruits]" DN29 Pasadika Sutta. #89714 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 5:35 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is a path in Buddhism? truth_aerator Hi Jon, >--- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > I take the reference to "one who makes insight the vehicle" to be a > reference to the person who attains enlightenment without first >having attained mundane jhana. don't confuse "the vehicle" for the goal. Please provide me a sutta quote that says that samadhi isn't required for Stream. Please provide me a sutta which says that mundane Jhana isn't required for any stage of awakening. Prove that Stream Enterer do not require samadhi-indriya at all. Prove that Stream Enterer do not require samma-samadhi at all. Prove that samadhi-indriya never contains Jhana. Prove to me that Buddha did NOT recomend or praise wholesome 'mundane' Jhana. Prove to me that non-Jhana path today is better than Jhana path. I'll save you some time, NONE. ZERO. The dry-non-samadhi path is as alien to Buddhism as Talmud to Buddha Dhamma. Even that Yugananda sutta doesn't preach dry insight alone. Good Luck, Alex #89715 From: Sukinder Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 5:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Reviewer's Comments : 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I sukinderpal Dear Tep and Nina, In the post following this one you said that you do not wish to continue with this discussion, but I’ll respond to that separately. In the meantime I hope you do not mind that I respond to this one. And its a very long one. ============ Sukin: Perhaps we should then factor in the fact that most newcomers to Buddhism would not have any preconceived expectations regarding references to other texts such as the commentaries or the Suttas? And maybe Nina indeed wants to stress `Abhidhamma' as in "study of realities" and not "book study"? Besides I did imply a student who is interested in learning about Reality / Truth / Dhamma and not one who would a more or less scholarly study of the Abhidhamma texts proper. T: Saying nothing casts doubt in the mind of educated readers who keep wondering, "Is this the same as the Abhidhamma that the Buddha taught only to His Chief Disciple? Why did He not teach householders too, so they could use it in the daily life?" The Vism refers to the "Abhidhamma" only a few times: Chapter XII paragraph 72; XIII n.20; XIV 24, 58, 185; XXI 72, 126. Is the Vism a good representation of the Abhidhamma? Suk: The kind of doubt you are concerned about is no hindrance to the understanding of Dhamma. I started with Abhidhamma actually believing it *not* to be the Buddha’s direct teachings, but a later composition by scholarly monks. This did not cause me to doubt the Teachings as a whole. Such considerations as historical evidence or Sutta vs. Abhidhamma or Buddha’s direct words vs. commentaries did not have any influence on my interest to developing my own understanding of the Truth. So I guess that newcomers who are ‘students of reality’, they too need not allow themselves to be moved by such considerations. And once they begin to understand the Dhamma better, rather than allow ‘doubt’ to form such questions, theirs will be explanations that are founded on better understanding of paramattha dhammas. I do not know much about the Vism, but from what little that I’ve read here on DSG, the message got from it is the same as the rest of the Tipitaka, namely the understanding dhammas and their paccaya. Why do you insist on the occurrence of more reference to the Abhidhamma? Shouldn’t we be concerned instead on whether the message in the Vism contradicts that which is found in the Abhidhamma and if either of these contradicts the Suttas? =========== > 2. What kinds of dhammas did the Buddha discover? Can all these > dhammas be categorized either as nama or as rupa only? Sukin: As I understand it, the Buddha was enlightened to all the realities which arise at and can be experienced by, the five senses and the mind. In the Suttas this is said to be the "All". I have no reason not to believe this to be true or that the Abhidhamma texts explain in greater detail, in fact comprehensively, about all this. And yes, the division into the broad categories, one Nama and the other Rupa makes sense, since this covers the All. T: You know that the All does not include Nibbana. Then how can Nibbana be experienced at Enlightenment? As an Abhidhammika I believe you can use your Abhidhamma knowledge to answer my question. However, by saying " I have no reason not to believe this to be true or that the Abhidhamma texts explain in greater detail, in fact comprehensively, about all this", it shows that you have not yet completely read "the Abhidhamma texts". Aren't you disqualified as an Abhidhammika? ;-)) Suk: Oh please, do not consider me an “Abhidhammika”, I am very little read in the actual Texts, more importantly however, I don’t care to be qualified as an Abhidhammika, the very idea sounds silly to me. With regard to the All, I think this does include Nibbana. But are you actually saying that since the Abhidhamma does not give a description of Nibbana and since what is found there are about sankhara dhammas only, it follows that the Abhidhamma does not go all the way to the goal? ========== Sukin: Or to a long time so-called Buddhist. ;-) I think it depends on the `understanding', including being aware of one's tendency to complications. The message itself is very simple in terms of intellectually understanding it. T: "Intellectually understanding it" does not one free from doubts. I think any understanding that is muddled is not satisfying. Yet, I agree that being aware of one's drawback is better than knowing nothing. Suk: Intellectual understanding is only the first step. It does not eradicate doubt, however being in fact the reality of “panna”, a sankhara khandha; it accumulates and counters doubt beginning with the more gross level. Otherwise how can there be any progress, in fact how could patipatti arise for example, when thinking in terms of better time, place and object associated with the idea of “meditation”, one is having doubt about the possibility of understanding arising now or at any other time?! =========== T: I agree that having attained 'namarupaparicheda~nana', the knowledge distinguishing between nama and rupa, the meditator can overcome the doubt about nama & rupa. But it is beyond me why just by knowing that "Nama experiences something; rupa does not experience anything", you and I can attain "the first stage of vipassana" through reading/thinking of such definition. If it is that easy, those readers of ADL, including the DSG Abhidhammikas, must have attained namarupaparicheda~nana by now. Suk: As I said, pariyatti is only the first step, no one on DSG has suggested that this is enough. But this is brought up often by those who continually fail to see the real meaning and hence significance of pariyatti and its relation to patipatti, to justify their preference for ‘formal practice’. But the fact is that these people jump at a worldling’s conception practice or patipatti due exactly to not having had the right pariyatti and who later are caught in the illusion of result and with time rested their confidence on that. Study of the teachings thenceforth comes second to the practice, and with this situation I think, chance for pariyatti to now arise so that any wrong interpretation is corrected is very slight. The newcomer in this regard is in a better position. Being told that “nama experiences something; rupa does not experience anything” with present moment experiences in mind and that one needs to develop more understanding of this by direct experience, having little or no history in terms of the ‘illusion that one is getting somewhere with meditation’, he is more ready to listen. And if his understanding is indeed right, he will soon see the contradiction implied in this idea of ‘formal meditation’. Instead, in being then involved in Ditthujukamma and the confidence associated, this helps to steer him away from the trap suggested by any similar ideas. More importantly, his outlook being based exactly on the fact of the nature of realities, this will lead him gradually to have direct understanding and later to insight. So it is not thinking -> first vipassana nana. But suttamaya panna -> cintamaya panna -> bhavanamaya panna or pariyatti -> patipatti -> pativedha. And *none of this is easy* and is cira-kala-bhavana. What is easy is instead, the arising of ignorance, attachment and wrong view leading to all sorts of “doings”, including meditation, which give the appearance of result being within reach, but is in fact not what the Buddha taught. =========== T: The mountain is for sure a visible object. You know, Sukin, I think I can see and immediately recognize a mountain without a thinking like, ' Ah, that is a mountain'. Suk: Being involved ‘wordlessly’ in the signs and details *is* thinking. Failing to understand the difference between this and any of the sense door experience is to be missing the most crucial distinction to be made in one’s study of the Dhamma. In fact namarupaparicheda nana couldn’t be achieved if this relatively more simple distinction is not made. ============ T: It is also very easy to see several colors of mountain rocks. If those colors of the rocks are rupa, then why are the rocks, an aggregate of rupas, not rupa? Newcomers who are not smarter than I possibly have a hard time figuring it out. Suk: What is experienced by eye consciousness is only one kind of the 28 kinds of rupas; this is visible object or color. Color is used here as a reminder of the fact that different combinations of the 4 primary elements condition different colours and this is what is actually experienced by eye consciousness. However, the way we understand color, rather than being that which is an aspect of ‘visible object’ is in fact ‘conceptual’, result of a ‘conceiving’. This seems to be exactly how you describe color above, namely the conventional and worldling’s sense of red, green, blue etc. being property *of* things. In Abhidhamma however, color (or visible object) is not that of something else, but a derived rupa arising together with a minimum number of other rupas, all falling away together instantly. On the other hand, were we to speak conventionally of rocks as having various colors, this is valid and true on its level, being reflection of what in fact is at the level of ultimate reality. However when we are talking about what is real and what is not in the ultimate sense, we need to be careful to distinguish these two and not confuse them. But I believe this is hard to understand, it took me quite a long time. And it most likely will be difficult for most, given so much conditioning by science, i.e. always thinking in terms of things and breaking down in terms of properties of those things. However, while the one leads to insight into the tilakkhana and hence eradication of ignorance, the other, being a product of conceiving, points only to more of the same, and leads to greater accumulation of ignorance. =========== T: But I think a more useful discussion is about the usefulness of calling colors rupa. Is such definition useful for a meditator to see 'rupam aniccam', for example? Suk: Before we can hope to have deep insight into the three characteristics, we need to have had insight into the distinction between nama and rupa. So indeed knowing intellectually that visible object is a rupa, this is not just helpful, but in fact necessary. Otherwise, as I tried to show above, ours is the tendency to conceiving and being fooled by that. =========== > Is seeing a mountain same as experiencing it by the eye? Sukin: No a mountain is never "seen", it does not have the characteristic that visible object has. It is object of javana citta only, whereas visible object must first arise as object of vipakka citta. T: You are reciting something I cannot follow, Sukin. Does that "understanding" help you see 'rupam aniccam'? Suk: Does what I’ve added above help explain? But I would like to ask you, why do you jump to the necessity of deep insight into the three characteristic? I know that you question the idea that intellectual understanding by way of the Abhidhamma, is capable of leading to developed understanding, namely vipassana. But even then, why not talk first about understanding whatever is experienced in terms its individual characteristic, function and cause or else as nama or rupa, dhatu, sankhata, kusala / akusala and so on? By insisting on the ultimate goal are we diverting the attention away from what can and must be understood now? =========== Sukin: Feeling is one of the seven universal cetasikas, in other words it arises with all cittas. Citta experiences rupa, cetasika, another citta, concept and Nibbana, therefore feeling must experience all these as well. T: Does that help you see 'vedana anicca'? Suk: Firstly, it is important that we get it right in principle; else since we are constantly forming our own theories about existence and non-existence, we will continue being lead by them into the darkness of ignorance and wrong view. Pariyatti knowledge acts as a compass for us to at least be facing the right direction; else we are thrust this and that way by force of wrong view, ending up moving more or less in circles. Much hearing is needed about all and every aspect of the Dhamma interspersed by much patipatti before there can be any deep insight. So my answer to your question is, yes, but not yet. ;-) =========== Sukin: Citta experiences as above, and since cetasika experiences the same object as the citta it accompanies, it follows that cetasika can experience the same objects as well. T: I think it would be useful if we could see the dukkha sacca (1st Noble Truth) from such reasoning. What's your thought? Suk: Reasoning is thinking. It can be cintamaya panna at best, but is not bhavanamaya panna. Insight into the dukkha sacca is the result of much development of the latter. =========== > But most of all, what is the use of knowing all these? Sukin: Without the Dhamma we have only wrong view about experiences. Akusala and kusala both are taken for `self'. Rupas are not known as they are and concepts are taken for real. Perception of permanence, happiness, self and beauty dictate all our thinking and verbal and bodily actions. In short being ignorant of "reality", we add to samsara and are lost. Being pointed to about what goes on through the five sense and the mind, our attention can gradually turn to the experiences through each of these doorways and we can thereby grow to have some understanding about them. What more can you ask for?!! ;-) T: I agree with you that the Dhamma helps one to overcome miccha- ditthis and also to abandon kilesas (akusala). Without uprooting clinging (upadana) one cannot gain Release (vimutti). I agree that right seeing & knowing the 'All', the way they really are, is the beginning for more knowledges (~nana) to develop. But I learn all this and MORE from the Suttanta-pitaka, not by reading the Abhidhamma in Daily Life. Do you see my point? Suk: Yet I wonder why I continue objecting to your views as expressed here on DSG. ;-) Metta, Sukin. #89716 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 6:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pali term for wrong view about kamma etc? ( was Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no jonoabb Hi Phil Good to see you around again. > I also > think there was a form of wrong view with the root "kamma" in it > somewhere. Anyone? This is very helpful for me, because as I was saying > the other day it is this sort of wrong view that I struggle with these > days, the kind of wrong view that says the Dhamma is just another > religion cooked up by fearful minds, more sophisticated than Xtnty, for > example, but a crock just the same... > Just wondering whether it's kammassakata-naana -- actually a kind of right view -- that you have in mind. This is right understanding about kamma, cause and effect, deeds and results. (I think you've said before that this kind of right understanding interests you more than right understanding about dhammas.) Jon #89717 From: "rinzeee" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 7:51 am Subject: Re: Questions regarding Ignorance rinzeee Dear Jessica --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jessicamui" wrote: > > > Dear Dhamma friends, > > In SN III 22.126-128, Buddha said that when the instructed noble > disciple "understand" that the 5 aggregates are subject to arising and > vanishing then one "has arrived at true knowledge". > > Regarding the above description (based on Bhikku Bodhi's translation), > my question is that does "true knowledge" only applicable to the > "instructed noble disciple" ? Yes, Jessica, "true knowledge" is only applicable to the "instructed noble disciple". >Does that mean only through real > experience, i.e. the practice of insight mediation to "see" the 3 Marks, > then it counts as "true knowledge"? "The practice of insight mediation to "see" the 3 Marks", leads to "true knowledge". >What about understanding it > intellectually through studying the Dhamma and reflection ? From what you ask, I assume (pardon me if I'm wrong here) that you are not familiar with the type of "objects" involved in arriving at "true knowledge". To be "Instructed" is to listen to the Dhamma with wise attention. Having listened to it one examines those Teachings with reflective acceptance. These two instances are called sotamaya panna and chintamaya panna. That is how far one can reach with these knowledges. To arrive at "true knowledge", the third step, bhavanamaya panna is involved. Please note that there is no person as such who is doing these things. It is just a matter of one's mind being conditioned, with various `insight knowledges', to finally arrive at "true knowledge" Nibbana. Now, Nibbana is an unconditioned object. It is Supra- mundane, beyond this world. All other objects are `of this world', hence Mundane. Therefore when you "understanding it intellectually through studying the Dhamma and reflection", is also a mundane object. "The practice of insight mediation to "see" the 3 Marks", conditions the mind to let go of all mundane objects, and prepares the mind for the Supra-mundane object, Nibbana. The disciple whos mind is so conditioned is a `Noble Disciple'. > From Abhidhamma perspective, does ignorance exist in every mind moment ? In an uninstructed worldling, who has not come across the Dhamma,,,, yes. As for those who has heard and reflected on the Dhamma it depends on how wisely he attends to it and so on. > If it exists in all, or some mind moments, can it be "removed" > momentarily through reflecting the Dhamma ? The root of all thinking stems from Lobha, Dosa, Moha, and their counterparts Alobha, Adosa and Amoha. Billions of thoughts, are said to be occurring per second. In Bhavanamaya panna, the mind is gradually conditioned, to "remove" the gross hindrances and then the subtle hindrances, till it finally arrives at The Path, where the mind is then conditioned by the 8-fold path factors, to take Nibbana as the object. At which moment the `removal' is permanent, otherwise it is a temporary suppression of the defilements. > Thanks in advance for your insight. > > Metta, > > Jessica > May all beings be happy Rinze #89718 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 10:28 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is a path in Buddhism? .. Twisting the Sutta Words ... dhammanusarin Hi, Jon (Attn: Alex, Howard ...), - I am very surprised by the wrong understanding you have shown, Jon ! This is not a language problem; it is a ditthi that twists the simple sutta such that your understanding is 180-degree opposite to the original truth. I think you should blame both commentary quotes AA and AT for having caused such wrong understanding. .......................... > [2] "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity > preceded by insight. As he develops tranquillity preceded by insight, > the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As > he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are > abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. > > T: This case is opposite to Case 1. Vipassana first, then samatha. > Again, both samatha & vipassana are required for arahantship. > Jon: The Nyanaponnika/Bodhi anthology quotes from the commentary ("AA") and sub-commentary ("AT") on this second case: <> Jon: I take the reference to "one who makes insight the vehicle" to be a reference to the person who attains enlightenment without first having attained mundane jhana. ................... T: Commentary AA says the meditator first gains insight understanding and he then attains "concentration". This comm. avoids the term tranquillity (samatha); his use of the term concentration, which means "samadhi" to you, gives you the impression that there is no samatha. In your mind tranquillity or samatha is equated to jhana that you do not approve. So you end up with the thought "there is no samatha". That is conditioned by a ditthi : "I want to believe what I want to believe" ! The commentary AT puts his own words, "one who makes insight the vehicle", in place of the original words, "a monk has developed tranquillity preceded by insight". By doing so, he twists the original words in order to abolish the importance of samatha and makes it sound as if vipassana is the ONLY means for the arahant path. Tep === #89719 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 11:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Reviewer's Comments : 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I nilovg Dear Sukin and Tep, Op 2-sep-2008, om 14:56 heeft Sukinder het volgende geschreven: > Without the Dhamma we have only wrong view about experiences. > Akusala and kusala both are taken for `self'. Rupas are not known as > they are and concepts are taken for real. Perception of permanence, > happiness, self and beauty dictate all our thinking and verbal and > bodily actions. In short being ignorant of "reality", we add to > samsara > and are lost. Being pointed to about what goes on through the five > sense and the mind, our attention can gradually turn to the > experiences > through each of these doorways and we can thereby grow to have some > understanding about them. > What more can you ask for?!! ;-) -------- N: Sukin, I like your post. > through each of these doorways and we can thereby grow to have some > understanding about them. > What more can you ask for?!! ;-)> For the moment this is enough. We should be contented going step by step. Nina. #89720 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 11:56 am Subject: Re: Anatta sanna (attn: Ken, Tep and all) dhammanusarin Dear Alex (KenH and others), - I apologize to you all for not being able to reply to some of the messages that are hidden in the fast stream of DSG messages each day. Like this one that I am now responding to, I did not catch it in time. Alex, we were discussing the wrong view about 'no self' that DSG Abhidhammikas are attached to and unable to separate from annihilationism. Is 'no self' a truth that the Buddha taught or is it just a philosophy that He did not teach because it was extreme (no existence)? So far, I only focus on 'no self' (i.e. there was 'no Buddha' who taught the Dhamma, 'no practice' of the Dhamma by no monks who are puggala) as being wrong in the mundane, coloquial, conventional sense of the real world, not the abstract, ultimate realities that some of us are just so fond of talking about but have not been able to experience them the way they really are. ============================== > T: Plain and simple, Alex. He "often refused to say that Atta >exists or doesn't" mainly because those two thinkings are extreme >views. Read the following Sutta : > > > "If, Aananda, when asked by the Wanderer: 'Is there a self?,' I had > replied to him: 'There is a self,' then, Aananda, that would be > siding with the recluses and brahmins who are eternalists. Buddha has affirmed the Anatta of the 5 aggregates (or Sabbe Dhamma, 6 internal & 6 external AN 10.60). However, > "But if, Aananda, when asked: 'Is there not a self?' I had replied > that it does not exist, that, Aananda, would be siding with those > recluses and brahmins who are annihilationists. [SN 44.10] Saying Atta doesn't exist IS annihiliationism, nihilism. > The anatta view is a samma-ditthi and rightly it is a middle path > that avoids extremes. > > Tep > === It is interesting to go over Udana 8.3 " There *is*, monks, an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there would not be the case that emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, emancipation from the born — become — made — fabricated is discerned." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.8.03.than.html Hmmm. That has to be read many times... I had to reconsider few things.... Best wishes, Alex ================== How is anatta related/connected to Nibbana? Can there be a self of anykind, when Nibbana is experienced? Isn't Nibbana a mental state that is free from lobha, dosa, moha : when there is the cessation of dukkha? Tep === #89721 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 3:18 pm Subject: Re: Anatta sanna (attn: Ken, Tep and all) truth_aerator Hello Tep, Ken, Jon, Sarah, Sukinder, Scott and all. Buddha had 100s of times where he has taught anatta as being not ABCDE. For some reason He did not finish his Anattalakkhana teachings with a clear statement: "There is absolutely no Self in any Dhamma, outside of Dhamma, in asankhata and outside of asankhata." If the Buddha would make an affirmative statement regarding total non existence of Self, there would not be 2,500 years of argument about "Did the Buddha teach Self" ? Sabbe Dhamma Anatta rests totally on definitations of "Sabbe" and "Dhamma". In the suttas where Sabbe is described, it is described only as 6 internal & external sense spheres leaving the possibility of some"thing" outside of these. Again, it is fully possible to posit a Self that isn't a Dhamma, and isn't part of the All (Sabbe). Of course there is this mystery of how can unconditioned and undescribable Self interact with The All and how did Avijja or Vimutti have any effect on it. The talk about "Self isn't apprehended" doesn't convinvingly rule out Self anymore than "Tathagata isn't apprehended here and now". Tathagata DID exist, even though he was "inapprehensible". The talk about "don't have any views on Self" can also be turned around by Atta preachers in a sense of "Self is ineffible, indescribable, and has to be directly percieved in some sort of a way." Back to Vacchagotta sutta. Buddha has stated that statement "There is no Self" is Anihhilationism, and we can check about what are the fruits of Anihhilationism & nihilism.... ========== Even if, as some scholars do, the word atta (atman) in attadipa (light of Soul) is interpreted as meaning just `oneself' without any reference to an ontological reality called "Self" and the phrase `attadipa' is taken to mean `you yourself are your light', it has to be admitted that the Buddha is asking his disciples to seek light within and not outside. Now, if there is no true "Self/Atman", then who is to seek the light and where? And if all objects, as the Buddha says, are perishable (anicca) and miserable (dukkha) and the light is to be sought only in the subject, then the reality of the transcendent subject is clearly implied in the passage" page: 30 === A.P. Buddhadatta, the well known Sinhalese Pali scholar and head of the Aggarama at Ambalangoda in Ceylon (appointed as the Agga- Mahapandita at the Council of Rangoon) wrote on 4th March 1947 concerning the English edition of George Grimm's main work in a letter to his daughter: "I read that book [DOCTRINE OF THE BUDDHA by George Grimm] , and (found it to be) as you have stated in your letter that `he (Grimm) recovered of the old genuine doctrine of the Buddha which had been submerged'. When we (Theravada) read our Pali texts (Abhidhamma) and commentaries (Buddhaghosa, Vishudhamagga), we get the idea that Buddhism is a sort of Nihilism….Thus I was puzzled for a long time to understand the true meaning of Buddhism though I was born a Buddhist. Many peoples do not go so far in these matters (of doctrine)." [Doctrine of the Buddha, ISBN 81-208-1194-1; publ. Montilal Banarsidass publishers. First Edition: Berlin, 1958; reprint 1999. Preface, page 9] ========= In MN2 we have another interesting thing. "There is No Self", "AM I NOT?" is ranked as useless and improper question due to WRONG reflection. So what to do with all of this? MN#2 is clear. Let go off all asavas through: seeing, restraining, using, tolerating, avoiding, destroying, developing. In other words, go get Awakened and ask questions later! :) By saying "There is No Self" one sides with Anihhilationists with kammic results that can ripe in .... Best wishes, Alex #89722 From: "jessicamui" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 9:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Questions regarding Ignorance jessicamui --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Jessica, > Op 1-sep-2008, om 16:35 heeft jessicamui het volgende geschreven: > > > But regarding the last part - about the presence of the Ignorance in > > the mind. If we contemplate the Dhamma through wise reflection, or > > through meditation, then there is not ignorance in the mind at that > > moment. But the sense of "I" still exists in the mind while we are > > doing good deeds like giving dana. Can we say that the ignorance > > exists if the "I"ness exists in the mind? > ------- > N: You observed very well when saying, in the mind while we are doing good deeds like giving dana.> > Kusala cittas and akusala cittas alternate and since they arise and > fall away so rapidly, it is not easy to discern different moments. <....> > ****** Dear Nina, Thank you very much for the detailed reply. I was quite confused about the difference between wrong view and ignorance. Now with your explanation, it clarifies my understanding. I also like the examples that you gave, very easy to understand. By the way, I take that the conceit can only be removed when achieving arahatship. It is a long way to go. Best Wishes ! Jessica. #89723 From: "jessicamui" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 10:00 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Questions regarding Ignorance jessicamui <...> > N: You observed very well when saying, in the mind while we are doing good deeds like giving dana.> > Kusala cittas and akusala cittas alternate and since they arise and > fall away so rapidly, it is not easy to discern different moments. > At the moment of kusala citta, such as when giving daana, there is > not at the same time clinging to self, no wrong view, di.t.thi or > ignorance. > Ignorance arises with every akusala citta, and wrong view does not > arise with every citta, it arises only with four types of lobha- > muulacitta, citta rooted in attachment. But those cittas are also > accompanied by moha, ignorance. > Ignorance covers up the true nature of realities, it does not know > when there is kusala citta and when akusala citta. For instance, > attachment can be accompanied by pleasant feeling or by indifferent > feeling. Many moments of cittas rooted in attachment and accompanied > by indifferent feeling arise in a day, but we do not know them. <....> Dear Nina and all, After reading your answer again, I have one more question, and some other thoughts: If ignorance is NOT associated with the Kusala citta, ie. when doing dana. In that sense, any "uninstructed worldlings" does have ignorance in their mind moment(s) during the process of doing Kusala deeds ? In Myanmar, when we were doing meritorious deeds, i.e. giving dana or after meditation sessions, the monks led us to dedicate the merit to the goal of achieving Nibanna. I wonder if the act of dedication of the merit will "redirect" the vipaka of the good deeds from its natural results, i.e. having good rebirth, etc, to actually helping one to achieving the higher goal. In other words, what is the effect of doing the special dedication vs not to do it ? Again, thank you for sharing your insights. With Much Metta, Jessica. #89724 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 4:54 pm Subject: Pali term for wrong view about kamma etc? ( was Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no philofillet Hi Jon > Just wondering whether it's kammassakata-naana -- actually a kind of > right view -- that you have in mind. This is right understanding about > kamma, cause and effect, deeds and results. Thanks. I think I was after a ditthi rather than a naana, but still good to know about. And the ditthi I was looking for was probably a figment of my imagination since no one has come up with it. (I think you've said before > that this kind of right understanding interests you more than right > understanding about dhammas.) Well, I don't want to say understanding about dhammas doesn't interest me, but I seem to be at a place of doubt about dhammas. One problem is that I am doubting Abhidhamma because of things I've read (in particular BB's introduction to the SN anthology) that state that Abhidhamma is an evolution of Buddhist thought rather than the Buddha's teaching in itself. So the "dhamma theory" has becoming less compelling for now. And I am not compelled by the notion of people with my very shallow understanding having awareness of fleeting "realities." So for the time being at least I am very interested in behaviour and whether what we do, think and say is likely to be harmful to ourselves and others. One could say then what is the point of studying Dhamma, because that sort of thing is taught by most other religions. Well, my understanding of the teaching is that wise behaviour creates conditions for deeper understanding to arise. When there is less remorse because one behaves better or when the mind is less diffused by unbridled mental babbling (which I consider a form of behaviour) there will be better conditions for understanding to deepen. So I am not worrying about my current lack of concentrated interest in the deep teachings...it will return, I believe! By the way, sorry to hear about your banged up toe. Metta, Phil #89725 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 5:03 pm Subject: Pali term for wrong view about kamma etc? ( was Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no philofillet Hi again > When there is less remorse because one > behaves better or when the mind is less diffused by unbridled mental > babbling (which I consider a form of behaviour) there will be better > conditions for understanding to deepen. So I am not worrying about > my current lack of concentrated interest in the deep teachings...it > will return, I believe! Oh, I'll add an important point. Through more wholesome behaviour, we (so to speak) improve our hopes for a favourable destination after death. In the hell and animal realms, there are no possibilities to develop understanding. Improving our hopes for a favrouable destination after death is rarely talked about here, or if it is there is often talk of it representing clinging to self etc but it is a very, very central point of Anguttara Nikaya and I'm sure the other Nikayas. In the Buddha's day, I have read, the principle aim of householders was to do merit in order for a favourable rebirth. I find that that is a reasonable approach to the Dhamma for myself as well. Metta, Phil p.s these two responses to your post turned into a kind of summing up of "where I'm at" I guess..of more interest to myself than anyone else... #89726 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 5:13 pm Subject: Re: ... 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I dhammanusarin Dear Sukin, - Yes, I stated that I did not intend to continue to discuss the ADL review further. >Suk: I do not know much about the Vism, but from what little that I've read here on DSG, the message got from it is the same as the rest of the Tipitaka, namely the understanding dhammas and their paccaya. Why do you insist on the occurrence of more reference to the Abhidhamma? Shouldn't we be concerned instead on whether the message in the Vism contradicts that which is found in the Abhidhamma and if either of these contradicts the Suttas? T: Because the emphasis of ADL is on the Abhidhamma and because the Vism only lightly touches the Abhidhamma Pitaka, that is why I asked about the appropriateness of her heavy dependence on the Vism. BTW I have no concern "whether the message in the Vism contradicts that which is found in the Abhidhamma" or "if either of these contradicts the Suttas". ............................................. >Suk: With regard to the All, I think this does include Nibbana. But are you actually saying that since the Abhidhamma does not give a description of Nibbana and since what is found there are about sankhara dhammas only, it follows that the Abhidhamma does not go all the way to the goal? T: Do you mind showing how the All includes Nibbana? No, that is not what I was saying. :-) ............................................. >Suk: Intellectual understanding is only the first step. It does not eradicate doubt, however being in fact the reality of "panna", a sankhara khandha; it accumulates and counters doubt beginning with the more gross level. Otherwise how can there be any progress, in fact how could patipatti arise for example, when thinking in terms of better time, place and object associated with the idea of "meditation", one is having doubt about the possibility of understanding arising now or at any other time?! T: I have no idea what you are talking about with respect to the followings : a) the "reality of panna accumulates"; (Is panna permanent? Isn't "develop" a better verb for transient/changeable panna?) b) progress (of what?) and "patipatti arises" (and does it pass away too? If so, how does it accumulate?); c) understanding rising now. (Is it namarupa-pariccheda~nana? If it is not, what does it take to accumulate understanding to the level of namarupa-pariccheda~nana?) .......................................... T: I earlier commented : "But it is beyond me why just by knowing that "Nama experiences something; rupa does not experience anything", you and I can attain "the first stage of vipassana" through reading/thinking of such definition. If it is that easy, those readers of ADL, including the DSG Abhidhammikas, must have attained namarupa pariccheda~nana by now.". And, instead of calmly explain how it might be possbile to progress from the worldling intellectual understanding toward attaining this very first vipassana ~nana, you blasted back : >Suk: As I said, pariyatti is only the first step, no one on DSG has suggested that this is enough. But this is brought up often by those who continually fail to see the real meaning and hence significance of pariyatti and its relation to patipatti, to justify their preference for `formal practice'. But the fact is that these people jump at a worldling's conception practice or patipatti due exactly to not having had the right pariyatti and who later are caught in the illusion of result and with time rested their confidence on that. T: Based on what special ~nana is your insightful statement above? How would you justify the claim that "these people" do not have the same qualifications that you do, or better? You then went on with the blah-blah-blah reasoning on how a newcomer, whose mind being free from the `illusion that one is getting somewhere with meditation', could proceed from listening (to whom? an ariyan?) to gain confidence which "helps to steer him away from the trap suggested by any similar ideas". >Suk: More importantly, his outlook being based exactly on the fact of the nature of realities, this will lead him gradually to have direct understanding and later to insight. T: Sorry, your "claim" does not convince me, because it is not substantiated by any of the Buddha's Teachings. It is not even close to the "pure insight vehicle" in the Vism XVIII, 5 -14 for development of namarupa pariccheda~nana. ............................................ >Suk: Being involved `wordlessly' in the signs and details *is* thinking. Failing to understand the difference between this and any of the sense door experience is to be missing the most crucial distinction to be made in one's study of the Dhamma. In fact namarupaparicheda nana couldn't be achieved if this relatively more simple distinction is not made. T: Again, more vague claim! Being mentally involved in 'nimitta- anubya~njana' is the consequence of lacking sense-restraint (indriya- samvara), Sukin. You are talking suttas now ! "On seeing a form with the eye, he does not grasp at any theme or details by which — if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye — evil, unskillful qualities such as greed or distress might assail him. ... ear, ..., mind ... [MN 27] How do you propose to establish sense-restraint and how will sense- restraint lead to namarupa pariccheda~nana? Your earlier "claim" does not mention sense-restraint , Sukin. Are you proposing an extension to the weak /claim/theory/? ............................................ >Suk: In Abhidhamma however, color (or visible object) is not that of something else, but a derived rupa arising together with a minimum number of other rupas, all falling away together instantly. On the other hand, were we to speak conventionally of rocks as having various colors, this is valid and true on its level, being reflection of what in fact is at the level of ultimate reality. However when we are talking about what is real and what is not in the ultimate sense, we need to be careful to distinguish these two and not confuse them. T: The Buddha even used the Sumeru Mountain as an example of impermanent earth-element to teach vipassana to the monks. The monks were not confused. The "pure insight vehicle" in the Vism XVIII, 5 -14, for the contemplation of nama-rupa is not that "complicated", Sukin. It doesn't confuse me at all. No "ultimate reality" or "ultimate sense" were mentioned by the Venerable Buddhaghosa, showing to me that he knew what he was talking about -- he was a practicing monk, not a theoretical-Abhidhamma monk. He talked about tranquillity and he talked about insight, starting with the four elements (earth, water, ..), the 32 body parts as materiality (rupa), the general 18 elements, the 12 bases, the five aggregates and never once talked about colors. He never once mentioned intellectual understanding. ........................................... I am too tired to type now. If I have time and enthusiasm again, I may continue to tespond to the rest of your post later, much later. Thank you for your patience to have read this far. ;-)) Tep === #89727 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 5:25 pm Subject: Pali term for wrong view about kamma etc? ( was Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no truth_aerator Hi Phil and all, >--- "Phil" wrote: >Well, I don't want to say understanding about dhammas doesn't >interest me, but I seem to be at a place of doubt about dhammas. One >problem is that I am doubting Abhidhamma because of things I've read >(in particular BB's introduction to the SN anthology) that state >that Abhidhamma is an evolution of Buddhist thought rather than the >Buddha's teaching in itself. Yes. Many scholars and monks do say this. > So the "dhamma theory" has becoming less compelling for now. You are right. And you know, one Abh says that there are 72 (or 82) dhammas. Another Abh claims 75, the third 100 dhammas... Commentarial Abh (the one used here) claims the Dhammas have Sabhava. The Patisambhidamagga (traditionally attributed to Sariputta) REFUTES Sabhava. The suttas or canonical Ther Abh does not speak about Sabhava at all (except for last few books in KN). When you read CMA (by Ven BB) you will find that some Theravadin Greats have had disagreements over various things of the same Abh (nothing to say about inter School dialogues that warranted a whole book written by Moggaliputa Tissa Thera called Kathavatthu)... I wonder why. Best wishes, Alex #89728 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 5:58 pm Subject: Re: Anatta sanna (attn: Ken, Tep and all) dhammanusarin Hi Alex, - Thanks for the discussion. >Alex: The talk about "don't have any views on Self" can also be turned around by Atta preachers in a sense of "Self is ineffible, indescribable, and has to be directly percieved in some sort of a way." >Back to Vacchagotta sutta. Buddha has stated that statement "There is no Self" is Anihhilationism, and we can check about what are the fruits of Anihhilationism & nihilism.... >In MN2 we have another interesting thing. "There is No Self", "AM I NOT?" is ranked as useless and improper question due to WRONG reflection. >So what to do with all of this? MN#2 is clear. Let go off all asavas through: seeing, restraining, using, tolerating, avoiding, destroying, developing. >In other words, go get Awakened and ask questions later! :) =============================================== T: Nope. After you have been Awakened, there are no more wrong views that motivate those questions anymore. Let me give you an analogy. Say, you have to drive on a very narrow- and-winding slippery road to the top of a high mountain. On each side of the road there is no guard rail. If your car slips off on either side, it will fall into the valley below. Horrible death! Do you have any thought about the consequence of falling off the road on either side? Will I fall? Will I not fall? If I might fall off the road, is the right better or is the left more preferable? Shouldn't the best thought be about keeping calm and steering the car straight ahead so that the steering wheel never twists to either side? When you are safely at the top of the mountain, do you still care about the consequence of falling off the road on either side? Will I fall? Will I not fall? If I might fall off the road, is the right better or is the left more preferable? Tep === #89729 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 6:28 pm Subject: Re: Anatta sanna (attn: Ken, Tep and all) truth_aerator Dear Tep, I really liked your post. It was spot on. Ultimately it is "what is to be done" and "how to remove stress"? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > > Hi Alex, - > > Thanks for the discussion. > Tep > === To you as well, Best wishes, Alex #89730 From: "Antony Woods" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 8:02 pm Subject: Old kamma & present behavior? antony272b2 Dear Group, Just popping in with a question. I found this sutta quote: "And what, bhikkhus, is old kamma? The eye is old kamma, to be seen as generated and fashioned by volition, as something to be felt. The ear is old kamma... The mind is old kamma, to be seen as generated and fashioned by volition, as something to be felt. This is called old kamma. And what, bhikkhus, is new kamma? Whatever action one does now by body, speech or mind. This is called new kamma." From: SN35:146 Antony: Is old kamma another name for vipaka? I usually thought of vipaka as things like health, wealth, beauty, long-life, lots of friends. What about vipaka as conditioning further good kamma performed now? I suppose The vipaka of good mental health and lots of Buddhist friends (the whole of the holy life) would be major factors (I may have answered my own question!) Thanks for listening / Antony. #89731 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 10:23 pm Subject: Pali term for wrong view about kamma etc? ( was Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no philofillet Hi Alex and all > >--- "Phil" wrote: > >Well, I don't want to say understanding about dhammas doesn't > >interest me, but I seem to be at a place of doubt about dhammas. One > >problem is that I am doubting Abhidhamma because of things I've read > >(in particular BB's introduction to the SN anthology) that state > >that Abhidhamma is an evolution of Buddhist thought rather than the > >Buddha's teaching in itself. > > Yes. Many scholars and monks do say this. I think the passage I refer to above is pretty strong. Robert K has said that he thinks this passage (or perhaps others like it) represent a blot on the career of BB or something like that. From the point of view of someone who deeply appreciates Abhidhamma like Robert K does, I can certainly understand him saying that. On the other hand, if what BB wrote has failed to create any kind of a stir in the Theravada community, I have to assume it's correct. Even if Abhidhamma did come later, I still think it provides an interesting extention of the Buddha's teaching and I want to keep in touch with it. But I can't place it on par with the suttanta if it came later. > > > So the "dhamma theory" has becoming less compelling for now. > > You are right. And you know, one Abh says that there are 72 (or 82) > dhammas. Another Abh claims 75, the third 100 dhammas... > > Commentarial Abh (the one used here) claims the Dhammas have Sabhava. > > The Patisambhidamagga (traditionally attributed to Sariputta) > REFUTES Sabhava. > > The suttas or canonical Ther Abh does not speak about Sabhava at all > (except for last few books in KN). > OK thanks. I didn't know that. I'm sure this sort of thing has been discussed a lot here without my having been able to get into it. And so I will stay out now as well! :) Metta, Phil #89732 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 10:30 pm Subject: I will die philofillet Hi all I saw a fascinating art piece the other day in an exhibition of Chinese Avant-Garde art. I forget the artist's name (see link) but it consisted of 10 video screens with people facing the camera and saying in 10 different languages "I will die." Needless to say it reminded me of the third of the 5 daily recollections the Buddha urged all people to make (I am not beyond the nature of growing old, getting sick or dying, and all that I love will be taken away, and I am the owner of my kamma.) I wonder if the artist did his work with the Buddha's teaching in mind. It certainly felt that way. Metta, Phil http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=WQytEyFKQG0 #89733 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 10:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] BE AWARE OF THE RIGHT OBJECT AT THE RIGHT TIME (2) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, BE AWARE OF THE RIGHT OBJECT AT THE RIGHT TIME by Phra Dhammadharo >The imperative is not intended, as it should be understood from the preceeding* that there is no 'self' to control 'oneself' let alone control another. >It should be taken in the sense that awareness is the aim or goal. ..... (continuing) And in what sense is it "aim or goal"? Not in the sense of ultimate goal, for the ultimate goal is none other than the eradication of defilements by the experience of nibbaana and hus the end to innumerable rebirths in samsaric wandering on. But rather "aim or goal" should be taken to mean that it is only by achieving this "aim or goal" that the ultimate goal may be attained. For as the Blessed One has said: "There is this one way, monks, for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow & grief, for the going down of sufferings and miseries, for winning the right path, for realizing nibbaana, that is to say, the four applications of mindfulness....." (Digha Nikaaya ii) And, in brief, how does "aim or goal" lead to the ultimate goal? Only by developing* awareness (sati) can wisdom (pa~n~naa) develop. Fully developed pa~n~naa is vipassanaa (insight wisdom) which can understand things as they really are i.e. as anatta, anicca and dukkha. Vipassanaa is a necessary condition for the arising of supramundane consciousness which experiences nibbaana. Wisdom (pa~n~naa) cannot arise without awareness (sati). Thus in order that pa~n~naa can be gradually developed stage by stage one must first develop sati. In this sense then awareness is the "aim or goal". *Developing: should be taken to mean 'the repeated occurrence of' ******* Metta, Sarah p.s comments and discussion very welcome! ======== #89734 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 11:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] annata sarahprocter... Dear Liam, Welcome to DSG and thanks for the brief intro you gave in your other 'hello' message. May I ask where you live? --- On Mon, 1/9/08, liamvann wrote: >I do not study pali, or sutta. Instead i study mind. I've discovered that there is no original belief: there is no individual. You are the product of your family, religion, and peers. .... S: You say there is 'no individual' and that you 'study mind'. Can we say that rather than being the 'product of your family, religion, and peers' that the mind and mind states arising now are the product of previous mind and mind states? For example, can be say that the clinging and grasping that arises now is a product of past clinging and grasping on and on? Metta, Sarah ======= #89735 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 12:06 am Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 9, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, I had offered some money and I expressed the wish: ”May I have less stinginess.” Khun Sujin reminded me that there may be clinging even while one is expressing such a wish. One may cling to the idea of “my stinginess or “my generosity”. This shows how keen paññå must become. Otherwise one does not see one’s clinging and one takes moments of akusala for kusala. Even when we do good deeds akusala cittas are bound to arise shortly after the kusala cittas. During our stay in Kandy, our host, who was so kind to drive us around every day, took us to a village school, outside Kandy. Most of the children of this school came from very poor families. The principal, a person with great patience and perseverance, had built up the community of this school in spite of many difficulties. His device was: “Don’t grumble about what you don’t have. Make every difficulty into a challenge.” Nobody at this school grumbled. We had a Dhamma session in the school and one of the teachers translated English into Singhalese. Many of the questions dealt with rebirth. How can one prove that there is rebirth and how can one prove that there are heavenly planes and hell planes? We explained that today we do not doubt that there was yesterday. Just as today follows upon yesterday, tomorrow will follow upon today. Evenso the different cittas (moments of consciousness) which arise and fall away succeed one another. The preceding citta is completely gone, but there are conditions that this citta is immediately succeeded by the next one. The last citta of this life will be succeeded by a following citta, which is the first citta of the next life: the rebirth-consciousness. The first citta of this life was the rebirth-consciousness. It could not have arisen without conditions for its arising. Its conditions were in a past life; it succeeded the last citta of the previous life. If we want to know what our next life will be, we should know our present life. In this life there are mental phenomena and physical phenomena arising and falling away, and so it will be in the next life. The present life will be the past life in the next existence. It depends on kamma (our accumulated good deeds and bad deeds) in which plane of existence there will be rebirth. Rebirth in a happy plane is the result of a good deed, kusala kamma, and rebirth in an unhappy plane is the result of a bad deed, akusala kamma. ****** Nina. #89736 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 12:08 am Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behavior? philofillet Hi Antony Long time no chat! > "And what, bhikkhus, is old kamma? > The eye is old kamma, to be seen as generated and fashioned by > volition, as something to be felt. > The ear is old kamma... > The mind is old kamma, to be seen as generated and fashioned by > volition, as something to be felt. > This is called old kamma. > And what, bhikkhus, is new kamma? > Whatever action one does now by body, speech or mind. > This is called new kamma." > From: SN35:146 > > Antony: Is old kamma another name for vipaka? Not quite, I think. BB's commentarial note to the sutta doesn't contain any reference to vipaka. Instead there is this: "Spk: It is old kamma (puraanam idam kammam): THis body is not actually old kamma, but beccause it is produced by old kamma it is spoken of in terms of its condition. It should be seen as generated (abhisankhata) in that it is made by conditions; as fashioned by volition (abhisan~ncetayitta) in that it is based on volition, rooted in volition; and as something to be felt (vedaniya) in that it is a basis for what is to be felt.." Then there is something referring to dependent origination. So it feels close to vipaka, doesn't it? Anything "produced by old kamma" feels close to vipaka. But why isn't vipaka mentionned? So I guess I am just echoing your question. > I usually thought of vipaka as things like health, wealth, beauty, > long-life, lots of friends. What about vipaka as conditioning further > good kamma performed now? I suppose The vipaka of good mental health > and lots of Buddhist friends (the whole of the holy life) would be > major factors (I may have answered my own question!) This is something that I think about a lot. If I understand correctly, vipaka is *not* the kind of thing you refer to above, but is rather whatever is arising through the sense doors, which must be more paramattha than the things you mention above. But I could be wrong. I know that the situation we are born into in life, and our basic health and beauty etc is said in the suttanta to be resultant of past behaviour, so you might be right. So again I am just echoing your uncertainty. In any case, I find it helpful to think of the things above as vipaka even if they are technically not. It helps condition not- getting-upset-or-infatuated by things. This summer I spent 3 weeks in utmost physical comfort surrounded by beautiful scenery and loving friends and family, with lovely food and so on and so on...and I thought of it all as vipaka. Helped me not get painfully attached to it because after all at the end of the 3 weeks I was removed from it...(back to Japan where I am still surrounded by pleasant sensations *and* situations that I take to be vipaka, though the situations are probably not.) THanks for letting me ramble on vipaka a bit Antony. Metta, Phil p.s there is an ambulance siren right now, and as always when I become aware of an ambulance siren I wish well to whoever is involved, which is a practice I learned from your post here. I think it's great the way we pick up helpful things like that from each other. I also think it is you who pointed out the importance of the 5 daily recollections which has become hugely important for me. #89737 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 2:08 am Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behavior? dhammanusarin Hi Antony, - Thank you for the discussion. >Antony: Is old kamma another name for vipaka? usually thought of vipaka as things like health, wealth, beauty, long-life, lots of friends. T: Just a thought. Old kamma, according to the sutta, is "brought into existence and created by volition, forming a basis for feelings". So it is not vipaka which is conditioned by this "basis for feelings" and, therefore, cravings and clinging that follow. >Antony: What about vipaka as conditioning further good kamma performed now? T: Good or bad or neutral kinds of kamma now are again conditioned by volition, not by vipaka of another kamma. If a vipaka conditioned another new kamma perpetually, there would be no cessation of kamma. The Buddha explained, "When, monks, by ceasing actions of body, speech and mind, one touches liberation, this, monks, is called 'the ceasing of kamma.' " He did not say that liberation meant ceasing of vipaka. Tep === #89738 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 3:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... sarahprocter... Dear Alex, We were discussing whether the Buddha taught 'the seen' or visible object' as being the object of seeing or whether he taught mountains and trees as being the object. To me, it seems obvious and according to experience, that only 'the seen', only visible object is ever seen. To you, it seems obvious that mountains are seen. --- On Fri, 29/8/08, Alex wrote: >> S: (the Udana, Enlightenment Ch, 10 with Bahiya, Masefield trans): > > The Buddha addressed Bahiya: "Therefore, Bahiya, you should train >yourself that with respect to the seen there will be merely the >seen, that with respect to the heard...." > A:>I knew that B., sutta would go there. Here is Buddha's words that explain in more detail that instruction: Here, Hemaka,with regard to things that are dear — seen, heard, sensed, & cognized — there is: the dispelling of passion & desire, .... S: Yes, the dispelling of attachment to what is seen and heard through the understanding of the seen and heard for what they are - mere sense elements experienced through the senses. >> You could also try looking through your 4 Nikays, starting with SN, >Salyatana Samyutta for lots more. > ... A:>If you have a specific sutta, please say it. While there are often passages of 6 sense spheres & their objects, 5 aggregates, I don't remember any passage which says "trees" do not really exist or that one shouldn't see trees. .... S: So when we read about the ayatanas or khandhas as being the all or all that exists, do you understand trees to be included? If so, which khandha are trees? when we read that seeing sees ruupas (forms or visible objects), do you understand trees to be included? If so, I'd like to see your suttas in support of trees being seen. SN 22: 23 "Full Understanding" (Bodhi transl): "At Saavatthi. 'Bhikkhus, I will teach you things that should be fully understood and also full understanding. Listen to that.... " 'And what, bhikkhus, is something that should be fully understood? Form, bhikkhus, is something that should be fully understood; feeling....perception....volitional formations.....consciousness is something that should be fully understood." S: No mountains or trees included at all. **** A:> "One who has reached the end has no criterion by which anyone would say that — for him it doesn't exist. When all phenomena (dhamma) are done away with, all means of speaking are done away with as well." http://www.accessto insight.org/ tipitaka/ kn/snp/snp. 5.06.than. html >Notice the transcending of ALL dhammas. Including the "atta/anatta" dhamma. .... S: I've no idea what this has to do with our discussion of mountains and trees vs visible objects being seen, but here, I understand the short stanza to be referring to how all *conditioned* dhammas are eradicated. It depends on the context of the sutta whether nibbana is included in the 'all dhamma' or note. I've no idea what an " 'atta/anatta' dhamma' is, Alex. Metta, Sarah =========== #89739 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 3:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) sarahprocter... Hi Andrew L, --- On Sat, 30/8/08, purist_andrew wrote: A:> It seems from the below that we agree that taking Bodhisattva vows at this point in time, by no way can lead us to attain the desired goal (Buddahood). Your agreement and references to previous posts (UP list) affirm to me what I thought to be the case. I am pleased. >However, I have come into this bit on an article Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote about taking refuge in the Triple Gem. In the relevant section, he is comparing the future results of two people, one who practices meditation and morality in this life, and one who with a mind of faith takes refuge in the triple gem but because of adverse circumstances cannot hold the precepts strictly nor practice meditation. ..... S: Can we really refer to having taken refuge in the Triple Gem before the development of insight and attainment of the path? Surely, it is only when insight has developed that saddha (confidence/faith) becomes a power. Only The sotapanna has unshakable confidence in the Triple Gem through the direct understanding of the 4 Noble Truths. .... A:> He says that the first person will have more peace in this life and may secure a more fortunate rebirth in the next life, but the one who takes refuge may receive more good fortune on a long-term basis. .... S: I think the purpose of the teachings is to develop more understanding now, at the present moment of dhammas as anatta. I don't think the purpose is to cling to future results for oneself. ... A:> The cite is below. http://www.accessto insight.org/ lib/authors/ bodhi/wheel282. html#ref1 >The important passage in the above is: ============ ========= B.B. >And if he fails to reach deliverance within the dispensation of the present Buddha it will very likely lead him to the dispensations of future Buddhas, until he eventually reaches the goal. ============ ========= >This being the case, can we not generate a mind of faith and desire, take the refuges, and begin developing or continue to develop, the paramis with hope that we may be able to make our aspiration at the foot of a future Buddha? .... S: What is the purpose of this? Isn't it just a kind of clinging? Aren't we lost in dreams about the future rather than developing understanding now of what the Buddha taught? .... A:> Even if the perfections aren't exactly what the Buddha taught, .... S: The Buddha did teach about the perfections, but only as developing with satipatthana, with right understanding and the other path factors, not with any idea of self. .... A:> they'll still serve as a foundation of spiritual development and there's got to be some overlap. We know the Buddha was moral and generous, and a renunciate and so forth. .... S: We also know that the Buddha taught that such qualities are anicca, dukkha and anatta. In other words, they don't belong to anyone. Good to discuss the Dhamma with you again, Andrew. Metta, Sarah ========== Maybe the Maha-Bodhisattva spirit isn't dead after all? Thoughts please. Regards, A.L. P.S.: Does anyone know how we can assure that in future lives we find the spiritual path and not get lost? Perhaps a mind of faith is one condition, or, as I've heard, a lot of reflection on the qualities of the Buddha? Or should we not assume anything about future lives and strive extra hard because we only have a comparatively high measure of certainty of what we can do in this life, on this world. --- In dhammastudygroup@ yahoogroups. com, sarah abbott wrote: > 4) The sight of the master: The personal presence of the master. The > aspiration only succeeds when made by one aspiring in the presence of > a living Buddha. When made after the Exalted One has passed into > parinibbana- - before a shrine, at the foot of a Bodhi-tree, in front > of an image, or in the presence of paccekabuddhas or the Buddha's > disciples-- the aspiration does not succeed. Why? Because the > recipient lacks the power (necessary to confirm the aspiration). The > aspiration only succeeds when made in the presence of the Buddhas, > for they alone possess spiritual power adequate to the loftiness of > the aspiration.