#90200 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 4:40 pm Subject: Re: capable of alighting on the stream dhammanusarin Dear Alex, - The venerable Mogok Sayadaw had a great belief in the majority of human beings (who have not committed the five "bad actions"). I probably take 7 years ! [But that is great!] What attainment was he talking about here that could result in 7 years at most? By "working hard" with the five faculties, what did he actually mean? All very dull people ask many questions, you know. :-) Thanks. Tep === #90201 From: han tun Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 4:47 pm Subject: Re: Difference of opinion hantun1 Dear Tep (Sarah, Nina), Tep: That's true. But how can we tell which opinion or idea is right, or better than the other? I think one way to find out which issue is right is to put each to test in several case studies. The better idea (or "opinion") is the one that can explain most real life situations better. For example, dana is kusala. Is dana accumulated by means of the three wholesome actions or through the six-sense doors? Han: A good suggestion. But who will do the testing? Han #90202 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? TGrand458@... In a message dated 9/14/2008 5:23:18 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: The English 'concept' is being used here differently by different people. You, TG, and Alex are using it as I always have to mean the sort of mental phenomenon we call an idea. Others here use it to refer to the intended referent of an idea, which often isn't an existent. In the case that it is a collection, these referent-of-collection, these referent-of-an-idea With metta, Howard Hi Howard Yea, I know what you mean. But the idea IS the "referent." There is nothing else to it. LOL I can't help it if a bunch of intellectuals make a big deal about non-existent things not existing....and yet somehow being permanent. LOL Its the Mad Mad Mad Mad World of Abhidhammica. TG #90203 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 5:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How what we do affects others (or doesn't) egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/9/14 : > Hi, Herman (and all) - > > > Who would swap real life for impersonal dhammas? > ---------------------------------------------- > Howard: > How can something be *replaced* by what is not different from it? > ----------------------------------------------- It may not be what you are meaning, but I see no overlap between being engaged in a social situation, and seeing instances of categories. Cheers Herman #90204 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 5:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Only for the Wise to See egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/9/9 sarah abbott : > Dear Tep (& Han), >However, usually we're lost in our ideas about body, postures and people, so we fail to appreciate that the only realities appearing through >the sense doors are the various rupas and that the only realities that can ever be known are such rupas or namas (or other rupas) >appearing through the mind door. I did ask you recently if you had ever encountered a doorway, and I may have missed your reply. On what basis do you maintain that any doorway is not an idea? Cheers Herman #90205 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 5:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings ... The No-book Rule Does Not Apply Here?. egberdina Hi Scott and Tep, 2008/9/15 Scott : > Dear Tep, > > Dhamma is to be learned as it is, not adapted as if it were just some > other philosophical creation in need of amendment by 'modern' thinkers. > Yes, exactly. And if Buddhagosa's 500AD opus is not a modern (for then) interpretation and adaptation of the oral tradition from 500BC, then there is no need to refer to Buddhagosa at all, and we can just all happily refer to the source texts. Cheers Herman #90206 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How what we do affects others (or doesn't) TGrand458@... Hi Herman and Howard I think what Howard means is that "phenomena is what it is" irregardless of how we think about it. I read it as a "middle-way type statement" that is not necessarily upholding any ulterior viewpoints. Is that about right Howard? TG In a message dated 9/14/2008 6:24:09 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/9/14 <_upasaka@..._ (mailto:upasaka@...) >: > Hi, Herman (and all) - > > > Who would swap real life for impersonal dhammas? > ------------ ---- ---- ---- -- > Howard: > How can something be *replaced* by what is not different from it? > ------------ ---- ---- ---- --- It may not be what you are meaning, but I see no overlap between being engaged in a social situation, and seeing instances of categories. Cheers Herman #90207 From: "Scott" Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 6:33 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings ... The No-book Rule Does Not Apply Here?. scottduncan2 Dear Tep, Thank you for the good points you give. T: "Once the books are well studied, it is time to put them away and start experimenting with the dhammas. Like a daughter who has to leave her parents to start her own family one day. ;-) Direct experiencing the dhammas is not thinking dependent. Thinking is a sankhara; beyond thinking is freedom from sankhara. [Sabba sankhara samatho]" Sincerely, Scott. #90208 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 2:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 9/14/2008 8:11:28 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: Hi Howard Yea, I know what you mean. But the idea IS the "referent." There is nothing else to it. LOL I can't help it if a bunch of intellectuals make a big deal about non-existent things not existing....and yet somehow being permanent. LOL Its the Mad Mad Mad Mad World of Abhidhammica. TG ============================== I don't agree, TG - sorry. When the intended referent of the concept of "the tree in my backyard" is a specific collection of rupas, as opposed to a self-existent entity, that referent is something that exists and is other than the idea - it is not nothing, and it is not an idea. An actual tree that kids climb is other than the idea of such. With metta, Howard #90209 From: "Scott" Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 6:36 pm Subject: Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ...Rode hard, tied up wet to a tree. scottduncan2 Dear Tep, T: "...I appreciate your clarification about what/who is or is not your true teacher. Why isn't the Buddha your teacher? That is a saddha. Taking refuge in the Dhamma and recollecting the Teachings is Dhammanusati. You can have both, can't you?" Scott: Yes, Tep, we are saying the same thing methinks. With the Buddha gone we are left with the Dhamma. We are both into it. Thank you for your good reflections here. Sincerely, Scott. #90210 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 6:38 pm Subject: Warning re: literalism in VisM truth_aerator Hello Herman and all, >--- "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Scott and Tep, > > Yes, exactly. And if Buddhagosa's 500AD opus is not a modern (for > then) interpretation and adaptation of the oral tradition from 500BC, > then there is no need to refer to Buddhagosa at all, and we can just > all happily refer to the source texts. > > Cheers > > Herman Here is an interesting thing re: VisM vs Patis on anapanasati. =================== Mystery of Breath Nimitta ============= "the mind of the jhanic meditator found in the Canon itself and quoted in the Patisambhidamagga as a simile involving a comparison of mind with a full clear moon, degenerates to a mistaken literalization of these images as internally produced visual data" In the Visuddhimagga description of mindfulness of breathing (Vis.213- 215, p.277), para.213 one reads: 214. When he does so in this way, the sign soon appears to him. But it is not the same for all; on the contrary, some say that when it appears it does so to certain people producing a light touch like cotton or silk cotton or a draught. 215. But this is the exposition given in the commentaries: It appears to some like a star or a cluster of gems or a cluster of pearls, to others with a rough touch like that of silk-cotton seeds or a peg made of heartwood, to others like a long braid string or a wreath of flowers or a puff of smoke, to others like a stretched-out cobweb or a film of cloud or a lotus flower or a chariot wheel or the moon's disk or the sun's disk. [Vs Patisambhidamagga.] Whose mindfulness of breathing in and out is perfect, well developed, and gradually brought to growth according as the Buddha taught, It is he illuminates the world just like the full moon free from cloud (Pat.III, 171, p.172). And, Just like the full moon free from cloud: Defilements are like clouds, the noble ones' knowledge is like the moon, the bhikkhu is like the deity's son who possesses the full moon. As the moon when freed from cloud, freed from mist, freed from smoke and dust, delivered from the clutches of the Eclipse-Demon Rahu, gleams and glows and shines, so too the bhikkhu who is delivered from all defilements gleams and glows and shines. Hence "just like the full moon free from cloud" was said (Pat.III, 182, p.175). Here, what is given canonically as a simile for the mind, in the Vimuttimagga is taken literally as visual percepts, although appropriately, given as images to which one should not pay attention. The Visuddhimagga, however, both mistakenly takes the similes "smoke", "mist", "dust", "gleam", "glows", "shines", and "moon", as literal visual images, and also misapprehends them as the counter-sign, the mark of success!, in direct opposition to the Vimuttimagga. One can only wonder how these metaphorical images, found at the end of the section describing breathing meditation in the Patisambhidamagga, eventually became literal visual events related to meditation practice in later commentarial works. From the evidence presented in this note, it may seem advisable to consider both the Vimuttimagga and the Patisambhidamagga as more reliable texts as far as breathing meditation is concerned. Bhikkhu Sona http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebmed058.htm ============================= Best wishes, Alex #90211 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 6:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ...Rode hard, tied up wet to a tree. egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/9/14 Scott : > Dear Herman, > > > I do think that sometimes, or from time-to-time (very infrequently at > the beginning), sati-sampaja~n~naa can arise, even while reading > (listening to) the Dhamma. When 'understanding' is of this kind - > that is not just an intellectual exercise - then there is something > going on. Sorry to mislead you. > Have no fear, I was not misled :-) Cheers Herman #90212 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 7:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Corner: DN 33 Twos (26-29), Commentary, part 2. egberdina Hi Nina, 2008/9/11 Nina van Gorkom : > Dear friends, > > sutta:Purity of morality and view. (Siilavisuddhi ca > di.t.thivisuddhi ca. > ------- > As to purity of morality, the Co. states that it is siila able to > attain purity. It refers to da.sa. Pali: 1365. We read (transl U Kyaw > Khine, 1372): > "What, in this connection is purity of morality? > It is not transgressing in action, not transgressing in speech, not > transgressing in both action and speech.This is called purity of > morality..." > --------- > > Co: Siilavisuddhiiti visuddhi.m paapetu.m samattha.m siila.m. > Abhidhamme panaaya.m ''tattha katamaa siilavisuddhi? Kaayiko > aviitikkamo vaacasiko aviitikkamo kaayikavaacasiko aviitikkamo, aya.m > vuccati siilavisuddhii''ti eva.m vibhattaa. > ------- > N: Siila is only purity of morality, siilavisuddhi, if it is > developed together with right understanding of nama and rupa. So long > as one takes siila for self it is not siilavisuddhi. > ------------- > > As to purity of view, di.t.thivisuddhi, the Co. states that this is > understanding able to attain purity. It refers to da.sa. Pali 1366. > We read (transl U Kyaw Khine, 1373): > "There are: knowledge that one's deeds are one's own (kammassakata > ~naa.na); knowledge conducive to the attainment of the four Ariya > Truths; knowledge of one who has realized the Path; knowledge of one > who has attained Fruition." > ---------- > > > Co: Di.t.thivisuddhiiti visuddhi.m paapetu.m samattha.m dassana.m. > Abhidhamme panaaya.m ''tattha katamaa di.t.thivisuddhi? > Kammassakata~naa.na.m saccaanulomika~naa.na.m > maggasama"ngissa~naa.na.m phalasama"ngissa~naa.na''nti eva.m vuttaa. > -------- > > N: The Co then adds another aspect of kamma 'not being one's own' or > 'being one's own'. > Akusala kamma is not one's own, since it destroys what is good, and > kusala kamma is one's own since it leads to benefit. In the case of > kusala kamma, one does not depend on another and nobody else can > destroy it. > This is further explained in the "Expositor" (II, p. 515) and the > "Dispeller of Delusion (II, p. 161). It is said of akusala kamma that > it destroys benefit and promotes harm. Whereas kusala kamma destroys > harm and promotes good. We read in the "Dispeller of Delusion: > " ... when there is this knowledge of ownership of kamma capable of > knowing in this way, there is no limit to the number of those who, by > knowing it, by giving many gifts, by fulfilling virtue and > undertaking the uposatha, experience happiness after happiness, > success after success and reach nibbaana." > -------- > N: This aspect is an exhortation to develop what is wholesome > including right understanding, so that eventually nibbaana can be > attained. > The subco. elaborates on the benefit (attha) as a consequence of > kusala kamma: benefit in this world, in another world and the highest > benefit. > > The Co. mentions under purity of view saccaanulomika~naa.na, > conformity knowledge, and this is insight knowledge in conformity > with the Truth, or adaptation knowledge. It is pa~n~naa that > penetrates one of the three characteristics of impermanence, dukkha > or anattaa. It surely leads to nibbaana, the subco. adds. It is > followed by Path-consciousness and Fruition. > ---------- In the above you make reference to kamma that is one's own, and what is not one's own. But then you also say that if sila is taken as self, it is not sila. I assume that you mean that sila is not one's own. I have tried to make sense of what you wrote, but I cannot. Can you clarify it? Cheers Herman #90213 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 7:22 pm Subject: Re: Old kamma & present beha philofillet Hi Herman > I think the abyssmal chariot simile comes from the same section. It > goes something like this. If you take a chariot apart, you can't drive > to town in it, therefore there can't have been a chariot. Herman, I think it's much more profound and important to consider than that. It ends with "those who see things this way see things with true vision" or something like that. If it's from a commentary, which I think it might be, that can be discounted to a certain small degree, but if it's from a sutta, anything that ends with a line like that cannot be called "abysmal" I think, you know? > It would be funny if it wasn't for those people who quote it as being > a fundamental truth :-) In my opinion, what people do is a kind of "panna appropriation" (I like coining these terms) which is like taking deep wisdom, discussing it in theoretical terms, which is a fair thing to do, but then trying to apply it to their own lives, which is absurd. So the deep teaching itself should not be dismissed, but people can be reminded that trying to have it too soon or believing that it is immediately relevant to their thick minds is bad practice and against the Buddha's gradual training. (The way that this is defended is by their saying that there is perfected pariyatti that only ever-so-gradually conditions patipatthi, but that is not the way the greedy human's mind works, alas. That's the way I see it... Metta, Phil #90214 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 7:54 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,301 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 301. 2. [As to function:] ignorance confuses beings about physical objects [of sense desire] and is a condition for the manifestation of formations; likewise [kamma-] formations form the formed and are a condition for consciousness; consciousness recognizes an object and is a condition for mentality-materiality; mentality-materiality is mutually consolidating and is a condition for the sixfold base; the sixfold base occurs with respect to its own [separate] objective fields and is a condition for contact; contact touches an object and is a condition for feeling; feeling experiences the stimulus of the object and is a condition for craving; craving lusts after lust-arousing things and is a condition for clinging; clinging clings to clinging-arousing things and is a condition for becoming; becoming flings beings into the various kinds of destiny and is a condition for birth; birth gives birth to the aggregates owing to its occurring as their generation and is a condition for ageing-and-death; and ageing-and-death ensures the decay and dissolution of the aggregates and is a condition for the manifestation of the next becoming because it ensures sorrow, etc.45 So this [Wheel of Becoming] should be known accordingly as occurring in two ways 'as to function' in whichever way is appropriate to each of its parts. ************************ Note 45. 'Sorrow, etc., have already been established as ignorance; but death consciousness itself is devoid of ignorance and formations and is not a condition for the next becoming; that is why "because it assures sorrow, etc." is said' (Pm. 640) ---------------------------- 301. yasmaa panettha avijjaa vatthuusu ca satte sammoheti, paccayo ca hoti sa"nkhaaraana.m paatubhaavaaya. tathaa sa"nkhaaraa sa"nkhata~nca abhisa"nkharonti, paccayaa ca honti vi~n~naa.nassa. vi~n~naa.nampi vatthu~nca pa.tivijaanaati, paccayo ca hoti naamaruupassa. naamaruupampi a~n~nama~n~na~nca upatthambheti, paccayo ca hoti sa.laayatanassa. sa.laayatanampi savisaye ca pavattati, paccayo ca hoti phassassa. phassopi aaramma.na~nca phusati, paccayo ca hoti vedanaaya. vedanaapi aaramma.narasa~nca anubhavati, paccayo ca hoti ta.nhaaya. ta.nhaapi rajjaniiye ca dhamme rajjati, paccayo ca hoti upaadaanassa. upaadaanampi upaadaaniye ca dhamme upaadiyati, paccayo ca hoti bhavassa. bhavopi naanaagatiisu ca vikkhipati, paccayo ca hoti jaatiyaa. jaatipi khandhe ca janeti tesa.m abhinibbattibhaavena pavattattaa, paccayo ca hoti jaraamara.nassa. jaraamara.nampi khandhaana.m paakabhedabhaava~nca adhiti.t.thati, paccayo ca hoti bhavantarapaatubhaavaaya sokaadiina.m adhi.t.thaanattaa. tasmaa sabbapadesu dvedhaa pavattikiccatopi ida.m vi~n~naatabba.m yathaaraha.m. #90215 From: "Scott" Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 7:58 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ...Rode hard, tied up wet to a tree. scottduncan2 Dear Herman, H: :Have no fear, I was not misled :-)" Scott: ;-) Sincerely, Scott. #90216 From: "connie" Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 8:16 pm Subject: Re: Vism.XVII,301 nichiconn Path of Purity, p.701 (By way of function.) And because ignorance brings confusion to beings as regards objects and is cause of the appearance of the activities; likewise the activities [582] make preparations for conditioned things and are the cause of consciousness; and consciousness cognizes the object and is the cause of name-and-form; and name-and-form gives support to each other and is the cause of the sixfold sense; and the sixfold sense proceeds in its own range and is the cause of contact; and contact touches the object and is the cause of feeling; and feeling enjoys the taste of the object and is the cause of craving; and craving lusts after the things of lust and is the cause of grasping; and grasping clings to what it can cling to and is the cause of becoming; and becoming throws (a man) into the various courses of life and is the cause of birth; and birth produces the aggregates by proceedingas their first appearance and is the cause of old-age-and-death; and old-age-and-death is established in the maturity and breaking up of the aggregates and is the cause of the appearance of a new becoming, it being the abode of sorrow and so on: - therefore, in all the terms, this should be understood by way of the double function of procedure. #90217 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 8:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Old kamma & present beh egberdina Hi Phil, 2008/9/15 Phil : > > > Hi Herman > >> I think the abyssmal chariot simile comes from the same section. It >> goes something like this. If you take a chariot apart, you can't drive >> to town in it, therefore there can't have been a chariot. > > Herman, I think it's much more profound and important to consider than > that. It ends with "those who see things this way see things with true > vision" or something like that. If it's from a commentary, which I > think it might be, that can be discounted to a certain small degree, > but if it's from a sutta, anything that ends with a line like that > cannot be called "abysmal" I think, you know? This is the entire sutta section that refers to chariots. (from SN 5:10) Just as, with an assemblage of parts, The word 'chariot' is used, So, when the aggregates are present, There's the convention 'a being.' What others have done with that snippet is at the expense of the other detail in the sutta, such as: Setting at Savatthi. Then, in the morning, the bhikkhuni Vajira dressed and, taking bowl and robe, entered Savatthi for alms. When she had walked for alms in Savatthi and had returned from her alms round, after her meal she went to the Blind Men's Grove for the day's abiding. Having plunged into the Blind Men's Grove, she sat down at the foot of a tree for the day's abiding. Then Mara the Evil One, desiring to arouse fear, trepidation, and terror in the bhikkhuni Vajira, desiring to make her fall away from concentration, approached her and addressed her in verse. and Then Mara the Evil One, realizing, "The bhikkhuni Vajira knows me," sad and disappointed, disappeared right there. I like your term panna appropriation, and I believe that what has been done with the Vajira Sutta over time sure fits the bill. Turning a 4 line verse into an entire doctrine that denies the content and context of it's source, is misappropriation, you know.:-) Cheers Herman #90218 From: "connie" Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 8:34 pm Subject: Re: Only for the Wise to See .. Less Book Recitation nichiconn Delightful King Tep, Tep: If the in-and-out breaths are not "concepts", then what are? c: The in-an-out breaths as in "bodily formations"? dully, connie #90219 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 9:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Only for the Wise to See sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- On Mon, 15/9/08, Herman Hofman wrote: 2008/9/9 