< <<<<<< > .... > S: Yes, again. (See more under 'Aspiration' and 'Bodhisatta' in U.P.) #89740 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 11:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] annata upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Liam) - In a message dated 9/3/2008 2:12:08 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: S: You say there is 'no individual' and that you 'study mind'. Can we say that rather than being the 'product of your family, religion, and peers' that the mind and mind states arising now are the product of previous mind and mind states? For example, can be say that the clinging and grasping that arises now is a product of past clinging and grasping on and on? ================================== But can I not also say that the phenomena of my mind stream do not constitute all of existence and that what comes to me is in part triggered by other mind streams? (You may repeat the preceding question with "you" instead of "I" and the corresponding replacements for "my", and "me".) Am I not replying to YOU, Sarah? Or is solipsism correct? If so, who is "the one," you or me? ;-)) With metta, Howard #89741 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 3:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) sarahprocter... Hi Ken H & Andrew L, --- On Sat, 30/8/08, kenhowardau wrote: K: >I think I have the answer to your question: ------- AL: >> Does anyone know how we can assure that in future lives we > find the spiritual path and not get lost? -------- K:> What is needed is a moment of right understanding now. The right understanding that there are only dhammas now - at this very moment - will be a condition for the same, unique, liberating, right understanding to arise again in future moments - in this lifetime and in others. ..... S: Thank you, Ken, you gave the best possible answer (imho) to this question. There really is no other answer. Metta, Sarah p.s. Btw, Ken, I did get to see a live shark (and no, it wasn't any DSG poster), it was a shark swimming across the shallow waters in Sydney where we swam and surfed every day:-) We can all the fun of hearing the repeated shark sirens (a change from ambulance sirens) and watching the hasty evacuation of the busy weekend sea at Manly. Of course, the die-hard surfers continued on.... No one injured, fortunately. ======== #89742 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 4:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] annata sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- On Wed, 3/9/08, upasaka@... wrote: >>S: You say there is 'no individual' and that you 'study mind'. Can we say that rather than being the 'product of your family, religion, and peers' that the mind and mind states arising now are the product of previous mind and mind states? For example, can be say that the clinging and grasping that arises now is a product of past clinging and grasping on and on? ============ ========= ========= ==== H:> But can I not also say that the phenomena of my mind stream do not constitute all of existence .... S: At the moment of thinking, is there any other 'world' apart from that of thinking? At the moment of seeing, is there any other 'world' apart from that which appears to seeing, i.e the visual world? .... H:>....and that what comes to me is in part triggered by other mind streams? .... S: Conventionally speaking, of course. In actuality, again isn't there just the visual world, the auditory world and so on appearing? .... H:>(You may repeat the preceding question with "you" instead of "I" and the corresponding replacements for "my", and "me".) Am I not replying to YOU, Sarah? Or is solipsism correct? If so, who is "the one," you or me? ;-)) .... S: It seems we're writing to each other and we both known that conventionally speaking this is true. But as Liam pointed out (and to which I was responding), actually there are no individuals. There is no Howard or Sarah. Mere phenomena (dhammas) rolling on. Metta, Sarah ======= #89743 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 12:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] annata upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 9/3/2008 7:09:01 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard, --- On Wed, 3/9/08, upasaka@... wrote: >>S: You say there is 'no individual' and that you 'study mind'. Can we say that rather than being the 'product of your family, religion, and peers' that the mind and mind states arising now are the product of previous mind and mind states? For example, can be say that the clinging and grasping that arises now is a product of past clinging and grasping on and on? ============ ========= ========= ==== H:> But can I not also say that the phenomena of my mind stream do not constitute all of existence .... S: At the moment of thinking, is there any other 'world' apart from that of thinking? At the moment of seeing, is there any other 'world' apart from that which appears to seeing, i.e the visual world? -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: At the moment of MY thinking or seeing or hearing etc, there is also YOUR thinking or hearing or seeing etc. Or do you think not? ----------------------------------------------------- .... H:>....and that what comes to me is in part triggered by other mind streams? .... S: Conventionally speaking, of course. In actuality, again isn't there just the visual world, the auditory world and so on appearing? ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: No, not conventionally speaking but actually speaking ... unless, of course, the phenomena that I refer to as "you" are entirely figments of my imagination, which I think would be of some concern to you if there were a "you" as much (or little) as there is a "me". ---------------------------------------------------------- .... H:>(You may repeat the preceding question with "you" instead of "I" and the corresponding replacements for "my", and "me".) Am I not replying to YOU, Sarah? Or is solipsism correct? If so, who is "the one," you or me? ;-)) .... S: It seems we're writing to each other and we both known that conventionally speaking this is true. -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Sarah, uttering the word 'conventional' solves nothing. With regard to our writing to each other, what is ACTUALLY true? Nothing? ------------------------------------------------------------ But as Liam pointed out (and to which I was responding), actually there are no individuals. ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: That's correct - only collections. Is there but one collection? And would that be "me" or "you", Sarah? ---------------------------------------------------------- There is no Howard or Sarah. Mere phenomena (dhammas) rolling on. ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Are the phenomena collectively referred to as "Howard" and those collectively referred to as "Sarah" part of one big smudge? Are the Buddha's statements about kammic inheritance just for the foolish masses, or was he stating literal, and not "merely conventional" truth? ---------------------------------------------------------- Metta, Sarah ============================= With metta, Howard (er, smudge) #89744 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 4:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] annata sarahprocter... Hi Howard & all, --- On Wed, 3/9/08, upasaka@... wrote: >>S: At the moment of thinking, is there any other 'world' apart from that of thinking? At the moment of seeing, is there any other 'world' apart from that which appears to seeing, i.e the visual world? ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- -------- >Howard: At the moment of MY thinking or seeing or hearing etc, there is also YOUR thinking or hearing or seeing etc. Or do you think not? ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ----- S: Just thinking, seeing or hearing....no 'my' or 'your' in reality. .... >>H:>....and that what comes to me is in part triggered by other mind streams? .... >S: Conventionally speaking, of course. In actuality, again isn't there just the visual world, the auditory world and so on appearing? ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - >Howard: No, not conventionally speaking but actually speaking ... unless, of course, the phenomena that I refer to as "you" are entirely figments of my imagination, .... S: Yes.... .... H:> which I think would be of some concern to you if there were a "you" as much (or little) as there is a "me". .... S: And if it's a concern, that's just a kind of thinking (with aversion, probably).... .... .... >>S: It seems we're writing to each other and we both known that conventionally speaking this is true. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - >Howard: Sarah, uttering the word 'conventional' solves nothing. With regard to our writing to each other, what is ACTUALLY true? Nothing? ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - S: Seeing, hearing, thinking.....6 worlds only....This is the amazing truth the Buddha taught and which can be tested out right now. ..... S:>>But as Liam pointed out (and to which I was responding), actually there are no individuals. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - >Howard: That's correct - only collections. Is there but one collection? And would that be "me" or "you", Sarah? .... S: No collections either....just mental and physical phenomena, just rupas, perceptions, feelings, other mental states and moments of consciousness (i.e just namas and rupas, just khandhas) .... S:>>There is no Howard or Sarah. Mere phenomena (dhammas) rolling on. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - >Howard: Are the phenomena collectively referred to as "Howard" and those collectively referred to as "Sarah" part of one big smudge? .... S: That's a new one! A 'smudge'? I don't think so:-) What seems like a 'smudge' or a 'Sarah' are just various ideas on account of sanna, usually on account of atta sanna. .... H:> Are the Buddha's statements about kammic inheritance just for the foolish masses, or was he stating literal, and not "merely conventional" truth? .... S: On the contary, I think they were for the very wise who could understand the truths behind the conventional terms. Hence they understood that in an ultimate sense, kamma or abhisankhara just refers to cetana cetasika and that the results of kamma are simply cittas (moments of consciousness) and rupas (physical phenomena) produced by kamma. They understood that these and all other dhammas are anatta. No individuals, foolish masses, Howard or Sarah to be found. Metta, Sarah ============= #89745 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 5:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] annata scottduncan2 Dear Sarah and Howard, S: "It seems we're writing to each other and we both known that conventionally speaking this is true. But as Liam pointed out (and to which I was responding), actually there are no individuals. There is no Howard or Sarah. Mere phenomena (dhammas) rolling on." Scott: I like this below: SN 7(7) Not Penetrated At Saavatthi. Standing to one side, the devataa recited this verse in the presence of the Blessed One: 11. "Those who have not penetrated things, Who may be led into others' doctrines, Fast asleep, they have not yet awakened." 12. "Those who have penetrated things well, Who cannot be led into others' doctrines, Those awakened ones, having rightly known, Fare evenly amidst the uneven." 7. Appa.tividitasutta.m 7. Saavatthinidaanaṃ . Ekamanta.m .thitaa kho saa devataa bhagavato santike ima.m gaatha.m abhaasi â€" "Yesaṃ dhammaa appa.tividitaa, paravaadesu niiyare; Suttaa te nappabujjhanti, kaalo tesa.m pabujjhitu’’nti. "Yesa.m dhammaa suppa.tividitaa, paravaadesu na niiyare; Te sambuddhaa sammada~n~naa, caranti visame sama’’nti. Scott: Taking liberty with the phrase 'others' doctrines' (which Spk clarifies as being the doctrines of the 62 views), one might suggest that were one to pursue a view in which the 'influence of others' - whether that be construed as 'separate mind streams', 'persons', or whatever - is relevant, then this is simply a mode of describing the unawakened state. On Monday, Luke was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. When thoughts of 'my mind-stream' and 'Luke's mind-stream' and 'mind-streams influencing each other' cloud the picture, I get caught up with 'the uneven'. There is peace, however, when - of course conceptually - I think of what goes on for Luke as occurring within his 'mind-stream', and that, in relation to thoughts of Luke ('Luke' -no offense to a Luke I love very much) and 'his diabetes' and 'his feelings' and 'his well-being' there might be the development of mettaa, karu.naa, khanti, and the like within 'my mind-stream'. The parent thinks of the child and tries to be kind and compassionate but has no say over the way in which another being experiences things. If to be awakened (to have penetrated the things of the four noble truths, as Spk clarifies) leads to even faring amidst the uneven, then I think for the unawakened it is wise to recall that what goes on for one stays with one and that what goes on for another stays with another because there are only 'mere phenomena rolling on'. I think it unnecessary to get caught up in dreams about how one 'mind-stream' influences 'another mind-stream'. Sincerely, Scott. #89746 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 1:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] annata upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 9/3/2008 7:59:09 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard & all, --- On Wed, 3/9/08, upasaka@... wrote: >>S: At the moment of thinking, is there any other 'world' apart from that of thinking? At the moment of seeing, is there any other 'world' apart from that which appears to seeing, i.e the visual world? ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- -------- >Howard: At the moment of MY thinking or seeing or hearing etc, there is also YOUR thinking or hearing or seeing etc. Or do you think not? ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ----- S: Just thinking, seeing or hearing....no 'my' or 'your' in reality. ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: What EXACTLY do you mean by that? Can you say or not? Is there no reality to distinguishing people? --------------------------------------------------------- .... >>H:>....and that what comes to me is in part triggered by other mind streams? .... >S: Conventionally speaking, of course. In actuality, again isn't there just the visual world, the auditory world and so on appearing? ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - >Howard: No, not conventionally speaking but actually speaking ... unless, of course, the phenomena that I refer to as "you" are entirely figments of my imagination, .... S: Yes.... ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Then I should stop having discussions. And no one should ever have listened to the Buddha. Sarah, unless you are just engaging in "clever" talk, this is crazy. ------------------------------------------------------- .... H:> which I think would be of some concern to you if there were a "you" as much (or little) as there is a "me". .... S: And if it's a concern, that's just a kind of thinking (with aversion, probably).... -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: You do refuse to say that there is more than one person. That accomplishes nothing. ------------------------------------------------------ .... .... >>S: It seems we're writing to each other and we both known that conventionally speaking this is true. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - >Howard: Sarah, uttering the word 'conventional' solves nothing. With regard to our writing to each other, what is ACTUALLY true? Nothing? ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - S: Seeing, hearing, thinking.....6 worlds only....This is the amazing truth the Buddha taught and which can be tested out right now. --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm quite aware of that truth, and, Sarah, that is NOT the issue at hand! ------------------------------------------------------------ ..... S:>>But as Liam pointed out (and to which I was responding), actually there are no individuals. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - >Howard: That's correct - only collections. Is there but one collection? And would that be "me" or "you", Sarah? .... S: No collections either....just mental and physical phenomena, just rupas, perceptions, feelings, other mental states and moments of consciousness (i.e just namas and rupas, just khandhas) ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Then no aggregates (a.k.a.collections), no sangha, and no Buddha, and no sense whatsoeb=ver in having conversations. ----------------------------------------------------- .... S:>>There is no Howard or Sarah. Mere phenomena (dhammas) rolling on. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - >Howard: Are the phenomena collectively referred to as "Howard" and those collectively referred to as "Sarah" part of one big smudge? .... S: That's a new one! A 'smudge'? I don't think so:-) What seems like a 'smudge' or a 'Sarah' are just various ideas on account of sanna, usually on account of atta sanna. .... H:> Are the Buddha's statements about kammic inheritance just for the foolish masses, or was he stating literal, and not "merely conventional" truth? .... S: On the contary, I think they were for the very wise who could understand the truths behind the conventional terms. Hence they understood that in an ultimate sense, kamma or abhisankhara just refers to cetana cetasika and that the results of kamma are simply cittas (moments of consciousness) and rupas (physical phenomena) produced by kamma. They understood that these and all other dhammas are anatta. No individuals, foolish masses, Howard or Sarah to be found. Metta, Sarah ================================== I give up, Sarah. You are speaking as an ideologue, refusing to engage in a genuine consideration of issues. With metta, Howard #89747 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 1:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] annata upasaka_howard Hi, Scott (and Sarah) - In a message dated 9/3/2008 8:12:28 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Sarah and Howard, S: "It seems we're writing to each other and we both known that conventionally speaking this is true. But as Liam pointed out (and to which I was responding), actually there are no individuals. There is no Howard or Sarah. Mere phenomena (dhammas) rolling on." Scott: I like this below: SN 7(7) Not Penetrated At Saavatthi. Standing to one side, the devataa recited this verse in the presence of the Blessed One: 11. "Those who have not penetrated things, Who may be led into others' doctrines, Fast asleep, they have not yet awakened." ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Who are the referred-to "those" and "they"? ------------------------------------------------ 12. "Those who have penetrated things well, Who cannot be led into others' doctrines, Those awakened ones, having rightly known, Fare evenly amidst the uneven." ------------------------------------------------ Howard: And who are these referred-to "those" and "they"? ------------------------------------------------ 7. Appa.tividitasutta.m 7. Saavatthinidaanaṃ . Ekamanta.m .thitaa kho saa devataa bhagavato santike ima.m gaatha.m abhaasi â€" "Yesaṃ dhammaa appa.tividitaa, paravaadesu niiyare; Suttaa te nappabujjhanti, kaalo tesa.m pabujjhitu’’nti. "Yesa.m dhammaa suppa.tividitaa, paravaadesu na niiyare; Te sambuddhaa sammada~n~naa, caranti visame sama’’nti. Scott: Taking liberty with the phrase 'others' doctrines' (which Spk clarifies as being the doctrines of the 62 views), one might suggest that were one to pursue a view in which the 'influence of others' - whether that be construed as 'separate mind streams', 'persons', or whatever - is relevant, then this is simply a mode of describing the unawakened state. On Monday, Luke was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. When thoughts of 'my mind-stream' and 'Luke's mind-stream' and 'mind-streams influencing each other' cloud the picture, I get caught up with 'the uneven'. There is peace, however, when - of course conceptually - I think of what goes on for Luke as occurring within his 'mind-stream', and that, in relation to thoughts of Luke ('Luke' -no offense to a Luke I love very much) and 'his diabetes' and 'his feelings' and 'his well-being' there might be the development of mettaa, karu.naa, khanti, and the like within 'my mind-stream'. The parent thinks of the child and tries to be kind and compassionate but has no say over the way in which another being experiences things. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: This compassion for beings isn't illusion, and the resulting peace is wholesome and for the good. --------------------------------------------------- If to be awakened (to have penetrated the things of the four noble truths, as Spk clarifies) leads to even faring amidst the uneven, then I think for the unawakened it is wise to recall that what goes on for one stays with one and that what goes on for another stays with another because there are only 'mere phenomena rolling on'. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, true. But your referring to "one" and "another" is not just the use of empty words. There is a basis. ------------------------------------------------- I think it unnecessary to get caught up in dreams about how one 'mind-stream' influences 'another mind-stream'. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: No dreaming, Scott. It goes on all the time. ------------------------------------------------- Sincerely, Scott. ============================ With metta, Howard #89748 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 5:43 am Subject: Re: annata philofillet Hi Scott Just popping in. It looks like Naomi's monitoring of my internet activity is failling...she had better change the password again!:) > I think for the unawakened it is wise to recall that what goes on for > one stays with one and that what goes on for another stays with > another because there are only 'mere phenomena rolling on'. I think > it unnecessary to get caught up in dreams about how one 'mind-stream' > influences 'another mind-stream'. I must admit that thinking how one mind-stream influences another makes perfect sense to me. I mean, just for one example, there is the sutta with Rahula in which the Buddha encourages him to consider whether what he has done, is doing or will do is "harmful to oneself, harmful to others, or harmful to both." (Paraphrase, but pretty sure it is just about spot on.) If the Buddha encourages us to reflect on whether what we do is harmful to others, what can that be other than "what goes on for one" in fact *not* "staying with one?" See what I mean? How can we "do harm to others" if their mind-stream or cittas or whatever are not effected by what we do? My weekend is over so probably won't get back to this for awhile. If you take the suttas-can- only-be-properly-understood-by-people-of-advanced-understanding- especially-those-who-lived-in-the-Buddha's day-unless-of-course-one- studies-the-commentaries-thoroughly position I'm happy to drop it! (I guess you probably do take that line - which is fine - since you like to look at the Pali so closely.) BTW, sorry to hear about Luke's diabetes. Metta, Phil #89749 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 1:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] annata upasaka_howard Hi again, Scott - In a message dated 9/3/2008 8:36:01 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Upasaka writes: There is peace, however, when - of course conceptually - I think of what goes on for Luke as occurring within his 'mind-stream', and that, in relation to thoughts of Luke ('Luke' -no offense to a Luke I love very much) and 'his diabetes' and 'his feelings' and 'his well-being' there might be the development of mettaa, karu.naa, khanti, and the like within 'my mind-stream'. The parent thinks of the child and tries to be kind and compassionate but has no say over the way in which another being experiences things. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: This compassion for beings isn't illusion, and the resulting peace is wholesome and for the good. =================================== Just a drop more, Scott: I wish you and Luke peace, and I wish him much health, and you as well. May all be well for you - very well. With love, Howard #89750 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 4:59 am Subject: Selfless + Harmless = Painless! bhikkhu0 Friends: What is the thing not really being? The blessed Buddha once said: Blissful is solitude for one who is content, learned & who see the True Dhamma. More blissful is gentle harmlessness towards all breathing beings without exception. Even more blissful is complete freedom from all urge for sense pleasures whatsoever. Yet, the supreme bliss, is the elimination of this abysmal deep conceit “I amâ€? !!! Udana 11 <...> Have a nice Egoless day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) ... Selfless + Harmless = Painless! #89751 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 6:08 am Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behavior? dhammanusarin Hi again, Antony - Reading my reply second time, I feel that the first part was not well written. So let me polish it a little. > > >Antony: Is old kamma another name for vipaka? > usually thought of vipaka as things like health, wealth, beauty, > long-life, lots of friends. > > T: Just a thought. Old kamma, according to the sutta, is "brought > into existence and created by volition, forming a basis for > feelings". So it is not vipaka which is conditioned by this "basis > for feelings" and, therefore, cravings and clinging that follow. > Polished reply : Old kamma is not kamma-vipaka; it forms a basis for feelings, then cravings and clinging follow. The rest of my reply is fine. Tep === #89752 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 8:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] anatta nilovg Dear Sarah and Howard, Op 3-sep-2008, om 13:58 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Hence they understood that in an ultimate sense, kamma or > abhisankhara just refers to cetana cetasika and that the results of > kamma are simply cittas (moments of consciousness) and rupas > (physical phenomena) produced by kamma. They understood that these > and all other dhammas are anatta ------- N: This reminds me of a verse in the Tiika to the Visuddhimagga I am going to post next time, now I quote only part. It refers to all the preceding passages about the links that are kamma (ignorance etc.) producing vipaaka (consciousness, as rebirth-consciousness) etc. Dhammas are producing dhammas, no place for a person: Nina. #89753 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 8:10 am Subject: Life exists in one moment nilovg Dear Sarah and Howard, --------- Sarah: As I read Nina's series on 'Sri Lanka' again, I'm reminded of some of K.Sujin's words that struck me so much at the time, especially the emphasis on "Life exists in a moment". It is panna which understands there really only ever is one citta at a time and one object appearing at a time. Very liberating! ----------- N: Howard, I promised to post what I heard in a recording on no self. I am reminded of atta-sa~n~naa, wrong remembrance. The first part was in Kraeng Kacang, April this year. Tape K.K. (beginning, April 2008): We are inclined to think of the whole body that is sitting, attaanudi.t.thi. When one understands that there is no self it really means that there is not the whole body. No tangible object appears when there is no experience of any tangible object. Don’t think that there is still the whole body that is sitting. Thinking remembers it as if it is there, when it is not there. Cittas arise and fall away so fast. One thinks of tangible object, but it is still “I”. There is an idea that the “I” must exist somewhere. But pa~n~naa sees that there is no one at all. Usually there is an idea of “me”, we take seeing for “me’, and we even take tangible object that appears as tangible object all over the body for “me”. Without direct awareness one cannot tell when there is wrong view. ------------ Remark afterwards, N: Especially the reminder that we believe that someone or something is already there or still there is helpful. Wrong remembrance of a person or a thing. We begin to understand that there is no person, we take it for granted that it always existed. Or even a thing like a chair we touch, it seems that it was always there. We may notice hardness of the body and even that seems to be there already, thus we may mislead ourselves into thinking that there is awareness when there is not. We cannot predict what reality appears next. ******* Heard from a Thai recording: We can just say: there is no “I”, but understanding of anattaa must be developed. When we do not think of another person he is not there. When seeing arises no other person is experienced. The world appears, but actually, one citta at a time arises and falls away. Because of wrong remembrance one takes what is experienced for permanent. -------- Nina. #89754 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 6:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Life exists in one moment upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Sarah) - I would far sooner say "Life exists in every moment," or, better, without any assumption of discrete, staccato moments, "Life is all the time." In a message dated 9/3/2008 11:11:14 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear Sarah and Howard, --------- Sarah: As I read Nina's series on 'Sri Lanka' again, I'm reminded of some of K.Sujin's words that struck me so much at the time, especially the emphasis on "Life exists in a moment". It is panna which understands there really only ever is one citta at a time and one object appearing at a time. Very liberating! ----------- N: Howard, I promised to post what I heard in a recording on no self. I am reminded of atta-sa~n~naa, wrong remembrance. The first part was in Kraeng Kacang, April this year. Tape K.K. (beginning, April 2008): We are inclined to think of the whole body that is sitting, attaanudi.t.thi. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: All the constantly arising and ceasing material phenomena that constitute what we call "the body" do indeed participate in what we call "the body sitting" - so, yes, the whole body is sitting --------------------------------------------------- When one understands that there is no self it really means that there is not the whole body. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: No, it does not. A body is a dynamic collection of rupas, and not imagined, but it is not a single phenomenon, and it and every phenomenon comprising it is anatta. ------------------------------------------------ No tangible object appears when there is no experience of any tangible object. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: This says that no rupa is observed when no rupa is observed. Not exactly a surprise! ;-) ---------------------------------------------- Don’t think that there is still the whole body that is sitting. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, here you are repeating yourself, but there's no need for me to repeat my answer. --------------------------------------------- Thinking remembers it as if it is there, when it is not there. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Thinking and remembering are each something, but a body (over a specific period of time) is something else. What thinking DOES do is conceive of a body as a single thing with core, self, own-being, and identity, and as more than just a changing collection of rupas across time. That is an error. To think it is nothing at all is another error. --------------------------------------------- Cittas arise and fall away so fast. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Fast or slow is irrelevant, and nobody is measuring anyway. In any case, consciousness is a continuously functioning operation without gaps, so the plural 'cittas' is odd! All that vi~n~nana is is the presence of experiential content - the knowing of content. That content is constantly in flux, with nothing remaining as-is for any time at all. Impermanence is more radical than the pointillist perspective suggests. Nothing remains at all, and nothing is graspable. The Dhamma is deeper than any of us knows. -------------------------------------------- One thinks of tangible object, but it is still “Iâ€?. There is an idea that the “Iâ€? must exist somewhere. ------------------------------------------- Howard: That idea isn't mine. ------------------------------------------- But pa~n~naa sees that there is no one at all. --------------------------------------------- Howard: And you know this, Nina? Not by authority, or report, or tradition, but directly as fact? ---------------------------------------------- Usually there is an idea of “meâ€?, we take seeing for “me’, and we even take tangible object that appears as tangible object all over the body for “meâ€?. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't have that idea, Nina. It's just a way of speaking. ----------------------------------------------- Without direct awareness one cannot tell when there is wrong view. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Darn right! ------------------------------------------------ ------------ Remark afterwards, N: Especially the reminder that we believe that someone or something is already there or still there is helpful. Wrong remembrance of a person or a thing. We begin to understand that there is no person, we take it for granted that it always existed. Or even a thing like a chair we touch, it seems that it was always there. We may notice hardness of the body and even that seems to be there already, thus we may mislead ourselves into thinking that there is awareness when there is not. We cannot predict what reality appears next. ******* Heard from a Thai recording: We can just say: there is no “Iâ€?, but understanding of anattaa must be developed. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Indeed! ----------------------------------------------- When we do not think of another person he is not there. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: LOLOL! And if I drive my car right into that "person whom we are not thinking about and thus isn't there," I do hope the hospital thinks otherwise, but that for my sake the policeman at the scene is an admirer of Khun Sujin, and agrees that there was no person injured! -------------------------------------------------- When seeing arises no other person is experienced. The world appears, but actually, one citta at a time arises and falls away. Because of wrong remembrance one takes what is experienced for permanent. -------- Nina. ================================= Nina, something is very wrong with your perspective. Fortunately for you and Lodewijk, you don't believe in it sufficiently to live according to it! With metta, Howard #89755 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 11:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions regarding Ignorance nilovg Dear Jessica (and Han at end), Op 2-sep-2008, om 19:00 heeft jessicamui het volgende geschreven: > If ignorance is NOT associated with the Kusala citta, ie. when doing > dana. In that sense, any "uninstructed worldlings" does have > ignorance in their mind moment(s) during the process of doing Kusala > deeds ? -------- N: The kusala citta that has objective dana is not accompanied by ignorance. It is accompanied by alobha, adosa, saddhaa, confidence in kusala, sati, hiri, ottappa. But while one is giving, and for example sitting in the temple, there are also likely to be akusala cittas in between, with attachment or conceit. Akusala cittas are accompanied by ignorance. ------- > > J: In Myanmar, when we were doing meritorious deeds, i.e. giving dana > or after meditation sessions, the monks led us to dedicate the merit > to the goal of achieving Nibanna. I wonder if the act of dedication > of the merit will "redirect" the vipaka of the good deeds from its > natural results, i.e. having good rebirth, etc, to actually helping > one to achieving the higher goal. In other words, what is the effect > of doing the special dedication vs not to do it ? ------- N: Good deeds will bring their results accordingly, but kamma that is already done cannot be altered, it will bring its result accordingly, and thus, no person could alter the law of kamma and vipaaka. Good deeds without the development of insight do not lead to enlightenment. Moreover, the magga-cittas that experience nibbaana are not vipaaka, not the result of good deeds. This dedication is somewhat incomprehensible to me. Perhaps it needs additional explanation. I wonder whether Han knows it? In Thailand the merit is dedicated to departed ones, so that they can anumodana in our good deeds. Instead of thinking of nibbaana I think it is more helpful to follow the Path leading to it: development of understanding of the phenomena of one's life at this moment. ------- J: By the way, I take that the conceit can only be removed when achieving arahatship. It is a long way to go. ------- N: At each of the stages previous to the stage of arahatship, conceit has become less coarse. For us now it may be very coarse, and then it can condition dosa; why is "he" treating 'me' in this way? Or: why is this beggar touching me? The beginning of having less conceit is knowing it as a conditioned nama when it arises. Nina. #89756 From: "Raymond Hendrickson" Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 1:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] annata bitakarma Sara says: S: On the contary, I think they were for the very wise who could understand the truths behind the conventional terms. Hence they understood that in an ultimate sense, kamma or abhisankhara just refers to cetana cetasika and that the results of kamma are simply cittas (moments of consciousness) and rupas (physical phenomena) produced by kamma. They understood that these and all other dhammas are anatta. No individuals, foolish masses, Howard or Sarah to be found. Metta, Sarah Ray.... Here is a Sutta I always like to refer to when these ideas of persons, beings, etc. come up...... Mara (addressed to bhikkhuni Vajira): By whom has this being been created? Where is the maker of the being? Where has the being arisen? Where does the being cease? bhikkhuni Vajira says: "Why now do you assume 'a being'? Mara, have you grasped a view? This is a heap of sheer constructions: Here no being is found. Just as, with an assemblage of parts, The word 'chariot' is used, So, when the aggregates are present, There's the convention 'a being.' It's only suffering that comes to be, Suffering that stands and falls away. Nothing but suffering comes to be, Nothing but suffering ceases." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn05/sn05.010.bodh.html Ray #89757 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 1:49 pm Subject: Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... truth_aerator Dear Sarah and all, IMHO, the Buddha has taught suffering & its cessation. Let us not forget also that the talk about ultimate existence or non-existence of things isn't something that Buddha approves. "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.015.than.html >--- sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > We were discussing whether the Buddha taught 'the seen' or visible >object' as being the object of seeing or whether he taught mountains >and trees as being the object. > > To me, it seems obvious and according to experience, that only 'the >seen', only visible object is ever seen. To you, it seems obvious >that mountains are seen. S: So when we read about the ayatanas or khandhas as being the all or all that exists, do you understand trees to be included? If so, which khandha are trees? when we read that seeing sees ruupas (forms or visible objects), do you understand trees to be included? If so, I'd like to see your suttas in support of trees being seen. > > SN 22: 23 "Full Understanding" (Bodhi transl): > > S: No mountains or trees included at all. > **** A: Trees are included perhaps under sanna or contents of sanna. But regardless of what "trees are", lets not forget the emphasis on 4NT. Best wishes, Alex #89758 From: han tun Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 2:04 pm Subject: Re: Questions regarding Ignorance hantun1 Dear Nina (and Jessica), > > Jessica: In Myanmar, when we were doing meritorious deeds, i.e. giving dana or after meditation sessions, the monks led us to dedicate the merit to the goal of achieving Nibanna. I wonder if the act of dedication of the merit will "redirect" the vipaka of the good deeds from its natural results, i.e. having good rebirth, etc, to actually helping one to achieving the higher goal. In other words, what is the effect of doing the special dedication vs not to do it ? ------- > Nina: Good deeds will bring their results accordingly, but kamma that is already done cannot be altered, it will bring its result accordingly, and thus, no person could alter the law of kamma and vipaaka. Good deeds without the development of insight do not lead to enlightenment. Moreover, the magga-cittas that experience nibbaana are not vipaaka, not the result of good deeds. This dedication is somewhat incomprehensible to me. Perhaps it needs additional explanation. I wonder whether Han knows it? In Thailand the merit is dedicated to departed ones, so that they can anumodana in our good deeds. Instead of thinking of nibbaana I think it is more helpful to follow the Path leading to it: development of understanding of the phenomena of one's life at this moment. -------------------- Han: Yes, we are always urged by the monks to dedicate the merit to the goal of achieving Nibbaana (Nibbaana paccayo hotu). No, the act of dedication of the merit will not "redirect" the vipaaka of the good deeds from its natural results. But we do that so that we will have correct attitude of mind (yonisomanasikaara) when we are doing good things, in that we will not do it for our personal gains or for any other worldly benefits, but for the eventual achievement of Nibbaana. It is like when we are radiating karunaa towards someone who is suffering. Will our karunaa redirect the kamma vipaaka of the affected person? It is also like when we are reciting Ratana Sutta: “This precious jewel is the Buddha. By this (asseveration of the) truth may there be happiness.â€? Will there be happiness among the peoples of the world by just saying the truth that the Buddha is the precious jewel? It is the saddhaa that is important. If one does not believe in such dedication, it is better no to do it. It is not useful to do something which one does not believe in. I agree with you that “Instead of thinking of nibbaana I think it is more helpful to follow the Path leading to it: development of understanding of the phenomena of one's life at this moment.â€? But the dedication of the merit to the goal of achieving Nibbaana is not to replace the following of the Path, but to further strengthen the saddhaa for our following of the Path. [If you say one cannot ‘strengthen’ the saddhaa, which is a conditioned dhamma, then I have no other explanation:>))] Respectfully, Han #89759 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 3:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Life exists in one moment truth_aerator Dear Nina, Howard and all, Nina, Is this for real? >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > N:When we do not think of another person he is not there. > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: >LOLOL! And if I drive my car right into that "person whom we are >not thinking about and thus isn't there," I do hope the hospital >thinks otherwise, but that for my sake the policeman at the scene is >an admirer of Khun Sujin, and agrees that there was no person >injured! > -------------------------------------------------- > > When seeing arises no other person is experienced. The world >appears, but actually, one citta at a time arises and falls away. >Because of wrong remembrance one takes what is experienced for >permanent. > -------- > Nina. > > ================================= >Nina, something is very wrong with your perspective. Fortunately >for you and Lodewijk, you don't believe in it sufficiently to live >according to it! > > With metta, > Howard Fortunately Buddha didn't teach this solipsistic-nihilistic doctrine. Suttas such as Kayagatasati (mn119) and many others, do refute the silly notion of body (with all its problems) not existing... Best wishes, Alex #89760 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 6:35 pm Subject: Mountains and Trees in the Suttas dhammanusarin Hi, Sarah (and Alex), - You told Alex (in #89738) that there were no mountains or trees in the Teachings. It was so because you looked too far, beyond the real world of ecosystems, into the paramattha dhammas. " 'And what, bhikkhus, is something that should be fully understood? Form, bhikkhus, is something that should be fully understood; feeling....perception....volitional formations.....consciousness is something that should be fully understood." S: No mountains or trees included at all. **** T: I have a few sutta quotes about trees and mountains below. More can be found if you do a search on the ATI archive. "Monks, the great sal trees that live in dependence on the Himalayas, the king of mountains, prosper in terms of three kinds of prosperity. Which three? They prosper in terms of branches, leaves, & foliage. They prosper in terms of bark & shoots. They prosper in terms of softwood and heartwood. The great sal trees that grow in dependence on the Himalayas, the king of mountains, prosper in terms of these three kinds of prosperity." [AN 3.48: Pabbata Sutta. A Mountain] "Just as when the root of a great, standing tree — possessed of heartwood — is inconstant & subject to change, its trunk is inconstant & subject to change, its branches & foliage are inconstant & subject to change, its shadow is inconstant & subject to change. If someone were to say, 'The root of that great, standing tree — possessed of heartwood — is inconstant & subject to change, its trunk is inconstant & subject to change, its branches & foliage are inconstant & subject to change, but as for its shadow, that is constant, everlasting, eternal, & not subject to change': would he be speaking rightly?" [MN 146: Nandakovada Sutta] ................ There are also suttas about impermanence of great mountains and even destruction of the whole cosmos at a certain time. The Buddha used those as example to teach the monks about 'anicca' in the earth property(dhatu). Tep === #89761 From: Sukinder Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 6:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ... 