sarah abbott : > Dear Tep (& Han), >However, usually we're lost in our ideas about body, postures and people, so we fail to appreciate that the only realities appearing through >the sense doors are the various rupas and that the only realities that can ever be known are such rupas or namas (or other rupas) >appearing through the mind door. H:>I did ask you recently if you had ever encountered a doorway, and I may have missed your reply. ... ... S: Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/90085 and then we can discuss further if you like. Metta, Sarah ====== #90220 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 9:18 pm Subject: Re: Warnings ... The No-book Rule Does Not Apply Here?. kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Scott and Tep, > > 2008/9/15 Scott : > > Dear Tep, > > > > Dhamma is to be learned as it is, not adapted as if it were just some > > other philosophical creation in need of amendment by 'modern' thinkers. > > > > Yes, exactly. And if Buddhagosa's 500AD opus is not a modern (for > then) interpretation and adaptation of the oral tradition from 500BC, > then there is no need to refer to Buddhagosa at all, and we can just > all happily refer to the source texts. > Hi Herman, Recently I alleged there was only one point that DSG's formal meditators agreed on. And that was that satipatthana could be practised at will. Was I right? Can you name one sutta - or just one sentence from a sutta - that you understand in the same way as any other DSG member understands it? Ken H PS: In case my question was too vague, let me suggest the word "satipatthana." Is there any agreement its meaning? KH #90221 From: "colette" Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 10:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Only for the Wise to See ksheri3 Hi Herman, Why does it appear as though you are taking the position of a "god of the threshhold" since all doorways have threshholds that must be crossed upon entering or leaving, passing through the doorway? Good hearing from you again. I'll be reading more tonight but probably even better tomorrow at the library. I'm ploding through this negative concept called "Apostasy". What a mess of hatefilled bull...! toodles, colette #90222 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 10:17 pm Subject: Absolutely Accomplished is the Arahats! bhikkhu0 Friends: The Seven Qualities of an Arahat: 1: The impermanence of all constructions is perfectly seen & comprehended. 2: The addiction & torture of all sense-desires is perfectly perceived & known.. 3: His mind is only inclined towards solitude, seclusion, silent ease, and Peace... 4: The Four Foundations of Awareness are continually & perfectly established.... 5: The Five Mental Abilities & Powers are thoroughly developed & consummated..... 6: The Seven Links to Awakening are utterly refined and fully accomplished....... 7: The Noble Eightfold Way is perfectly realized, acquired and all concluded.......! By these 7 criteria, he clearly & invariably recognizes, that for him, has the mental fermentations associated with Sense-Desire, joined with Becoming, and grounded in Ignorance been completely & irreversibly eliminated. Cut of at the root and like a palm tree stump never to grow again... Mission completed. Done is what was to be done. No more of this... More on what those gone to end, have perfected: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Awareness_Sati.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Five_Abilities_Summary.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Leading_to_Enlightenment.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/The_Way.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Perfectly_Enlightened.htm Arahat Bhikkhu & Bhikkhuni Source: The Exhaustive Speeches by the Buddha. Digha Nikaya 34 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=25103 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/index.html Have a nice advanced day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) .... #90223 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Sep 14, 2008 7:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? TGrand458@... In a message dated 9/14/2008 7:36:24 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: I don't agree, TG - sorry. When the intended referent of the concept of "the tree in my backyard" is a specific collection of rupas, as opposed to a self-existent entity, that referent is something that exists and is other than the idea - it is not nothing, and it is not an idea. An actual tree that kids climb is other than the idea of such. With metta, Howard .................................................... Hi Howard Yea, we disagree. There is just what arises. There is no "unarisen referent" nor an "arisen referent that doesn't exist." The idea of the tree in the backyard is just the memory and associations thereof. Hummm, on further looking at what you say, you seem to be just claiming that the tree "itself" is existing as a set of conditions. I wouldn't argue with that, but I don't think that's the issue. When Abhidhammikas say that concepts are not real, they are not talking about the "(rupa) tree structure," they are referring to concept of the tree. But I say the concept of the tree is a mental structure that is conditioned and imprinted due to contact of conditions. Therefore I see it as no special ontological category. It is conditioned, impermanent, associated with suffering when conjoined with attachment, and nonself. So in our example, the things that actually arise are the actual "tree structure," and the concept/mentation of such. To me, the referent is just the memory/concept activity; and the tree is just the tree. What else is there? If you want to say the referent is the actual tree ... that's OK, in either case we are dealing with either the memory or the actual tree and both are actualities. (But the actual tree doesn't arise by just thinking about it.) From an Abhidhammika point of view, if the "referent" is considered to be the "actual tree structure," then we have even larger issues with Abhidhammikas claiming it doesn't exist. But I don't think the Abhidhammikas are claiming that. I think Abhidhammikas believe that concepts are "non-conditioned permanent archetypes that don't exist as real things." I think that is ridiculous and lacks a solid grounding on the conditions driving concepts. Of course they think I'm ridiculous...but I'll see their ridiculous and raise them an absurd... I think Abhidhammikas have correctly understood that concepts are delusional, but have incorrectly figured that delusional concepts can't be actual. But they are actual, -- as perception (deluded or non-deluded), memory, mentation, -- even if they aren't true. "Delusion Happens." T-Shirt time??? ;-) TG #90224 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 1:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Corner: DN 33 Twos (26-29), Commentary, part 2. nilovg Dear Herman, I appreciate it that you follow Sangiiti corner. Op 15-sep-2008, om 4:14 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > In the above you make reference to kamma that is one's own, and what > is not one's own. But then you also say that if sila is taken as self, > it is not sila. I assume that you mean that sila is not one's own. I > have tried to make sense of what you wrote, but I cannot. Can you > clarify it? --------- N: No, I did not say this. I said: so long as siila is taken for self it is not purity of siila, siila visuddhi. The visuddhis, purities, point to satipatthaana that is developed. Now, to return to the beginning, kamma is one's own: each individual receives the result of his own deeds. The word own is by way of explanation, it does not mean that a self receives the result of his deeds. Kamma is cetanaa and vipaaka are particular cittas such as rebirthconsciousness and results such as seeing, hearing. At the same time you can see that there is no denial of this individual or that individual. Now another explanation which may be somewhat unusual: kusala kamma is one's own, akusala kamma is not. The Expositor explains: can anybody take away someone's virtue? It is accumulated and kusala conditions kusala again, including right understanding and this can lead to arahatship. Akusala kamma is not one's own, it leads to loss of possessions, it is destructive. I was thinking of your remark denial of personality when listening to a Thai recording this morning. When we want to give away something we are thinking of 'I am giving'. But when we study Dhamma it is different: at least nineteen sobhana cetasikas have to arise together with the kusala citta so that there can be daana. Confidence (saddhaa), sati, non-attachment, non-aversion, etc. at first we understand in theory that not a self gives, only citta and cetasikas, and then there can be a beginning of knowing characteristics of dhammas. Little by little we come to understand that it is not self who gives, that it is dhamma, conditioned reality, that undertakes giving. **** Nina. #90225 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 1:21 am Subject: Re: Getting comfort from deep teachings that one doesn't have true insight into? kenhowardau Hi Phil, I have already replied to this post, but I left the first part out. So I'll go back to it. I wouldn't want you having the last word on anything. :-) ----------- KH: > > Can you see that a conventional understanding of 'doing' is > antithetical to the Dhamma? According to the Dhamma, there is only one > real kind of doing. And that is, the function performed [momentarily] > by a fleeting, conditioned dhamma. > > Ph: > No, I can't understand how on earth a conventional understanding of doing is antithetical to the Dhamma. Last night I was reading the Vism instructions on meditating on the breath, just for one example. It is an extremely detailed list of what to do. That conventional doing will lead to bhavana, perhaps, and then there can be a real understanding of Dhamma which is at the deep level of no conventional "doing", real insight into cittas performing their functions etc. But to try to scrap conventional "doing" right from the beginning is not at all what the Buddha teaches, as far as I can see. Gosh, Ken, you're studying the deep, later chapters of Vism. How can you possibly say that the earlier chapters on concentration don't involve doing!?! --------------- Maybe it is difficult to see. (Sorry if that sounds condescending.) But there is no difference between the first, middle and last pages of the Pali texts: they are all about conditioned dhammas. --------------- Ph: > Just for one example: "Herein, this clansman who is a beginner should first give attention to this meditation subject by counting. And when counting, he should not stop short of five or go beyond ten or make any break in the series. By stopping short of five, his thoughts get extied in the cramped space, like a herd of cattle shit in a cramped pen. By going beyond ten, his thoughts that the number (rather than the rebaths) for their support..." Are you going to say that this counting the breaths no-less-than 5 times and no-more-than 10 times just arises on its own or will you concede there are clear and specific instruction about how to meditate? (Of course this is Buddhaghosa but since you are studying vism. in detail in its depths, I assume you take Buddhagosa as reliable in transmitting the Buddha's teaching.) ---------------- I could be wrong, but I think the Visuddhimagga's term "beginner" applies exclusively to someone who can identify the calm that accompanies kusala consciousness and who wishes to cultivate that form of calm to the exclusion of all else. Such individuals are extremely rare. Kusala pleasant feeling and akusala pleasant feeling are very hard to differentiate. Harder still is the differentiation between kusala and akusala *neutral* feeling. Even so I believe only those rare, good, wise, individuals who *can* do it could possibly qualify as jhana "beginners." (And, BTW, only a tiny minority of those beginners can progress to the first stage of development - access concentration.) After being accepted by a jhana teacher, a beginner will perform certain actions (sitting up straight, concentrating on kasinas, counting etc). Everyone performs actions of some sort: there is no way of not performing actions. These just happen to be actions that go with being a jhana beginner. Actions that go with being a satipatthana beginner will include finding a teacher, hearing the true Dhamma . . and so on. Actions that go with being a good worldling will include giving alms, avoiding wrong livelihood etc. In all cases, there are ultimately only dhammas. Insight development requires knowing this ultimate reality. Other forms of development don't. ----------- Ph: > Actually, it seems silly offering one example of conventional doing because it suggests that it has to be defended by examples! Of course there is conventional doing Ken! Conventional helps to establish conditoins for insight! WSWWANWWWTB! (short for Howard's famous expression! We start where we are...) ----------- If the rare conditions for being a jhana beginner (knowing kusala from akusala) are not present there will be no benefit whatsoever from mimicking actions of a jhana beginner in the hope of developing kusala calm. Only a fool would do it. ----------------------- Ph: > Anyways, I'll drop it there. ----------------------- Yes, do that. Let me have the last word, and admit I have won! :-) (joke) Ken H > I make the kind of pointings-out like I > did today without any hope of you seeing what I mean, you are > thoroughly hooked on your way - and that's not bad! In the end, I > think, being utterly hooked on some approach to the Dhamma helps us > make good progress in getting beyond our worst defilements, even if the > approach we are hooked on is flawed. Yes, yes, it's all about cittas > being developed, not people, not really, not ultimately I agree. But > there has to be people doing things wisely to avoid harming themselves > and others first, and people doing things to provide themselves with > better conditions for deepening understanding...etc. > > Metta, > > Phil > #90226 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 2:06 am Subject: Re: Difference of opinion dhammanusarin Dear Han (Nina, Sarah, KenH, Sukin, Scott),- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Tep (Sarah, Nina), > > Tep: > That's true. But how can we tell which opinion or idea is right, or better than the other? > I think one way to find out which issue is right is to put each to test in several case studies. The better idea (or "opinion") is the > one that can explain most real life situations better. > For example, dana is kusala. Is dana accumulated by means of the three wholesome actions or through the six-sense doors? > > Han: > A good suggestion. > But who will do the testing? > > Han > Nina, Sarah, KenH, Sukin, and Scott, of course ! Tep === #90227 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 2:19 am Subject: Re: Only for the Wise to See .. Less Book Recitation dhammanusarin Witty Queen Connie, - I am happy to see a subtle question from you, it is not dull by any measure. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > Delightful King Tep, > > Tep: If the in-and-out breaths are not "concepts", then what are? > > c: The in-an-out breaths as in "bodily formations"? > > dully, > connie > T: As for breaths as "concept", you know well that that has been the DSG idea, not mine. It is one reason why they reject anapanasati, saying "breaths are concepts, not ultimate reality" ! Yes, Connie, breaths are kayasankhara. That's what the Buddha said; by the way, concepts and paramattha dhammas are not found in the suttas. Tep === #90228 From: "rinzeee" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 2:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream rinzeee --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder wrote: Dear Sukin Sukin: Today's audience in disagreeing with the Abhidhamma, insist that conventional realities *exhibit* characteristics to be known, for example, that mountains could be studied and seen as being impermanent, suffering and non-self. Or else they believe that breath or posture as `conceived' by them, these when attended to can lead ultimately to insight, enlightenment…. Rinze: Lord Buddha talks of 37 factors of enlightenment of which 5 are, (1) Faith, (2) Energy, (3) Mindfulness, (4) Concentration and (5) Wisdom. Wisdom, if not balanced with Faith, would result in needless queries of this sort, even disagreement of either one or the other facets of Dhamma. Unless we aspire to be a Buddha and investigate things on our own, without any guidance from others, the need for Faith is there in us. This can be seen when we are helpless, destitutes in Life or when about to die. At such times, some look up to God, but we would seek refuge in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha. Unlike the Faith in other religions, in the Buddhist perspective, Faith is Confidence (a cetasika). Fundamentally, Faith (in something), is a set of instructions, which when followed, alters the mental state of a person, to the better (vis-à-vis Nibbana, in this case). One should have the wisdom to see this change in mental state to the "better", this is Reflective Knowledge in the simplest form, and would be, how wisdom is involved in the Buddhist perspective of Faith. This `change in mental state', need not necessarily be the kind experienced from Sotapanna to Sakadagami and beyond, if so, seeing Paticcha Samuppada would be confined to Sotatpanna and above only! In fact we all are founded on the Dhamma. The Dhamma touches all of us. Our existence is Dhamma, or at least the part that we see. When PS is seen in some aspects, faith and wisdom works in tandem (apart from the other enlightenment factors). This is how Faith becomes the foundation for all of the Dhamma to be seen. Sukin: Today's audience, let alone knowing the distinction, their insistence on a formal practice whereby concepts of time, place, posture and particular object become all important, this being exactly due to wrong view, causes them to move further and further away from the intended goal. Rinze: Not having followed the "set of instructions" (or having understood the Dhamma in all its aspects), as given in the Sutta or the Abhidhamma (in which case the instructions are, as given in the commentaries, hence not the `Buddha words'), one cannot come to the definite conclusion that, "they believe that breath or posture as `conceived' by them, these when attended to can lead ultimately to insight, enlightenment" or that "their insistence on a formal practice whereby concepts of time, place, posture and particular object become all important" is right or wrong view Unless one can prove to the contrary, either by experience or citing the Dhamma, in ether way it should be Patccha Samuppada. Lord Buddha talks of 4 types of individuals in Samdhi Sutta AN 4.94 "There is the case of the individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness, but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. Then there is the case of the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquillity of awareness. Then there is the case of the individual who has attained neither internal tranquillity of awareness nor insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. And then there is the case of the individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment." Samadhi Sutta AN 4.94 Both, internal tranquillity of awareness (concentration), & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment (insight), are needed for one to progress in Dhamma. And when one part is lacking, Lord Buddha, instructs us, to go to the other individual who has that part in full. So who are we, Sukin, to say that, "this way is better than the other", when perhaps, both "ways" may be necessary, to complement each other, isn't it? May we all see the Dhamma Rinze #90229 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 2:37 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings ... The No-book Rule Does Not Apply Here?. dhammanusarin Dear Herman and Scott, - Thank you for thinking of me. See a comment below. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Scott and Tep, > > 2008/9/15 Scott : > > Dear Tep, > > > > Dhamma is to be learned as it is, not adapted as if it were just some > > other philosophical creation in need of amendment by 'modern' thinkers. > > > > Yes, exactly. And if Buddhagosa's 500AD opus is not a modern (for > then) interpretation and adaptation of the oral tradition from 500BC, > then there is no need to refer to Buddhagosa at all, and we can just > all happily refer to the source texts. > > Cheers > > Herman > T: Scottie is right; Dhamma is about truths to be ultimately seen by the wise. Dhamma is pure -- unfabricated by the thoughts of deluded, uninstructed persons -- and timeless; therefore, we'd better leave it the way it truly is. I have a different view about Ven. Buddhaghosa, dear Herman. Being supported by good reasons, I absolutely believe that he was an ariya savaka who had great intelligence. However, the Vism is a mixed bag -- some comments he made are controversial. Tep === #90230 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 2:40 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings ... The No-book Rule Does Not Apply Here?. dhammanusarin Dear Scott, - Thank you very much. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > Thank you for the good points you give. > > T: "Once the books are well studied, it is time to put them away and > start experimenting with the dhammas. Like a daughter who has to leave > her parents to start her own family one day. ;-) Direct experiencing > the dhammas is not thinking dependent. Thinking is a sankhara; beyond > thinking is freedom from sankhara. [Sabba sankhara samatho]" > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > It is a pleasure to be on the same side with you, once in a blue moon, Scottie. Tep === #90231 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 2:46 am Subject: Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ...Rode hard, tied up wet to a tree. dhammanusarin Dear Scott, - Happy indeed is me who made a second "strike" today. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > T: "...I appreciate your clarification about what/who is or is not your > true teacher. Why isn't the Buddha your teacher? That is a saddha. > Taking refuge in the Dhamma and recollecting the Teachings is > Dhammanusati. You can have both, can't you?" > > Scott: Yes, Tep, we are saying the same thing methinks. With the > Buddha gone we are left with the Dhamma. We are both into it. Thank > you for your good reflections here. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > T: Thank you for this second agreement. Yes, we are both into it. Tep === #90232 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting comfort from deep teachings that one doesn't have true insight into? nilovg Dear Ken. It is very helpful for me the way you explain beginner. When we read the text we may wonder who is a beginner, but now it is clear. Nina. Op 15-sep-2008, om 10:21 heeft kenhowardau het volgende geschreven: > I could be wrong, but I think the Visuddhimagga's term "beginner" > applies exclusively to someone who can identify the calm that > accompanies kusala consciousness and who wishes to cultivate that form > of calm to the exclusion of all else. > > Such individuals are extremely rare. Kusala pleasant feeling and > akusala pleasant feeling are very hard to differentiate. Harder still > is the differentiation between kusala and akusala *neutral* feeling. > Even so I believe only those rare, good, wise, individuals who *can* > do it could possibly qualify as jhana "beginners." (And, BTW, only a > tiny minority of those beginners can progress to the first stage of > development - access concentration.) #90233 From: han tun Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 4:07 am Subject: Re: Difference of opinion hantun1 Dear Tep, > > > Tep: That's true. But how can we tell which opinion or idea is right, or better than the other? I think one way to find out which issue is right is to put each to test in several case studies. The better idea (or "opinion") is the one that can explain most real life situations better. For example, dana is kusala. Is dana accumulated by means of the three wholesome actions or through the six-sense doors? > > Han: A good suggestion. But who will do the testing? > Tep: Nina, Sarah, KenH, Sukin, and Scott, of course ! -------------------- Han: I thought you would volunteer to do the testing as it was your idea. You made a good suggestion, but it would not work. If such a testing was done, and if the test results favoured the Kamma Sect, the Dvaara Sect would not accept. If the test results favoured the Dvaara Sect, the Kamma Sect would not accept. Whatever it might be the Kamma Sect would not change its position. And whatever it might be the Dvaara Sect would not change its position. Please remember that the debate was going on for years until the difference died a natural death. That was why I said it was impossible to get an agreement in such a situation. Han #90234 From: "Scott" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 4:37 am Subject: Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? scottduncan2 Dear Alex, A: "So there *is* something permanent? I disagree here." Scott: No, concepts are 'nothing', hence anicca doesn't apply in my opinion. Here is an excerpt from an earlier discussion, Sarah quotes: "The Abhidhammattha Vibhavani (Book 8) distinguishes between six kinds of concepts that are names, naama-pa~n~natti (see Visuddhimagga VIII, note 11). 1. Vijjamana pa~n~nattis, concepts which make known what is real, for example the words ruupa, naama, vedanaa (feeling), or sa~n~naa (perception) 10. 2. Avijjamana pa~n~nattis, concepts which make known what is not real, such as the words Thai or foreigner. These concepts do not represent absolute realities, citta and cetasika which are nama, and rupa. Thai or foreigner are not real in the absolute sense, they are conventional realities, sammutti dhammas. Could akusala citta (unwholesome consciousness) be Thai or foreign? Akusala citta is a paramattha dhamma (a reality), it is a dhamma which has its own characteristic, it is not Thai or foreign. 3. Vijjamanena avijjamana pa~n~nattis, concepts of the non-existent based on the existent. There is the expression "the person with the six abhi~n~nas." The six abhi~n~nas are real but person is not real. Thus this concept stands for what is real and for what is not real. 4. Avijjamanena vijjamana pa~n~nattis, concepts of the existent based on the non-existent. There is the expression 'woman's voice'. The sound is real, but the woman is not real. 5. Vijjamanena vijjamana pa~n~nattis, concepts of what is real based on what is real. There is the term cakkhu-vinnana (eye-consciousness). Cakkhu (eye) is a reality, namely the cakkhu-pasada-rupa (eyesense, a reality sensitive to colour or visible object), and vinnana (consciousness) is also a reality, namely the reality which experiences. 6. Avija amanena avijjamana pa~n~nattis, concepts of what is not real based on what is not real. There is the expression "the kings son". Both king and son are not real, they are sammutti dhammas, conventional realities." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/10221 A: "I believe that concepts are sanna/naama and thus impermanent AND conditioned (at least by language)." Scott: You may also consider Abhidhammattha Sangaha. Here Larry excerpted some quotes from the CMA: ch. 8, guide to #29 There are two kinds of concepts, atthapa~n~natti or concepts-as-meanings, and naamapa~n~natti or concepts-as-names. The former are meanings conveyed by the concepts, the latter the names or designations which convey that meaning. For example, the notion of a four-legged furry domestic animal with certain physical features and traits is the concept-as-meaning of the term 'dog'; the designation and idea 'dog' is the corresponding concept-as-name. ch. 8 #30 By following the sound of speech through the process of ear-consciousness, and then by means of the concept conceived by (the process in the) mind-door that subsequently arises, meanings are understood. These concepts should be understood as fashioned by worldly convention. ch. 3, guide to #17 The cittas that arise in a mind-door process can cognize any of the five physical sense objects as well as all types of mental objects inaccessible to the cittas in a sense-door process. Mind-door cittas can also cognize an object belonging to any of the three periods of time - past, present, or future - or one that is independent of time (kalavimutta). This last expression applies to Nibbana and concepts. Nibbana is timeless because its intrinsic nature (sabhava) is without arising, change and passing away; concepts are timeless because they are devoid of intrinsic nature." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/12935 Sincerely, Scott. #90235 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 4:51 am Subject: Re: Difference of opinion ... Natural Death ... dhammanusarin Dear Han and all, - Nice remarks. >Han: I thought you would volunteer to do the testing as it was your idea. You made a good suggestion, but it would not work. If such a testing was done, and if the test results favoured the Kamma Sect, the Dvaara Sect would not accept. If the test results favoured the Dvaara Sect, the Kamma Sect would not accept. Whatever it might be the Kamma Sect would not change its position. And whatever it might be the Dvaara Sect would not change its position. Please remember that the debate was going on for years until the difference died a natural death. That was why I said it was impossible to get an agreement in such a situation. T: Your wise remark above reminds me of the DSG Abhidhamma Sect and the Sutta Sect we have here. ;-) Thank you very much, Han. You convince me that there is no use to do the testing. So, let the difference hold until it die of a natural death. Tep === #90236 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 1:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How what we do affects others (or doesn't) upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 9/14/2008 8:24:04 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/9/14 : > Hi, Herman (and all) - > > > Who would swap real life for impersonal dhammas? > ---------------------------------------------- > Howard: > How can something be *replaced* by what is not different from it? > ----------------------------------------------- It may not be what you are meaning, but I see no overlap between being engaged in a social situation, and seeing instances of categories. Cheers Herman ============================== My point was that "real life" and "impersonal dhammas" are one and the same. The terminology just reflects different "takes" on the same thing. With metta, Howard #90237 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 5:29 am Subject: Re: Getting comfort from deep teachings that one doesn't have true insight into? philofillet Hi Nina Ken wrote: > > I could be wrong, but I think the Visuddhimagga's term "beginner" > > applies exclusively to someone who can identify the calm that > > accompanies kusala consciousness and who wishes to cultivate that form > > of calm to the exclusion of all else. (etc etc...) You wrote: > It is very helpful for me the way you explain beginner. When we read > the text we may wonder who is a beginner, but now it is clear. Hmmm. I guess you place more value on the opinions of Ken H than I do...or perhaps he is repeating something he heard from an A.S talk. Other than that, there is no particular reason to think this is the correct definition of a beginner. The vism certainly doesn't define it in this way. The vism says that the beginner experiences the gross aspects of the breath in the way the listener experiences the gross aspects of the sound of the ringing gong. And then as there is develoopment, the subtler aspects are cognized. You folks will always always forever and ever choose to ignore that passage. Because it doesn't fit with your doctrine. That is the way things must be... Metta, Phil p.s this is my last post for awhile at DSG. #90238 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 1:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 9/15/2008 2:59:30 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: Hi Howard Yea, we disagree. There is just what arises. There is no "unarisen referent" nor an "arisen referent that doesn't exist." The idea of the tree in the backyard is just the memory and associations thereof. -------------------------------------------- Howard: But I'm not talking about the *idea* of the tree. Nobody climbs an idea or plants one or chops one down. An actual tree is an extremely complex stream of conditions, many at a time, that are interrelated in such a way as to make possible what we *call* climbing, planting, and chopping down. Viewing this dynamic set of conditions as a single reality and naming it as an individual is avijja-in-action, but so is dismissing the reality of the aggregations we call "trees". ------------------------------------------- Hummm, on further looking at what you say, you seem to be just claiming that the tree "itself" is existing as a set of conditions. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm, sort of - though not existing all at the same time. ---------------------------------------------- I wouldn't argue with that, but I don't think that's the issue. When Abhidhammikas say that concepts are not real, they are not talking about the "(rupa) tree structure," they are referring to concept of the tree. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: No, they really are not. They believe that what the idea of "tree" refers to is nonexistent, and it is such projected fictions (as they see them) that they refer to as "pa~n~natti," these being neither nama nor rupa, but nothing at all. -------------------------------------------------- But I say the concept of the tree is a mental structure that is conditioned and imprinted due to contact of conditions. Therefore I see it as no special ontological category. It is conditioned, impermanent, associated with suffering when conjoined with attachment, and nonself. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: This "idea" of tree, which I actually think is not a single mental entity, but is a pattern of mental operations, is also what I mean by concept, but it is NOT what others here mean by "pa~n~natti". They view pa~n~natti as imagined mental shadow-projections with no reality at all to them - what ideas supposedly refer to but which actually exist in no manner at all. -------------------------------------------------- So in our example, the things that actually arise are the actual "tree structure," and the concept/mentation of such. To me, the referent is just the memory/concept activity; and the tree is just the tree. What else is there? --------------------------------------------------- Howard: At a single moment? Only these, of course - though what the "tree structure" could be at a single zero-duration instant eludes me. Ken notwithstanding (;-), single moments are ungraspable fictions. At any instant, phenomena are *in process*. -------------------------------------------------- If you want to say the referent is the actual tree ... that's OK, in either case we are dealing with either the memory or the actual tree and both are actualities. (But the actual tree doesn't arise by just thinking about it.) ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Of course not. Only the "idea" of it does. ----------------------------------------------------- From an Abhidhammika point of view, if the "referent" is considered to be the "actual tree structure," then we have even larger issues with Abhidhammikas claiming it doesn't exist. But I don't think the Abhidhammikas are claiming that. I think Abhidhammikas believe that concepts are "non-conditioned permanent archetypes that don't exist as real things." I think that is ridiculous and lacks a solid grounding on the conditions driving concepts. Of course they think I'm ridiculous...but I'll see their ridiculous and raise them an absurd... I think Abhidhammikas have correctly understood that concepts are delusional, but have incorrectly figured that delusional concepts can't be actual. But they are actual, -- as perception (deluded or non-deluded), memory, mentation, -- even if they aren't true. "Delusion Happens." T-Shirt time??? ;-) TG ============================= With metta, Howard #90239 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: breath. was: Getting comfort .. nilovg Dear Phil, Op 15-sep-2008, om 14:29 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > The vism says that the beginner experiences the > gross aspects of the breath in the way the listener experiences the > gross aspects of the sound of the ringing gong. And then as there is > develoopment, the subtler aspects are cognized. ------- N: Consider, before he can begin with that he has to know when he concentrates with lobha and when with kusala citta, with detachment. Detachment from sense-objects is the goal. Before knowing the gross aspects he must know what breath is. Rupa, conditioned by citta. So long as he is alive citta conditions this rupa, but when it is time to die, there is his last breath. He must know many things before he even begins, and his understanding and awareness must be very keen. Nina. #90240 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:11 am Subject: Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? truth_aerator Dear Scott, Thank you for your reply >--- "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > A: "So there *is* something permanent? I disagree here." > > Scott: No, concepts are 'nothing', hence anicca doesn't apply in my > opinion. Here is an excerpt from an earlier discussion, Sarah >quotes: > >#in previous msg# >Scott: Concepts are not sa"nkhaara as I understand it. As I see it, > since impermanence is a characteristic of conditioned realities - > paramattha dhammas - and since concepts are not paramattha dhammas, > then they do not arise and fall away - they are not impermanent If concepts are "nothing" then how can "nothing" be divided into 6 kinds of nothing? > "The Abhidhammattha Vibhavani (Book 8) distinguishes between six >kinds of concepts that are names, naama-pa~n~natti (see >Visuddhimagga VIII, note 11). Is 6 kinds of concepts found anywhere in the suttas, Patis? I am very cautious about taking things from VisM because there are some incorrect and over-reified teachings (that go against Patis & suttas) found there. Best wishes, Alex #90241 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Skype chat dhammanusarin Dear Nina (Scott, Connie, Han, Herman), - I wrote a reply to your message (see below) on the day it appeared on the message board, but the Yahoo! computer did not post it. So I gave up. But today I have a renewed enthusiasm to do it again. >Nina: Recently, Tep asked me to reconsider these things, ultimate truth, conventional truth. And yes, I think it is excellent material for the non-book discussion group started by Sarah and Tep :-)) T: The real credit should go to Sukin, who first asked me to drop any sutta quotes for the various reasons he gave. And I finally agreed. It would be nice if you also could join this no-books kind of discussion. .......................... >N: I can add that the point Sutta versus Abhidhamma is also a topic that recurs all the time on dsg, as you kow. As I was studying the Book of Analysis and comparing the way the four Truths are dealt with here with the Suttanta way, I especially found helpful what Iggleden said in the intro to the Book of Analysis: the Abhidhamma is directed to the practice. Again, no contradiction but a different way of treatment. Also the suttas remind us to be aware now, but the details given in the Abhidhamma are most valuable. Not theory (as some people think, unfortunately), but always directed to satipatthana now. T: I thinks several people, including me, are not yet convinced that "the details given in the Abhidhamma are most valuable", Nina. Can you explain in your own words with examples in real life how the details in the Abhidhamma are more valuable than the Teachings in the Suttas? It is fair to use real-life examples in the comparison testing, since the Suttas are based on real-life cases. Tep === #90242 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 11:31 am Subject: Re:Abhidhamma practice truth_aerator > >N: >the Abhidhamma is directed to the practice. Again, no contradiction Dear Nina, Sarah and other DSG members. Please describe the practice. > Also the suttas remind us to be aware now, but the details > given in the Abhidhamma are most valuable. Not theory (as some >people > think, unfortunately), but always directed to satipatthana now. First of all, WHICH Abhidhamma? How can I know that there are only 72, 82, 75, 100 dhammas? Some Abhidhamma books like: Dharmaskandha and Sangitiparyaya: is attributed to Sariputta Prajnaptisastra: to Mogallana or Mahakaccana Dharmaguptaka Sariputrabhidharmasastra (T. 1548) to Sariputta... Vajjiputakkas had Abhidhamma that is attributed to Sariputta... Oh which one... Which one...? Best wishes, Alex #90243 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 11:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Skype chat nilovg Dear Tep, Op 15-sep-2008, om 19:27 heeft Tep het volgende geschreven: > I thinks several people, including me, are not yet convinced > that "the details given in the Abhidhamma are most valuable", Nina. > Can you explain in your own words with examples in real life how the > details in the Abhidhamma are more valuable than the Teachings in the > Suttas? It is fair to use real-life examples in the comparison > testing, since the Suttas are based on real-life cases. ------- N: Let me first straighten out something. I never said that I value and respect all three parts of the Tipitaka and would never make such an evaluation. In another post you spoke about sutta sect and abhidhamma sect in dsg. This is not correct, even when you meant a joke. There are different methods of teaching as the Buddha said himself. Also in the Abhidhamma we find sections of suttanta method and abhidhamma method. When I have time I shall come up with some examples why details of the Abhidhamma are helpful. As you know, plenty of homework for me, Larry just posted a Visuddhimagga part, and Connie will give me a piece of samvega, I guess. Nina. #90244 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 11:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Abhidhamma practice nilovg Dear Alex, Some time ago you had the same remark and your query was answered. Maybe delve into some old posts, I believe by Sarah: Abhidhamma. You had a remark about the Visuddhimagga not always correct. Perhaps you can indicate where? It is good to straighten this out. Nina. Op 15-sep-2008, om 20:31 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Oh which one... Which one...? #90245 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 12:52 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:VisM truth_aerator Hello Nina, >--- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > You had a remark about the Visuddhimagga not always correct. >Perhaps > you can indicate where? It is good to straighten this out. > Nina. The one about: Mystery of Breath Nimitta (by Bhikkhu Sona) "the mind of the jhanic meditator found in the Canon itself and quoted in the Patisambhidamagga as a simile involving a comparison of mind with a full clear moon, degenerates to a mistaken literalization of these images as internally produced visual data" In the Visuddhimagga description of mindfulness of breathing (Vis.213- 215, p.277), para.213 one reads: 214. When he does so in this way, the sign soon appears to him. But it is not the same for all; on the contrary, some say that when it appears it does so to certain people producing a light touch like cotton or silk cotton or a draught. 215. But this is the exposition given in the commentaries: It appears to some like a star or a cluster of gems or a cluster of pearls, to others with a rough touch like that of silk-cotton seeds or a peg made of heartwood, to others like a long braid string or a wreath of flowers or a puff of smoke, to others like a stretched-out cobweb or a film of cloud or a lotus flower or a chariot wheel or the moon's disk or the sun's disk. [Vs Patisambhidamagga.] Whose mindfulness of breathing in and out is perfect, well developed, and gradually brought to growth according as the Buddha taught, It is he illuminates the world just like the full moon free from cloud (Pat.III, 171, p.172). And, Just like the full moon free from cloud: Defilements are like clouds, the noble ones' knowledge is like the moon, the bhikkhu is like the deity's son who possesses the full moon. As the moon when freed from cloud, freed from mist, freed from smoke and dust, delivered from the clutches of the Eclipse-Demon Rahu, gleams and glows and shines, so too the bhikkhu who is delivered from all defilements gleams and glows and shines. Hence "just like the full moon free from cloud" was said (Pat.III, 182, p.175). Here, what is given canonically as a simile for the mind, in the Vimuttimagga is taken literally as visual percepts, although appropriately, given as images to which one should not pay attention. The Visuddhimagga, however, both mistakenly takes the similes "smoke", "mist", "dust", "gleam", "glows", "shines", and "moon", as literal visual images, and also misapprehends them as the counter-sign, the mark of success!, in direct opposition to the Vimuttimagga. One can only wonder how these metaphorical images, found at the end of the section describing breathing meditation in the Patisambhidamagga, eventually became literal visual events related to meditation practice in later commentarial works. From the evidence presented in this note, it may seem advisable to consider both the Vimuttimagga and the Patisambhidamagga as more reliable texts as far as breathing meditation is concerned. Bhikkhu Sona http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebmed058.htm Full text at that address ============================= Best wishes, Alex #90246 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 1:02 pm Subject: Re: Skype chat dhammanusarin Dear Nina (Han, Alex), - I am hesitant to argue with you : >N (#90243): Let me first straighten out something. I never said that I value and respect all three parts of the Tipitaka and would never make such an evaluation. T: Now please read again the message below that was posted earlier: > >N (#90093): I can add that the point Sutta versus Abhidhamma is also a topic that recurs all the time on dsg, as you kow. ... ... Again, no contradiction but a different way of treatment. Also the suttas remind us to be aware now, but the details given in the Abhidhamma are most valuable. T: By saying "but the details given in the Abhidhamma are MOST valuable", isn't it clear that it means the suttas are LESS valuable? It's fine if you still insist that you "never said" that. ......................... >N: When I have time I shall come up with some examples why details of the Abhidhamma are helpful. As you know, plenty of homework for me, Larry just posted a Visuddhimagga part, and Connie will give me a piece of samvega, I guess. T: The fact that "details of the Abhidhamma are helpful" is already accepted by me. That is not the issue! So there is no need to do any comparison testing with the suttas via real-world examples, Nina. Tep === #90247 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 1:46 pm Subject: The Chariot Simile dhammanusarin Hi Herman and Phil (Howard, Sarah), - I hope you might find my comment below useful as a supplement to the on-going discussion. > > Herman: > I think the abyssmal chariot simile comes from the same section. It > goes something like this. If you take a chariot apart, you can't drive to town in it, therefore there can't have been a chariot. > Phil: Herman, I think it's much more profound and important to consider than that. It ends with "those who see things this way see things with true vision" or something like that. If it's from a commentary, which I think it might be, that can be discounted to a certain small degree, but if it's from a sutta, anything that ends with a line like that cannot be called "abysmal" I think, you know? .................. T: Pondering over the Chariot Simile : Just as, with an assemblage of parts, The word 'chariot' is used, So, when the aggregates are present, There's the convention 'a being.' I think the simile's logic/reasoning/theme is that a 'being' is a name/label for an assembly of the (five) aggregates. Same logic is again seen in the definition of a 'contact' as the coming-together of three dhammas : an external sense object, an internal sensing medium (eye, ear, ...), and a consciousness. If we stop at this point, there would be no need to ask questions on self, no self, existence, non-existence, ultimate realities, concepts. Just a thought. Tep === #90248 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ...Rode hard, tied up wet to ... upasaka_howard Hi, Colette (and Sarah) - In a message dated 9/15/2008 4:43:09 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ksheri3@... writes: Good Morning Howard, Sure, Sarah has a point. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I thought so. -------------------------------------------- You suggest that a thought has no foundation upon which it can be seperated and/or distinguished. --------------------------------------------- Howard: I do? I wasn't aware of that - or maybe I don't understand you. Thoughts have foundations. And what is it I calim that thoughts can't be distinguished from? I'm not follwing what you are asserting, Colette. --------------------------------------------- I give Sigmond Fraud who generated an entire class of drug distributors completely upon the foundation of his homosexual drug addicted hallucination (I classify his homosexuality through his fixation upon masturbation, self- gratification/self-abuse, which clearly distinguishes his concentration upon his phallus 100% of the time). How many children, today, are put on drug therapy as a means of controling them? This is a foundation based upon nama and the hallucinatory effects of nama. Do you see clinging to nama such as a dharma or a boat to cross a river? ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Colette, I'm not following this or what it has to do with what I wrote. I'm sorry. --------------------------------------------- I look forward to reading the entire post. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Reading WHAT entire post? ---------------------------------------------- toodles, colette ============================== With metta, Howard #90249 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 2:33 pm Subject: Re: The Chariot Simile truth_aerator Hello Tep, Herman, Howard, Phil and all, >--- "Tep" wrote: > > Hi Herman and Phil (Howard, Sarah), - > > > > Herman: > > I think the abyssmal chariot simile comes from the same section. >It > > goes something like this. If you take a chariot apart, you can't > drive to town in it, therefore there can't have been a chariot. > > > Phil: Herman, I think it's much more profound and important to > consider than that. It ends with "those who see things this way see > things with true vision" or something like that. If it's from a > commentary, which I think it might be, that can be discounted to a > certain small degree, but if it's from a sutta, anything that ends > with a line like that cannot be called "abysmal" I think, you know? > .................. The example of chariot is probably from Milindapanha. Lets examine it. When we see a "car" and ask a person, what is that? A car, person replies. If we take the car apart and ask the person what he sees. S/He will answer a pile of parts. Thing is that he saw different states of component parts. Furthermore the debate centers very much on the *precise* meaning of the word "to exist". What does PRECISELY existence means? If it means "function", or being able to do things, then the Car most definately exists. When the example is carried toward a living being, then it is even less appropriate. You can't take a person apart and then recombine together like you could do with a car (or a chariot). If existence implies "irreducability and existence of ultimate dhammas" then we need to clarify what we mean by "ultimate" dhammas ? Does "ultimate" means: Unconditioned? Well as I remember only Nibbana (and maybe space) is one is unconditioned. Unable to be further reduced into different constituent parts? Then we have: 4 Mahabhutas + Avijja > T: Pondering over the Chariot Simile : > > Just as, with an assemblage of parts, > The word 'chariot' is used, > So, when the aggregates are present, > There's the convention 'a being.' > > I think the simile's logic/reasoning/theme is that a 'being' is a > name/label for an assembly of the (five) aggregates. Same logic is > again seen in the definition of a 'contact' as the coming-together of > three dhammas : an external sense object, an internal sensing medium > (eye, ear, ...), and a consciousness. > > If we stop at this point, there would be no need to ask questions on > self, no self, existence, non-existence, ultimate realities, concepts. > > Just a thought. > > Tep > === An additional question could be: "How to attain Right View"? Best wishes, Alex #90250 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How what we do affects others (or doesn't) upasaka_howard Hi, TG (and Herman) - In a message dated 9/15/2008 4:44:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: Hi Herman and Howard I think what Howard means is that "phenomena is what it is" irregardless of how we think about it. I read it as a "middle-way type statement" that is not necessarily upholding any ulterior viewpoints. Is that about right Howard? TG ============================== I'm sorry that I didn't make myself clearer. What I meant in the following is just that what real life actually consists of is impersonal dhammas, and seeing it as otherwise is just a convenient convention, or, if not recognized as such, an error of understanding. But, indeed, reality is what it is, regardless of what we might think it is. With metta, Howard In a message dated 9/14/2008 6:24:09 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/9/14 <_upasaka@..._ (mailto:upasaka@...) >: > Hi, Herman (and all) - > > > Who would swap real life for impersonal dhammas? > ------------ ---- ---- ---- -- > Howard: > How can something be *replaced* by what is not different from it? > ------------ ---- ---- ---- --- It may not be what you are meaning, but I see no overlap between being engaged in a social situation, and seeing instances of categories. Cheers Herman #90251 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 4:01 pm Subject: Re: The Chariot Simile dhammanusarin Dear Alex, - You asked: > > An additional question could be: "How to attain Right View"? > > A right answer could be : avoid the extreme views. Tep === #90252 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 4:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How what we do affects others (or doesn't) egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/9/15 : > Hi, Herman - > >> >> Who would swap real life for impersonal dhammas? >> ---------------------------------------------- >> Howard: >> How can something be *replaced* by what is not different from it? >> ----------------------------------------------- > > It may not be what you are meaning, but I see no overlap between being > engaged in a social situation, and seeing instances of categories. > > ============================== > My point was that "real life" and "impersonal dhammas" are one and the > same. The terminology just reflects different "takes" on the same thing. > I'm afraid I'm going to dig my heels in and utter a resounding "NO, NO, NO". If there is no valid distinction between a sentient being, and say, a brick, or a garbage can full of trash, then compassion, karuna, metta, harm and benefit are meaningless, and Buddhism with it. As I was writing to Nina, a rose pulled apart is no longer a rose. A human being is not only the aggregation of it's component parts. Cheers Herman #90253 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 5:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings ... The No-book Rule Does Not Apply Here?. egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/9/15 kenhowardau : > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" > wrote: >> > >> > Dhamma is to be learned as it is, not adapted as if it were just some >> > other philosophical creation in need of amendment by 'modern' > thinkers. >> > >> >> Yes, exactly. And if Buddhagosa's 500AD opus is not a modern (for >> then) interpretation and adaptation of the oral tradition from 500BC, >> then there is no need to refer to Buddhagosa at all, and we can just >> all happily refer to the source texts. >> > > > > Hi Herman, > > Recently I alleged there was only one point that DSG's formal > meditators agreed on. And that was that satipatthana could be > practised at will. > > Was I right? Can you name one sutta - or just one sentence from a > sutta - that you understand in the same way as any other DSG member > understands it? > > Ken H > > PS: In case my question was too vague, let me suggest the word > "satipatthana." Is there any agreement its meaning? > I would say there is not. And I would suggest that has always been the case, since the very first time the word was used by a sage to convey a particular meaning. However, I am sure that what we will all agree on is that there have been dozens of schools of thought all claiming a superior understanding of the sayings