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I sukinderpal Dear Tep and Nina, Nina thanks for your suggestion to go slow. I do tend to go on and on, which is fine I think, if it is on one or two points at a time. Actually I wasn’t expecting Tep to come up with so many questions at once, which I understand to be due to having been given a chance to express his view on the way the Dhamma is expressed here on DSG. Which is fine and I thought that I would just go along with that. =============== Tep you wrote: T: Because the emphasis of ADL is on the Abhidhamma and because the Vism only lightly touches the Abhidhamma Pitaka, that is why I asked about the appropriateness of her heavy dependence on the Vism. BTW I have no concern "whether the message in the Vism contradicts that which is found in the Abhidhamma" or "if either of these contradicts the Suttas". S: And note that originally I didn’t particularly intend to convince you about the Abhidhamma and its place in the scheme of things. I pointed out to Nina’s book only because I considered it to have given a very good exposition of the Truth / Reality for the newcomer. I had no interest as to whether she relied more on other parts of the Tipitaka or commentaries and I wasn’t out to try to prove the Abhidhamma better over the Suttas. The fact that many discussants seem often to quickly pull out Suttas in order to make their point but without providing any of their own reasoned explanations, this is not saying that one should *not* quote Suttas. However I thought this to be a good way to draw them out to express their real understanding, in their own words. True, I do have my preference for the Abhidhamma, this being that it allows me to go straight to considering dhammas by reducing the chance of being caught thnking in terms of ‘self’ such as when reading the Suttas, and I believe that this should be the same for everyone. Also I gave other explanations as to why I thought that this habit of pulling out Suttas was making the discussions going nowhere. And I would like to stress here, the part about discussants using the various concepts found in the Suttas as though they really understand them, but which according to me, they don’t. This is the reason I thought to come down to the basics, namely that it will provide a chance to evaluate our real understanding with regard to the ‘deeper’ concepts. In fact when reading some of the posts the following words by the American poet Emerson often come to my mind, “I hate quotations. Tell me what you know”. Of course Emerson had something else in mind, being very much fooled by conventional reality; he wasn’t offering any real solution. But the Buddha did and this is why we are here. It seems however, that we have accumulated so much wrong understanding with regard to what the Buddha really taught. What I think we need to remember is that indeed what he taught pertained to our moment to moment experience but of which we are always making reference to “wrongly” (with wrong view). In light of this, I think the approach I have been stressing is *most direct*! So far, instead of approaching one’s study of the Dhamma by referring to such common day-to-day and moment to moment experiences as seeing, hearing, thinking etc., we have been thrust mostly with concepts that we accept blindly, philosophize about or else follow the suggestion of without reflection. And this from my perspective, have taken people too far in the wrong direction! So Tep, I suggest that we start all over again by going one step at a time, do you agree? Assuming that you do, let me begin by asking whether you agree with the following suggestions: -There are two kinds of reality: mental phenomena (nama) and physical phenomena (rupa). - Nama experiences something; rupa does not experience anything. - Seeing is, for example, a type of nama; it experiences visible object. Visible object itself is rupa; it does not experience anything. Metta, Sukin #89762 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 8:14 pm Subject: Re: Mountains and Trees in the Suttas scottduncan2 Dear Tep (Sarah and Alex), Regarding: T: "...There are also suttas about impermanence of great mountains and even destruction of the whole cosmos at a certain time. The Buddha used those as example to teach the monks about 'anicca' in the earth property(dhatu)." Scott: In the Index of Similes, Sa.myutta Nikaaya, there are listed about 80 similes found in this collection of suttas alone. Subjects include acrobats, balls of clay, chariots, divine vehicles, empty villages, fishermen, goats, a hand in space, Indra's pillar, jackals, ki.msuka trees, lumps of foam, monkeys in forests, naagas, oxen, pots of ghee, rain clouds, sand castles, turtles, vipers, waterpots, wheel-turning monarchs, and youth in battle, to name but a few. A simile is (Oxford dictionary): "[noun] a figure of speech involving the comparison of one thing with another thing of a different kind (e.g. as solid as a rock). â€" ORIGIN Latin, from similis 'like'." Scott: I don't expect agreement here, Tep. Apparently we don't see eye to eye. I agree totally with Sarah. One has to understand the meaning of a simile. A simile is not to be taken literally. I don't mind if you choose not to reply. Sincerely, Scott. #89763 From: Sukinder Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 9:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] annata sukinderpal Dear Scott, Your post was very inspiring. But I was sorry to hear about this: Scott: On Monday, Luke was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. S: Yesterday it so happened that my wife met an acupressure specialist, a Sikh woman visiting from Canada, to talk about my older son’s problem of not gaining any height and the younger one’s sensory integration dysfunction. Having heard that this doctor has cured people with otherwise hard to cure diseases including diabetes, my wife went on to talk about a cousin’s son who at the age of three was diagnosed with the disease. The doctor suggested that under certain conditions, it was possible to cure this. Now Scott, I am generally very skeptical about these things, and would prefer not to spend time thinking about it. However this may be due to the influence of medical science of today, so I don’t really know. You may have a different picture, and so if interested here is some information. Dr. Rajinder Kaur Sachdeva Acupressurist. #210 8334128 Street, Surrey B.C. Phone: 604-671-2325 There is supposed to be a website also, but I don’t know what it is and can’t seem to find it yet. :-/ I don’t know how far this is from where you live and I leave it to you to judge whether this will be worth a visit. Metta, Sukin #89764 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 8:07 pm Subject: There are 4 Realizable States! bhikkhu0 Friends: The Four Modes of Direct Experience: The Exalted Buddha once said: Bhikkhus, there are these 4 realizable states: What four ? By the body one realizes the 8 releasing liberations. By memory one realizes one's prior lives in all diverse detail. By the divine eye one realizes the death & rebirth of beings. By understanding one realizes elimination of the mental fermentation. These, Bhikkhus, are the 4 realizable states... Source: The Numerical Sayings of the Buddha. Anguttara Nikaya II 182 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=204050 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=132552 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/index.html Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) .... 4 x Realizable Release ...!!! #89765 From: Sukinder Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 11:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] annata sukinderpal Hi Howard, (Sarah, Scott and Nina), I would like to come into this discussion from a different and more conventional angle. Please feel free not to respond if you think that you will end up only repeating what you have said before. ============== S: At the moment of thinking, is there any other 'world' apart from that of thinking? At the moment of seeing, is there any other 'world' apart from that which appears to seeing, i.e the visual world? -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: At the moment of MY thinking or seeing or hearing etc, there is also YOUR thinking or hearing or seeing etc. Or do you think not? Sukin: Taking into consideration that there is only one citta experiencing one object at a time, I think you will agree that what we designate as ‘self and other’ in our interactions, must be associated with that “one fleeting citta” at that moment. However, since this citta arises and falls away purely by conditions that are equally fleeting, none of these experiences can in fact be considered ‘self’. And one of these conditions is the ‘falling away’ of the previous citta and its accompanying cetasikas. Now even the previous citta must have fallen away, so how can we speak about ‘other realities’, those that never arise associated with the one citta per moment, to count in? I am talking here, about rupas of the body that are conditioned by the three other factors, excepting citta. But even these, arise and fall away in an instant, nothing remains to be pointed to, except an imaginary ‘new’ rupa. So what are we really referring to? The above can be seen with reference to one’s own experience and so it must be the same with what we take for ‘other’ as well. In fact more so, since I can’t experience your citta while there can be a moment of satipatthana to know the citta which has just fallen away ‘here’. When I communicate with you, I go by conventional reality without having to believe that there is more than just one moment of citta arising and falling away there, as it is here. The conventional body moves, but this will ever be by force of one citta arising and falling away at a time. The rupas are not waiting to be commanded by citta, since none of these stay longer than a moment. The five khandhas arise together and fall away together and nothing is there apart of this to be seen as a ‘whole’ or as ‘interrelated’. The interrelatedness is between the realities that constitute the khandhas which are anicca, dukkha and anatta. Anything else brought into the picture must be due to wrong view, I think. Metta, Sukin #89766 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 11:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions regarding Ignorance nilovg Dear Han and Jessica, Op 3-sep-2008, om 23:04 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > I agree with you that “Instead of thinking of nibbaana I think it > is more helpful to follow the Path leading to it: development of > understanding of the phenomena of one's life at this moment.” But > the dedication of the merit to the goal of achieving Nibbaana is > not to replace the following of the Path, but to further strengthen > the saddhaa for our following of the Path. -------- N: Han, you give a very good explanation, I understand now. The dedication is like a reminder: daana is not for personal gain, but to lessen defilements. When we think of nibbaana, actually, it is the end of all defilements and that is our goal. The dedication reminds us of the goal. Certainly, saddhaa can become stronger, and reminders do help! Thank you very much, Han. I knew you would give an excellent explanation. Nina. #89767 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 11:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] annata nilovg Dear Ray, thank you for the reminder, I also find this sutta very helpful. Nina. Op 3-sep-2008, om 22:56 heeft Raymond Hendrickson het volgende geschreven: > Mara (addressed to bhikkhuni Vajira): > > By whom has this being been created? > Where is the maker of the being? > Where has the being arisen? > Where does the being cease? #89768 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 11:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Life exists in one moment nilovg Dear Alex, Op 4-sep-2008, om 0:58 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Suttas such as Kayagatasati (mn119) and many others, do refute the > silly notion of body (with all its problems) not existing... ------- N: All these suttas help us to understand that in the ultimate sense there is no whole, a whole of a body that exists, only fleeting rupas, arising and falling away. The characteristics of these rupas have to be known one at a time, so that we shall loose the notion of my whole body that exists. Nina. #89769 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 3, 2008 11:40 pm Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 9, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, People wonder about the body in the next life. So long as there are conditions for rebirth, kamma will produce bodily phenomena at the moment of rebirth-consciousness [1]. Our body that was yesterday is completely gone, but today there are again new bodily phenomena we call “our body”. We do not doubt about these bodily phenomena. Why then do we doubt about rebirth? Bodily phenomena arise and fall away all the time. One may perhaps be inclined to prove rebirth by examining cases of people who claim to remember former lives. Scientific proof and reasoning will never eradicate doubt and wrong understanding. Neither are they of any help to take away one’s anxiety about what will happen to the “self” after death. Doubt and wrong view can only be eradicated by right understanding which sees phenomena as they really are. In Colombo we also had a few sessions with children. We used the “Sigålovåda Sutta” (Dígha Nikåya, Dialogues of the Buddha III, no 31) as an example of the teaching of different kinds of kusala we should practise in daily life. In this sutta we read about such good qualities as kindness, generosity, humbleness and patience. Khun Sujin spoke about patience. When we have aversion about an unpleasant object it shows that there is no patience. But do we have patience when the object is pleasant? We are attached to pleasant objects and when we are attached there is no patience. Khun Sujin said: ”When the food is very delicious today, do you have patience? Will you eat just enough to sustain the body, or will you eat more, because you like the food? Then there is impatience.” The children wanted to hear “Jåtaka” stories, stories about the former lives of the Buddha, and thus I explained that the Jatakas teach us about the many virtues of the Buddha which he accumulated during innumerable lives. Khun Sujin asked the children: “You like to hear stories, but what about your own story?” We like to hear about the story of someone else, but do we really know ourselves? We should find out more about our “own story”. ----------- 1. Unless rebirth occurs in a plane of existence where there is no rúpa, bodily phenomena. ******* Nina. #89770 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 2:16 am Subject: Re: Mountains and Trees in the Suttas dhammanusarin Dear Scott (Sarah, Alex, ...),- Similes are an important teaching tool of the Blessed One, Scott. >Scott: A simile is (Oxford dictionary): "[noun] a figure of speech involving the comparison of one thing with another thing of a different kind (e.g. as solid as a rock). " ORIGIN Latin, from similis 'like'." >Scott: I don't expect agreement here, Tep. Apparently we don't see eye to eye. I agree totally with Sarah. One has to understand the meaning of a simile. A simile is not to be taken literally. I don't mind if you choose not to reply. T: More important, do not overlook the REAL message that our Greatest Teacher, the Buddha, very skillfully designed into each simile and effectively conveyed to the intelligent disciples. Tep === #89771 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 2:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] BE AWARE OF THE RIGHT OBJECT AT THE RIGHT TIME (3) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, BE AWARE OF THE RIGHT OBJECT AT THE RIGHT TIME by Phra Dhammadharo continuing.... In What sense "Aware" ---------------------- This is the cetasika awareness. It is a sobhana (beautiful) cetasika which occurs with all kusala-cittas. Like all conditioned realities, it arises when there are conditions for it to arise and falls away immediately. It might be said to have as its near enemy thinking or "labelling" in the sense that it is dangerous to confuse the two. Like all realities it is uncontrollable (in fact, as above, there is no 'one' to control) and cannot be forced. It can arise at any time and in any place when the conditions are right. Wanting it, trying to have it, clinging to it should be regarded as its hindrances. The conditions for it to arise are: Meeting the right person, hearing dhamma, reflecting on dhamma and practising accordingly. Only sati can be aware. In what sense "right object"? The meaning is threefold: 1) The meaning here is whatever characteristic of naama or ruupa appears through one of the six doorways. Thus its object can be a characteristic of 89 types of citta (for those who have not attained jhaana), 52 types of cetasika, 28 elements of ruupa or nibbaana (which constitute absolute realities [paramattha dhammas]). 2) From the preceeding is the corollary that "Right Object" is an absolute reality as distinct from apparent or conventional terms or concepts (pa~n~natti) which in this sense might be regarded as wrong object. 3) In the sense that when sati has as its object "Right object" one is truly treading the eightfold Path. For at that moment all factors of the five factor eightfold Path must be present including, of course, momentary Right Concentration (samma-samadhi). ****** to be contd. Metta, Sarah ======== #89772 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 2:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Life exists in one moment nilovg Hi Howard, Op 3-sep-2008, om 19:36 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I would far sooner say "Life exists in every moment," or, better, > without any assumption of discrete, staccato moments, "Life is all > the time." ------- N: The reminder pointed to one citta at a time, experiencing one object at a time. And true, when seeing arises, no thinking of a person. That is another moment. > > We are inclined to think of the whole body that is sitting, > attaanudi.t.thi. > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > All the constantly arising and ceasing material phenomena that > constitute what we call "the body" do indeed participate in what we > call "the body > sitting" - so, yes, the whole body is sitting > --------------------------------------------------- > > When one understands that there is no self it really > means that there is not the whole body. > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > No, it does not. A body is a dynamic collection of rupas, and not > imagined, but it is not a single phenomenon, and it and every > phenomenon comprising > it is anatta. > ------------------------------------------------ > N: Do you like this perspective: only at one point hardness > appears, and at such a moment no thinking of the whole body. The > next moment may be different: thinking of body. Many different > cittas experiencing one object at a time. ---------- > No tangible object appears > when there is no experience of any tangible object. > ----------------------------------------------- > Howard: > This says that no rupa is observed when no rupa is observed. Not > exactly > a surprise! ;-) > ---------------------------------------------- > N: I understand, this may sound strange to you. It reminds us: > tangible object was not there, it arises and falls away so fast. We > should not take it for granted that it is there, that it appears. > ---------- > Don’t think that > there is still the whole body that is sitting. > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Well, here you are repeating yourself, but there's no need for me to > repeat my answer. > --------------------------------------------- > N: Only rupas arising and falling away so fast. From head to toe, > in splitseconds all rupas have been replaced already. We are so > used to think of the whole body that is sitting, don't we? But we > can learn to think in the correct way, that is a beginning of right > understanding. -------- > > Thinking remembers it > as if it is there, when it is not there. > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Thinking and remembering are each something, but a body (over a > specific > period of time) is something else. What thinking DOES do is > conceive of a > body as a single thing with core, self, own-being, and identity, > and as more > than just a changing collection of rupas across time. That is an > error. To > think it is nothing at all is another error. > --------------------------------------------- > N: I find this reminder helpful, we think all the time that a body > is present, that it stays for some time, but this is merely > thinking due to sa~n~naa. No, not thinking that there is nothing at all, but when a rupa appears such as heat or hardness, we learn that it is a mere dhamma with its own characteristic. > ------- > Cittas arise and fall away > so fast. > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Fast or slow is irrelevant, and nobody is measuring anyway. In any > case, > consciousness is a continuously functioning operation without gaps, > so the > plural 'cittas' is odd! All that vi~n~nana is is the presence of > experiential > content - the knowing of content. That content is constantly in > flux, with > nothing remaining as-is for any time at all. Impermanence is more > radical than > the pointillist perspective suggests. Nothing remains at all, and > nothing is > graspable. The Dhamma is deeper than any of us knows. > -------------------------------------------- > N: The plural cittas is meaningful, otherwise one would think of > one citta that stays. Seeing visible object is one moment of citta, > thinking off a person is another moment of citta, and they arise at > different moments. Thus, at the moment of seeing, visible object > appears, no person is seen, no person appears. It takes long before > this truth is directly realized, but it is important to have at > least intellectual understanding of this fact. ------------- > One thinks of tangible object, but it is still “I”. There is > an idea that the “I” must exist somewhere. > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > That idea isn't mine. > ------------------------------------------- > N: Howard, I know, but your understanding of anattaa can be > deepened. When speaking of a collection of rupas or mindstreams, > there is still thinking. One thinks of names and terms, and > collection or mindstream cannot be directly experienced. When > awareness begins to be aware of the characteristic of a single nama > or rupa there will be more detachment from ideas of person. > > ================================= > H: Nina, something is very wrong with your perspective. Fortunately > for you > and Lodewijk, you don't believe in it sufficiently to live > according to it! ------- N: I know how you feel about this. We can lead our normal life, thinking of other people, but we can begin to understand that this is thinking. Usually we think with akusala cittas about others. Thinking is done by the javanacittas in the process and these cannot be neutral, they are either kusala or akusala. We think more often with attachment, but we can also think with metta and karuna. We can learn the difference between the moments of thinking of a person and experiencing one nama or rupa through one of the six doors at a time. It is hard (speaking for myself) to get rid of the idea of a person who exists, and to realize that what we take for a person are mere fleeting dhammas. But a beginning can be made. Just one nama or rupa at a time, and then the question about a srtory: when this happens in an accident or that, how can you deny a person? Or thinking of a collection of rupas or a mindstream, such questions may not arise anymore. So many texts can help us. Think of the Sutta Raymond quoted, about a being, a being. Or the Visuddhimagga texts about the D.O.: mere dhammas produce dhammas, a person is not to be found. Really helpful and we need this. ***** Nina. #89774 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 4:07 am Subject: [dsg] Re: ... 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I dhammanusarin Dear Sukin (Nina, Alex, Howard, the DSG-Abhidhamma Gang), - We started with a genuine ADL book review, now it has branched into something like a debate that may never end, unless it is cut off right now. As usual you are trying to justify your views (that make you think differently) and explain the original motivation. >Suk (#89761): -- 1) Actually I wasn't expecting Tep to come up with so many questions at once, which I understand to be due to having been given a chance to express his view on the way the Dhamma is expressed here on DSG. -- 2) The fact that many discussants seem often to quickly pull out Suttas in order to make their point but without providing any of their own reasoned explanations, this is not saying that one should *not* quote Suttas. However I thought this to be a good way to draw them out to express their real understanding, in their own words. -- 3) True, I do have my preference for the Abhidhamma, this being that it allows me to go straight to considering dhammas by reducing the chance of being caught thnking in terms of `self' such as when reading the Suttas, and I believe that this should be the same for everyone. -- 4) Also I gave other explanations as to why I thought that this habit of pulling out Suttas was making the discussions going nowhere. And I would like to stress here, the part about discussants using the various concepts found in the Suttas as though they really understand them, but which according to me, they don't. T: Concerning 1), the reason I gave many (at least 20) questions was already explained in a previous reply : these questions show doubt a knowledgeable and inquisitive newcomer possibly has in mind when s/he reads ADL. In 2) you seem to show same annoyance when you are overwhelmed by several sutta quotes (I have the impression that you generally do not consider them as highly valuable as K. Sujin's teachings). I cannot blame you since I feel annoyed too when "some discussants" throw several commentary quotes at me as if they should be preferred to the original Teachings. Concerning 3), I think the original Abhidhamma Pitaka (the seven books) complements the Suttas, and I have not seen any reason why you think there is a competition between them. The main cause of conflict, I believe, stems only from the different interpretations and opinions of each person, or programmed gang members who have the same narrow view. In short, the problem is rather caused by conceit and conception with self-views. In 4) the point that you are stressing is an insult on the discussants who prefer "the various concepts found in the Suttas"; you are saying that they are stupid because they do not understand what they are talking about. That is no longer political! ............................. T: Then you add fuel to the fire by boasting about your unproven right understanding, while putting down the views of those who disagree with your DSG-Abhidhamma path. The capitalization below is mine. Notice that the 'I' is already capitalized. ;-) >Suk: It seems however, that WE have accumulated so much wrong understanding with regard to what the Buddha really taught. What I think WE need to remember is that indeed what he taught pertained to OUR moment to moment experience but of which WE are always making reference to "wrongly" (with wrong view). In light of this, I think the approach I have been stressing is *most direct*! So far, instead of approaching one's study of the Dhamma by referring to such common day-to-day and moment to moment experiences as seeing, hearing, thinking etc., WE have been thrust mostly with concepts that WE accept blindly, philosophize about or else follow the suggestion of without reflection. And this from my perspective, have taken people too far in the wrong direction! T: No, Sukin, you don't really mean "we" because in the back of your mind, "you" is not included in the "we" or "our". >Suk: So Tep, I suggest that we start all over again by going one step at a time, do you agree? T: No, Sukin, I do not, and will not agree, because you already have shown a fixed, unshakable belief in your own superior "understanding" of the claimed-to-be Dhamma of the Buddha. What is the use of having more discussion with me, or Alex, or Howard ... the list goes on, when you know that you will not change or even modify your cast-in- stone view, because "Only this is right"? Tep === #89775 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 4:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] annata scottduncan2 Dear Sukin, Thanks for the reply: S: "...The doctor suggested that under certain conditions, it was possible to cure this...Dr. Rajinder Kaur Sachdeva..." Scott: She would live about 12 hours to the west. I appreciate the tip. Sincerely, Scott. #89776 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 12:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] annata upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin (and Sarah, Scott, and Nina) - In a message dated 9/4/2008 2:09:35 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sukinder@... writes: Hi Howard, (Sarah, Scott and Nina), I would like to come into this discussion from a different and more conventional angle. Please feel free not to respond if you think that you will end up only repeating what you have said before. ============== S: At the moment of thinking, is there any other 'world' apart from that of thinking? At the moment of seeing, is there any other 'world' apart from that which appears to seeing, i.e the visual world? -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: At the moment of MY thinking or seeing or hearing etc, there is also YOUR thinking or hearing or seeing etc. Or do you think not? Sukin: Taking into consideration that there is only one citta experiencing one object at a time, I think you will agree that what we designate as ‘self and other’ in our interactions, must be associated with that “one fleeting cittaâ€? at that moment. ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't understand that at all, Sukin. At any point in time, there are, what(?), trillions of people, animals, etc that are conscious? What are you asserting here? I don't get your point. Whatever is in process at any instant is what is in process at that instant. What else are you asserting? ------------------------------------------------------------ However, since this citta arises and falls away purely by conditions that are equally fleeting, none of these experiences can in fact be considered ‘self’. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not clear on what you think "this" citta is. In any case, where does "self" come into this? At any point in time, there is a near-infinite number of instances of consciousness, each within a single stream of conditionality. These streams of experience, while certainly interacting, are nonetheless distinguishable. But every stream is just a collection of (relatively closely interrelated) phenomena, each one of which is fleeting, conditioned, dependent, and not-self. --------------------------------------------------------------- And one of these conditions is the ‘falling away’ of the previous citta and its accompanying cetasikas. Now even the previous citta must have fallen away, so how can we speak about ‘other realities’, those that never arise associated with the one citta per moment, to count in? I am talking here, about rupas of the body that are conditioned by the three other factors, excepting citta. But even these, arise and fall away in an instant, nothing remains to be pointed to, except an imaginary ‘new’ rupa. So what are we really referring to? The above can be seen with reference to one’s own experience and so it must be the same with what we take for ‘other’ as well. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, sukin, here you ARE speaking of others. I'm afraid I miss your point entirely. (I also have no reason to accept the packet perspective on consciousness. There are no gaps in the operation of consciousness, but the content of consciousness and its features (clarity, energy, etc) and concomitant operations are constantly changing.) ------------------------------------------------ In fact more so, since I can’t experience your citta while there can be a moment of satipatthana to know the citta which has just fallen away ‘here’. When I communicate with you, I go by conventional reality without having to believe that there is more than just one moment of citta arising and falling away there, as it is here. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, of COURSE we only infer the existence of others! But there is adequate evidence for me. What about you? ----------------------------------------------- The conventional body moves, but this will ever be by force of one citta arising and falling away at a time. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: The body moving is exactly the occurrence of many rupic events over a period of time. It is a matter of material phenomena that may or may not be noticed. (And again, this individual-citta notion is a theoretical construct that, upon analysis, presents grave problems. And though we are certainly aware of consciousness, we've never discerned "a citta" - at least I have not. Rather than contemplate such theoretical constructs, I prefer to attend to what is actually present. ------------------------------------------------ The rupas are not waiting to be commanded by citta, since none of these stay longer than a moment. The five khandhas arise together and fall away together and nothing is there apart of this to be seen as a ‘whole’ or as ‘interrelated’. The interrelatedness is between the realities that constitute the khandhas which are anicca, dukkha and anatta. Anything else brought into the picture must be due to wrong view, I think. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Again, I miss your point. I am bringing nothing extraneous into any picture. I am simply denying solipsism. ------------------------------------------------- Metta, Sukin ============================ With metta, Howard #89777 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 6:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ... 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I nilovg Dear Sukin and Tep, Excellent suggestion Sukin. I never hear enough about this subject and I like to go over it again and again. I never mind repetitions. I never find it monotonous to hear again about seeing, and what seeing experiences. There is always more to consider and understanding can grow, little by little. Nina. Op 4-sep-2008, om 3:53 heeft Sukinder het volgende geschreven: > So Tep, I suggest that we start all over again by going one step at a > time, do you agree? > Assuming that you do, let me begin by asking whether you agree with > the > following suggestions: > > -There are two kinds of reality: mental phenomena (nama) and physical > phenomena (rupa). > - Nama experiences something; rupa does not experience anything. > - Seeing is, for example, a type of nama; it experiences visible > object. > Visible object itself is rupa; it does not experience anything. #89778 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 6:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... nilovg Dear Alex, your quoted sutta strikes me especially while studying the D.O. in Visuddhimagga. When it is said in the suttas the world, meant is very often: the five khandhas. I think again of the verse I am going to quote: And the Buddha taught the Dhamma for cessation of [all] causes. When causes have been made to cease, the round, being cut, revolves no more; So here the life of purity [brahmacariya] exists to make a [final] end of pain. Finding no being, there is neither eternity nor annihilation. Op 3-sep-2008, om 22:49 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its > object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one > sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right > discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not > occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually > is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world > does not occur to one" -------- N: Thus: existence with reference to the khandhas is not to be found. Nina. #89779 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 6:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... sarahprocter... Dear Alex & all, --- On Thu, 4/9/08, Alex wrote: A:> "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one" http://www.accessto insight.org/ tipitaka/ sn/sn12/sn12. 015.than. html ..... S: Please take a look at the following if you have time in U.P: Kaccanagotta Sutta (SN:12:15(5)) 10500, 15227, 36930, 56882, 63073, 73481, 73841, 74661, 74694, 74870 Here is the main extract from the first one: >Sarah: >There are some useful notes at the back of B.Bodhi’s translation of the Kaccaanagotta Sutta which I know is a favourite of Howard’s: ..... From the Sutta (SN 11, Nidaanavagga, 15(5) )we read: “This world, Kaccaana, for the most part depends upon a duality - upon the notion of existence and the notion of nonexistence “ (Dvayanissito khvaaya.m Kaccaana loko yebhuyyena atthita~n c’eva natthita~n ca.) ..... Com notes (Spk): “ ‘For the most part’ (yebhuyyena) means for the great multitude, with the exception of the noble individuals (ariyapuggala). The notion of existence (atthitaa) is eternalism (sassata); the notion of nonexistence (natthitaa) is annihilationism (uccheda).” ..... Com notes (Spk-p.t): “The notion of existence is eternalism because it maintains that the entire world (of personal existence) exists forever. The notion of nonexistence is annihilationism because it maintains that the entire world does not exist (forever) but is cut off.” ..... Back to the Sutta: “ But for one who sees the origin of the world as it really is with correct wisdom, there is no notion of nonexistence in regard to the world. And for one who sees the cessation of the world as it really is with correct wisdom, there is no notion of existence in regard to the world.” .... Com notes (Spk): “ ‘The origin of the world’: the production of the world of formations. ‘There is no notion of nonexistence in regard to the world’: there does not occur in him the annihilationist view that might arise in regard to phenomena produced and made manifest in the world of formations, holding ‘They do not exist.” ..... Com notes (Spk-p.t): “The annihilationist view might arise in regard to the world of formations thus: ‘On account of the annihilation and perishing of beings right where they are, there is no persisting being or phenomenon.’ It also includes the wrong view, having these formations as its object, which holds: ‘There are no beings who are reborn.’ That view does not occur in him; for one seeing with right understanding the production and origination of the world of formations in dependence on such diverse conditions as kamma, ignorance, craving, etc, that annihilationist view does not occur, since one sees the uninterrupted production of formations.” ..... Com notes (Spk): “ ‘The cessation of the world’: the dissolution (bhanga) of formations. ‘There is no notion of existence in regard to the world’; There does not occur in him the eternalist view which might arise in regard to phenomena produced and made manifest in the world of formations, holding ‘They exist’.” ..... Com notes (Spk-p.t): “The eternalist view mght arise in regard to the world of formations, taking it to exist at all times, owing to the apprehension of identity in the uninterrupted coninuum occurring in a cause-effect relationship. But that view ‘does not occur in him’; because he sees the cessation of the successively arisen phenomena and the arising of succesively new phenomena, the eternalist view does not occur.” ******* >In other words, both views are inherently wrapped up in an idea of ‘self’ or identity in the ‘uninterrupted continuum’. While we cling to an idea of self, there is bound to be one of these views. In the Brahmajaala Sutta (and commentaries) we read in detail about all the possible wrong views including these. 7 kinds of annihilation view are mentioned in the sutta. I’ll just quote the first one: ..... (p.79 B.Bodhi trans.) “85. ‘Herein, bhikkhus, some recluse or brahmin asserts the following doctrine and view: ‘The self, good sir, has material form; it is composed of the four primary elements and originates from father and mother. Since this self, good sir, is annihilated and destroyed with the breakup of the body and does not exist after death, at this point the self is completely annihilated.’ In this way some proclaim the annihilation, destruction, and extermination of an existent being.’” ..... The other 6 kinds of annihilation view all end with the same last sentence about the belief of the ‘extermination of an existent being’. This idea of an ‘existent being’ is the real crux of the view. ..... In the sub-commentary notes (p.182), we read: “Since the destruction of the non-existent (asato) is impossible, the words ‘(annihilation) of an existent being’ are given signifying annihilation based on existence (atthibhaavanibandhano upacchedo).......” ..... A little later (p.183): “..For the assumption of a being arises when the compact of aggregates occurring in the form of a coninuum is not dissected (into its components). And since it is held that ‘the self exists so long as it is not annihilated,’ the assumption of annihilationism is based on the asumption of a being.’ “*** In summary, I don’t find any support for the idea that the cessation of all formations (i.e all phenomena including any experiencing of nibbana) at parinibbana has anything to do with an annihilation view Sarah ***For the non Pali-challenged: “Santaanavasena hi vattamaanesu khandhesu ghanavinibbhogaabhaavena sattagaaho, sattassa ca atthibhaavagaahanibandhano ucchedagaaho yaavaaya”m attaa na ucchijjati, taavaaya”m vijjati yevaa ti gaha.nto.” ***** ****** NEW IMPORTANT PART! >> S: No mountains or trees included at all. > **** >A: Trees are included perhaps under sanna or contents of sanna. .... S: Are you sure that even 'perhaps' trees are included? What do you understand the characteristic of sanna to be, Alex? Is it a nama or a rupa? What is a content of sanna? Are such 'contents' sanna khandha? Metta, Sarah ============ #89780 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 6:53 am Subject: Re: Lets talk about useful stuff truth_aerator Dear Scott, Tep and all, I think that the whole talk about existence & non-existence of trees and things to be either premature or totally off the direction of the Buddha-Dhamma. A much better question would be which defilements present and if so, what is to be developed? The Buddha's path is gradual path with gradual progress. The most coarse defilements are dealt first and then the more subtle ones. Lets talk about development. Here is the sutta to the point: ========================================================= 163. Bhikkhus, these are the four ways of reaching the goal. What four? A difficult means and slow realization, a difficult means and quick realization, a pleasant means and slow realization and a pleasant means and quick realization. Bhikkhus, what is the difficult means and slow realization? Here, bhikkhus, a certain one abides reflecting loathsomeness in the body, loathsomeness in food, detachment from all the world, seeing impermanence in all determinations and the perception of death is thoroughly established in him. He abides relying on these five powers of a trainer- Such as the powers of faith, shame remorse, effort and wisdom. The five faculties of faith, effort, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom are blunt in him as a result he realizes the destruction of desires slowly with successive leading. Bhikkhus, to this is said the difficult means and slow realization. Bhikkhus, what is the pleasant means and slow realization? Here, bhikkhus, a certain one secluded from sensual thoughts, angry thoughts, hurting thoughts and evil thoughts . . . re. . . . abides in the first higher state of mind [alex: Jhana].... he abides in the fourth higher state of mind [alex: Jhana]. He abides relying on these five powers of a trainer- Such as the powers of faith, shame remorse, effort and wisdom. The five faculties of faith, effort, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom are blunt in him as a result he realizes the destruction of desires slowly with successive leading. Bhikkhus, to this is said the pleasant means and slow realization. http://www.mahindarama.com/e-tipitaka/Anguttara-Nikaya/an4-161-170.htm =========== I've cut out the quick realization copy as it is exactly the same except a person has highly developed faculties. But as I understand it, it doesn't apply to us at this day an age. Lets talk about: loathsomeness in the body, loathsomeness in food, detachment from all the world, seeing impermanence in all determinations and the perception of death. --- Best wishes, Alex #89781 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 7:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Life exists in one moment truth_aerator Dear Nina and all, >--- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Alex, > ------- > N: All these suttas help us to understand that in the ultimate >sense there is no whole, a whole of a body that exists, Kayagatasati is primary to remove LUST for the body and all the negative things that fetter and are connected with kamaraga. "For one who remains focused on the foulness of the body, the obsession with passion for the property of beauty is abandoned. " http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/iti/iti.3.050-099.than.html It 85 Best wishes, Alex #89782 From: Sukinder Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 7:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ... 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I sukinderpal Tep, T: No, Sukin, I do not, and will not agree, because you already have shown a fixed, unshakable belief in your own superior "understanding" of the claimed-to-be Dhamma of the Buddha. What is the use of having more discussion with me, or Alex, or Howard ... the list goes on, when you know that you will not change or even modify your cast-in- stone view, because "Only this is right"? Sukin: Perhaps my very suggestion to you to go according to my plan sounds arrogant, but I don’t think that I could have avoided this. The way I state things is the way I state it, little of which will be rooted in kusala, but even this can be overlooked, I think. The overall effect is that I am an egomaniac, and you can even remind me of this from time to time, I won’t mind. And also my very intention to discuss the Dhamma with you may be clouded with conceit. However, in spite of all this, I still think that it would be useful to discuss what I’ve suggested. One thing you can take out of your mind though, if it is what you will conclude from this, is that I derive any “satisfaction” from doing this. So please re-consider and I won’t mind that you will occasionally point out my akusala tendencies. Only please, don’t allow such perception of my character come in the way. Metta, Sukin #89783 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 8:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: ... 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I dhammanusarin Dear Sukin, - Reading your reply I couldn't help laughing a lot (but I was not laughing at you). Sukin, your personality (non-existing in the ultimate sense) is puzzling and contradicting to the norm. I explain below why I think so. >Suk: One thing you can take out of your mind though, if it is what you will conclude from this, is that I derive any "satisfaction" from doing this. T: You mean, you are deriving "non-satisfaction" from the debate then? But non-satisfaction never is a motivation. >Suk: The overall effect is that I am an egomaniac, and you can even remind me of this from time to time, I won't mind. ... ... So please re-consider and I won't mind that you will occasionally point out my akusala tendencies. Only please, don't allow such perception of my character come in the way. T: It is good that you admit that you are an ego-maniac. Self- importance drives you to debate with me in order to win. If you win, then you can justify the conceived superiority that only your approach (the DSG-Abhidhamma path) works! All this is laughable since it contradicts with your no-self philosophy. No self is not compatible with ego-centricity/ego-mania. Tep === #89784 From: Sukinder Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 8:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ... 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I sukinderpal Dear Tep, Does the below mean that you are ready to get on with the discussion? If so, I'll wait for your response. ;-) Metta, Sukin Tep wrote: > > > Dear Sukin, - > > Reading your reply I couldn't help laughing a lot (but I was not > laughing at you). Sukin, your personality (non-existing in the > ultimate sense) is puzzling and contradicting to the norm. I explain > below why I think so. > > >Suk: One thing you can take out of your mind though, if it is what > you will conclude from this, is that I derive any "satisfaction" from > doing this. > > T: You mean, you are deriving "non-satisfaction" from the debate > then? But non-satisfaction never is a motivation. > > >Suk: The overall effect is that I am an egomaniac, and you can even > remind me of this from time to time, I won't mind. ... ... So please > re-consider and I won't mind that you will occasionally point out my > akusala tendencies. Only please, don't allow such perception of my > character come in the way. > > T: It is good that you admit that you are an ego-maniac. Self- > importance drives you to debate with me in order to win. If you win, > then you can justify the conceived superiority that only your > approach (the DSG-Abhidhamma path) works! All this is laughable since > it contradicts with your no-self philosophy. No self is not > compatible with ego-centricity/ego-mania. > > Tep > === > > #89785 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 8:30 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... truth_aerator Dear Sarah & all DSG'ers >---sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Alex & all, > S: Are you sure that even 'perhaps' trees are included? What do you >understand the characteristic of sanna to be, Alex? Is it a nama or a >rupa? What is a content of sanna? Are such 'contents' sanna khandha? > > Metta, > > Sarah > ============ Walk into one and tell me. Same with walls as well. Best wishes, Alex #89786 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 8:51 am Subject: [dsg] Re: ... 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I dhammanusarin Dear Sukin, - Thank you for the quick reply. Let's get to the important point. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > Does the below mean that you are ready to get on with the discussion? > If so, I'll wait for your response. ;-) > > Metta, > > Sukin > First thing first. Please tell me frankly what your motivation is. I need to justify whether it is worth the time (a lot of time) to do the debate; this is not just a discussion. It's not going to be worth the time, if your only motivation is to win and justify the conceived superiority. Thanks. Tep === #89787 From: Sukinder Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 9:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ... 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I sukinderpal Dear Tep, You asked: First thing first. Please tell me frankly what your motivation is. I need to justify whether it is worth the time (a lot of time) to do the debate; this is not just a discussion. It's not going to be worth the time, if your only motivation is to win and justify the conceived superiority. Suk: I've already given you some reasons in an earlier post, I think. But I'll add here, that I think that a discussion along this line should turn out to be quite different from the kind usually discussed here on DSG. Is this good enough reason? Metta, Sukin #89788 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 9:23 am Subject: Question regarding "Conceptual" realities truth_aerator To Sarah, Jon, Sukinder, Scott and DSG'ers Do the "conceptual" realities come out from the "ultimate" realities? yes or no. What distinguishes conceptual from ultimate reality? How long does conceptual reality last (in relation to ultimate reality)? Best wishes, Alex #89789 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 11:39 am Subject: [dsg] Re: ... 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I dhammanusarin Hi, Sukin - You are negotiating, it seems. >Tep: First thing first. Please tell me frankly what your motivation is. I need to justify whether it is worth the time (a lot of time) to do the debate; this is not just a discussion. It's not going to be worth the time, if your only motivation is to win and justify the conceived superiority. Suk: I've already given you some reasons in an earlier post, I think. But I'll add here, that I think that a discussion along this line should turn out to be quite different from the kind usually discussed here on DSG. Is this good enough reason? T: That question on your motivation has to be answered first, Sukin. After that we can discuss the "some reasons" of yours. BTW how long did it take you last time to buy your car? Tep === #89790 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 12:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Question regarding "Conceptual" realities nilovg Dear Alex, Op 4-sep-2008, om 18:23 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Do the "conceptual" realities come out from the "ultimate" realities? > yes or no. -------- N: If there were no ultimate realities, there would not be what we call this or that person. -------- > A:What distinguishes conceptual from ultimate reality? ------- N: Ultimates, nama or rupa, when they appear can be directly experienced through one of the six doors. Concepts are objecs of our thinking, they cannot be directly experienced. ------ > > A:How long does conceptual reality last (in relation to ultimate > reality)? ------ N: It is gone when the cittas that thinks of it have fallen away. I think of Alex, but after a while, I stop thinking of him, I turn the attention to something else. No Alex anymore. Nina. #89791 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 9:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question regarding "Conceptual" realities upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 9/4/2008 12:23:52 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: To Sarah, Jon, Sukinder, Scott and DSG'ers Do the "conceptual" realities come out from the "ultimate" realities? yes or no. What distinguishes conceptual from ultimate reality? How long does conceptual reality last (in relation to ultimate reality)? Best wishes, Alex =========================== There's just reality - singular, IMO. Whatever exists is real, and whaever is merely imagined is unreal. As for speech, there is more or less literal (or figurative), and also, more or less true (or false). With metta, Howard #89792 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 10:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question regarding "Conceptual" realities upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Alex) - In a message dated 9/4/2008 3:02:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@ xs4all.nl writes: N: It is gone when the cittas that thinks of it have fallen away. I think of Alex, but after a while, I stop thinking of him, I turn the attention to something else. No Alex anymore. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Gosh, Nina - for Alex's sake I do hope you keep on thinking of him! You know, there's a notion in mystical Judaism that every element of creation exists only for so long as G-d sustains it. You are making yourself sound very much like "you know who"! ;-)) ======================== With metta, Howard #89793 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 10:05 am Subject: Short Vacation upasaka_howard Hi, all - I will be on vacation from early tomorrow until late Sunday and out of internet contact until then. With metta, Howard #89794 From: "colette" Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 2:02 pm Subject: Re: Ancient Life & sensual distractions ksheri3 I tell ya, IGNORANCE is such a pain in the rectum, but that's just my opinion. I mean look at that subject line: somebody linked Ancient to life, if that isn't IGNORANCE then I don't know what IGNORANCE is, but I'm sure other people are more than happy to tell the BUDDHA that the BUDDHA ACTUALLY IS IGNORANT and THAT THEY KNOW WHAT IGNORANCE IS. ANCIENT? Hmmmm, why, is it possible that ANCIENT is a sloth's way of saying PAST? Can humans speak with Sloths? You c, I'm clearly getting at the practice of Foot Binding and I'm saying that the INSTITUTION created by and for FOOT BINDING still exists and therefore has no applicability to the PAST DHARMA. Zoiks, I modified that concept of the PAST and I peppered it with the concept of DHARMA. ARen't I crafty one? Enough with this moment that struck me the second I opened this forum and related my immediate thoughts to you. It's interesting, however, how this is gonna connect with what I wanted to do as I was walking through the rain back to the library since it certainly deals with A STREAM OF CONSCIOUSNESS. "It's a love that last forever. It's a love that has no past." The Beatles Hi connie, ">... precious reminder ..." THANK YOU connie. Do ya think that it has anything to do with what Winston Churchil was saying: "The truth is so precious that it must be surrounded by a bodyguard of lies"? <....> > > Alex: When some women sees a $5 purse & $200 dollar purse, the reaction is different! > > colette: It invites the question, 'empty of what'? > > connie: thanks for that precious reminder of the immediate & mediocre nature of our pedestrian lives. paritta as in mundane and limited; pedestrian, as in the sense of viithi <> > > Alex: Please don't forget about the specifics of the visual (or any other) object. > While ugly & pleasant sight are both "sight" - the content of the sight and its effect on someone with latent tendencies is different. > > connie: I think some of this "content" might be a later addition. Certainly, ruupa aaramma.na and not "people" are seen by vipaakacitta, but other minds 'consider' and treat as convention warrants < the abstractions formed by mano, or mind proper, from the objects of sense presented by the sense-organ when reacting to external objects. > (PTSD dhamma). > colette: c'mon, dear, shouldn't we allow Nina to at least lay into this topic since she is the resident expert on VIPISSANA? And what is Vipissana if not a conscious awareness? Does "consciousness" completely encompass that concept of "awareness"? Why is it that women are said to have "feminine intuition" and that intuition then cannot be considered as an "awareness" and therefore a "CONSCIOUSNESS"? --------------------------- > also, as we have already overheard (: somewhere in the dsg mall, but i've misplaced the receipt now, one of the Sisters, anyway: > > RD - << Seen in the midst of the crowd; thou deemest of value and genuine > Conjurer's trickwork, trees all of gold that we see in our dreaming. >> colette: that looks DELICIOUS! Got the Sutta address where it can be obtained? <....> ----------------------------------- > and > Pruitt - << Just as you might see a picture painted on a wall, smeared on with yellow orpiment, your view of this is wrong. > The perception they are human beings is groundless. >> > colette: this one looks like it's a little more work. -------------------------- > and taxing, no doubt! > colette: TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION is a highle honored corporate and republican tradition. But they do forget that the CAste System is what they cannot refuse. ARe dies cast? Is there a "casting couch"? What would Sigmond Fraud say about a casting couch, hmmm? THANKS FOR THE COMPANIONSHIP AND DIALOGUE connie. toodles, colette #89795 From: "colette" Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 2:30 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: ... 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I ksheri3 Hi Tep, Look, I accept everybody up-front and always give them more than enough opportunity to vindicate their position and actions but one thing I actually believe that you are DELIBERATELY AND INTENTIONALLY trying to avoid is GENDER. DEPROGRAMMING: First ya gotta admit that there's a difference between the thought processes of the male and the female. Secondly you're gonna have to start digging for how these differences occured. <....> > >Tep: First thing first. Please tell me frankly what your motivation > is. colette: Tep, that is such a losers gambit since that same sentence can and question can be reflected back at you through the "mirror of the mind". Why are you in this discussion group? <....> ---------------------------------------- > I need to justify whether it is worth the time (a lot of time) to do > the debate; colette: <....> Alas, my time's up and I've gotta run. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep" wrote: > > Hi, Sukin - > > You are negotiating, it seems. > > >Tep: First thing first. Please tell me frankly what your motivation > is. I need to justify whether it is worth the time (a lot of time) to do > the debate; this is not just a discussion. It's not going to be worth > the time, if your only motivation is to win and justify the > conceived superiority. <....> #89796 From: Sukinder Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 3:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ... 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I sukinderpal Dear Tep, ============== Suk: I've already given you some reasons in an earlier post, I think. But I'll add here, that I think that a discussion along this line should turn out to be quite different from the kind usually discussed here on DSG. Is this good enough reason? T: That question on your motivation has to be answered first, Sukin. After that we can discuss the "some reasons" of yours. BTW how long did it take you last time to buy your car? Suk: I guess I don't know the difference then, between 'motivation' and 'reason'. I would use them interchangeably in this context, but this may be because of bullheadedness. And I also don't understand the significance of your question on buying the car. Does this make it worse? Sukin #89797 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 4:44 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: ... 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I dhammanusarin Hello Colette, - I admit that your sense of humor can be entertaining sometimes. >C: Look, I accept everybody up-front and always give them more than enough opportunity to vindicate their position and actions but one thing I actually believe that you are DELIBERATELY AND INTENTIONALLY trying to avoid is GENDER. >DEPROGRAMMING: >First ya gotta admit that there's a difference between the thought processes of the male and the female. T: Yes, there is. In regard to thought processes, Colette is a male and Sukin is a female. :-) >C: Secondly you're gonna have to start digging for how these differences occured. <....> T: It is easy to see; no digging at all. > >Tep: First thing first. Please tell me frankly what your motivation is. >colette: Tep, that is such a losers gambit since that same sentence can and question can be reflected back at you through the "mirror of the mind". Why are you in this discussion group? <....> T: Easy to answer, Colette. I am here to discuss the Dhamma with only one motivation : to learn something useful. If I see that the topic is not useful, then I will not discuss it. More questions: Why do many members never discuss anything? Why did 'those discussants' always discuss several things that they should not have discussed? Tep === #89798 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 5:17 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: ... 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I dhammanusarin Dear Sukin, - Hmm.. So far you have been avoiding my simple question about motivation. Why does it take so long to answer? > >T: That question on your motivation has to be answered first. > >After that we can discuss the "some reasons" of yours. > >BTW how long did it take you last time to buy your car? > Suk: I guess I don't know the difference then, between 'motivation' and 'reason'. I would use them interchangeably in this context, but this may be because of bullheadedness. And I also don't understand the significance of your question on buying the car. > > Does this make it worse? > ............... T : To me a good motivation is driver for me to do anything. Sometimes, there are no reasons (justifications) why I am motivated. Reasons alone are not a motivator. Yet, I can find at least a reason to explain any motivation. Now, about the question on buying car. If you spend so much time to avoid the simple question I asked and ask more questions instead, then negotiating with a car salesperson can take you at least a week. The salesperson may quit before you can make up your mind!! Forget about the discussion, Sukin. I know it is going to take too much time and effort that is not justifiable. May we have peace, Tep === #89799 From: Sukinder Date: Thu Sep 4, 2008 6:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ... 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I sukinderpal Dear Tep and Collete, =========== Hmm.. So far you have been avoiding my simple question about motivation. Why does it take so long to answer? > >T: That question on your motivation has to be answered first. > >After that we can discuss the "some reasons" of yours. > >BTW how long did it take you last time to buy your car? > Suk: I guess I don't know the difference then, between 'motivation' and 'reason'. I would use them interchangeably in this context, but this may be because of bullheadedness. And I also don't understand the significance of your question on buying the car. > > Does this make it worse? ............ T : To me a good motivation is driver for me to do anything. Sometimes, there are no reasons (justifications) why I am motivated. Reasons alone are not a motivator. Yet, I can find at least a reason to explain any motivation. Now, about the question on buying car. If you spend so much time to avoid the simple question I asked and ask more questions instead, then negotiating with a car salesperson can take you at least a week. The salesperson may quit before you can make up your mind!! Forget about the discussion, Sukin. I know it is going to take too much time and effort that is not justifiable. Sukin: I just read your post to Collete in which you said: "I am here to discuss the Dhamma with only one motivation : to learn something useful." Do you not see that everyone else including me, must also be here ultimately to "learn" from discussions? As I've indicated before, mine is mixed and each time arises according to circumstance. For example, from last night, I thought about your initial willingness to go along with this discussion , and because I really would like to do this, I thought to be patient and avoid being sidetracked by other considerations. This is one reason why I don't think it helps to talk about motivation, when the interest in the end, is to further one's understanding of the Dhamma. Moreover I think it is natural given the amount of kilesas, that there *will* be many akusala motivations, so much so that it seems the kusala ones are less. However, I think if we are going to be bogged down because of fear that the akusala will be encouraged, then the situation would be hopeless, it seems to me. Besides were I to only mention the apparent kusala motivations, would this not be misleading both to you and myself? Tep, if you still think that it is going to be a waste of time discussing the Dhamma,(which by the way, though implied, I would try to avoid making a reference to in our discussions) with me, so be it. But know that I'm ready whenever you change your mind. Metta, Sukin