of The Sage from the Sutta Nipata. And that many of these schools have withered and died. (I tell you, it's a jungle of views out there :-) What we can also know and all agree on as well is that the views that survive are the incorrect ones, by necessity, because the view of The Sage is for and leads to cessation. What survives are views more likely to guarantee almsfood to those who are in competition for it, and the survival of their brotherhood. Cheers Herman #90254 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 1:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? TGrand458@... In a message dated 9/15/2008 6:52:35 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: So in our example, the things that actually arise are the actual "tree structure," and the concept/mentation of such. To me, the referent is just the memory/concept activity; and the tree is just the tree. What else is there? --------------------------------------------------- Howard: At a single moment? Only these, of course - though what the "tree structure" could be at a single zero-duration instant eludes me. Ken notwithstanding (;-), single moments are ungraspable fictions. At any instant, phenomena are *in process*. Hi Howard Your above seemed to come "out of left field." LOL Must have been something you had on your mind. I don't think we are on the same page (at least not the same paragraph) ... as what I think I'm talking about doesn't seem to be what you're talking about except maybe obliquely. Anyway, wish you well and we'll talk later. TG #90255 From: "connie" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:11 pm Subject: Sangiiti Sutta Corner: DN 33 Twos (30 - 31) nichiconn Dear Friends, the next* sets of two: CSCD < Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 8:51 pm Subject: A visit from James and another farewell to DSG philofillet Hi all Just saw James off at the station. He was here for 3 nights. It worked out very well, really. Yesterday was a national holiday so we went sightseeing to Kamakura and saw the famous Great Buddha there. Interesting also that at the Hase-dera Kannon (Kwan yon?) statue James, who is deeply empathetic/psychically sensitive to people, got a very painful vibe from all the suffering that had been left, so to speak, by people there. You may remember about 3 years ago I posted about going there and just getting flooded with tears of joy thinking about the way the Buddha brings release from suffering to people. So a place with very intense vibes that we responded to in different ways because of our dispostions/accumulations etc. A lot of very good Dhamma talk, must during long train rides here and there over the last couple of days. It was good because while we are generally on the same page there are a lot of things we disagree on within that page. I think that's where the most fruitful Dhamma discussion talks place. I won't go into details, but the "people don't exist" thing was one (I'm not convinced yet that on a very deep level this isn't true, but James rejects it emphatically) and guarding the sense doors. Guarding the sense doors is very important for me, and from SN 35 suttas I understand it to refer more to paying attention to proliferation rather than averting eyes from certain objects etc, but James sees it more as a practice that is only suitable for monks. We disagreed there. Um, what else was there...some very good talk about meditation techniques that need not be discussed here....oh, there was a lot more. It was good. It was interesting that I got the call from him on a day where earlier, in the morning, I had come to see that a turning point, turn in the road has come for me. I'm going back to where I started in the Dhamma about 5 years ago, the mahayana tradition. I still think the Pali canon most closely expresses the Buddha's teaching, but Mahayana, I think, is most suitable for my dispositions. (The idea of doing what can be done to relieve the suffering of others is far more compelling for me than developing my own understanding of dhammas etc...yes, of course Theravada teaches about working to help others as well...by taking care of ourselves, we take care of others and vice-versa in that SN sutta. But I think I'll have a look at Mahayana again for awhile and see what's up there. I'll do it at e- sangha, where I can also keep in touch with Theravada. We'll see what happens, but I expect I won't be posting at DSG for a good long while. Perhaps I'll meet some of you at the other forum. (I know Robert K is there and he will be able to report at Bangkok meetings about just how hopelessly wrong I will have been going...) Yes, I think Dhamma discussion when people are basically on the same page is most fruitful. And I feel disrespect for KS and serious doubt about Abhidhamma so it doesn't really make sense to participate at a group that is devoted to her and it. (I bow to the historical evidence as cited by Bhikkhu Bodhi and many others that it wasn't taught by the Buddha. That doesn't mean it's not valuable, but to stubbornly cling to it as the Buddha's purest teaching as people do is nutty, I think.) Thanks again for everything, Sarah and Jon. I've learned a lot here, things I would have never learned elsewhere. I expect in a couple of years the lack of intellectual intensity at e-sangha will have me back here again. So see you all again someday. Metta, Phil p.s again, this departure doesn't have anything to do with James' visit. Just a coincidence that my sense of a turning point came on the day he appeared! :) #90257 From: Sukinder Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Only for the Wise to See .. Less Book Recitation sukinderpal Dear Tep, I’ll respond to this post, and you may or may not wish to respond further, but I think it is time that we move our discussion to the other thread. What do you say? ========== Suk: 1) I think it is very important to approach the Teachings with the understanding of it requiring "understanding" at the very outset and about the development of this same every step of the way. When this is seen, instead of thinking then in terms of the need to "experience directly" or mindfulness, one thinks of it in terms of the "development of understanding". T: That understanding at the very outset is adverting (the mind) for the purpose of seeing, and it is of course important. Thinking of the need, etc., is distraction and useless. S: Yes. But I think it is more accurate to say that each moment of right understanding is conditioned and accumulates. The first step is important in the sense that without it there can’t be a second one, however there must be countless moments of such steps (pariyatti) accumulating as sankhara before there can arise, a moment of patipatti. In between, any moment of wrong understanding not known but in fact encouraged, being indeed a hindrance, is more than just distraction. ========== Suk: 2) Also in seeing the difference between wrong and right intellectual understanding one comes to appreciate that indeed the two are due to the arising of some corresponding mental factors. Moreover one can see the difference between suttamaya panna and cintamaya panna and here appreciate the fact that `intellectual understanding' is of different degrees and must be developed gradually. T: Clinging to terminologies (pannatti) is a hindrance to development of panna, Sukin. I hope you don't mind if I throw away those terms (such as : mental factors, suttamaya panna, cintamaya panna and `intellectual understanding') and simply say as follows: Study the terminologies well such that their understanding will support development of the higher, and more useful, direct knowing of the dhammas. But do not spend your life time dwelling with intellectual thinking. [But if you want to, then who am I to say?] S: Clinging is clinging, it is never good. It can have any object, including the idea of wanting to do away with terminologies. ;-) We use terms for communication, in this regard some terms express an idea better than others. I think many of the pali terms that we use here, there is no equivalent English word, and so it is better that we use these. For example what you suggest above: “Study the terminologies well such that their understanding will support development……..” Suttamaya panna is not “study the terminologies”, but rather the *understanding* of what these terms point to at the intellectual level. Better to come to understand then, what is meant by the pali terms while trying to express our understanding about them in our own words. The pali used in the Texts is an expression of a level of understanding, our use of these can be with right or wrong understanding. So the problem is not the words, don’t you think? ========== Suk: 3) Sure, direct experience which is satipatthana is reference not only to a level of sati, but also a corresponding level of panna. And indeed this is an important step away from mere intellectual understanding. However, because most people think in terms of `experience' and not in terms of the `development of understanding', they wrongly then conceive of the need to `look', `note', `focus' etc. This inadvertently causes them to downplay pariyatti, indeed it issues from `wrong understanding'. Were there right intellectual understanding enough to appreciate its importance and scope, instead of seeking to `experience directly' one will think in terms of just developing understanding. T: Good, it is good that you see the importance of direct knowledge. Please also note that sati, satipatthana, and pa~n~na fly above the intellectual understanding, which clings to one's favorite teacher and her teaching. S: I’ll admit that I’m quite attached to A. Sujin; however, more than this is my respect for her. Why I respect her is exactly because I see the value of the Dhamma as interpreted by her. So in the end Tep, it is the Dhamma that I really value and not any person. And as far as I’m concerned, it is not “her” teaching. ============ T: Further, I think you're incorrect about the meaning of 'experience'. It is the knowledge from mindfulness & awareness that is not distracted by the anuvya~njana in 'what is seen, heard,...' . S: But isn’t the not being distracted by the signs and details due exactly to the fact of mindfulness and understanding having arisen to know the characteristic of a reality? What else could condition non-distraction? ============ T: While you are experiencing the 'world' (loka), you are observing/discerning or 'noticing' with no attachment to what is appearing/disappearing here & now. S: The 'world' (loka) is the world of the six senses, one at a time. Any idea of ‘something’ being observed and of someone making the observation with non-attachment must be something other than sati and panna performing their functions, I think. ============ Suk: 4) The direct connection between pariyatti and patipatti is appreciated and not made distorted by force of tanha and wrong view. Indeed, the process from the beginning to end involves "straightening of view" / Ditthujukamma and no unnecessary conflict are created between pariyatti and patipatti. T: While one is in the patipatti phase, pariyatti is often revisited; so they are neither separated nor in conflict. S: I’d say that thinking arises all the time. However, this can be kusala or akusala and with right or wrong understanding. =========== T: If one approaches patipatti (patipada), that is supported by Sila, and discerns the kusala/akusala along with their origins, then there need not be fear of tanha and wrong views; although anusayas are still there (in the background, like Sarah's famous Self Demon). S: And this demon can approach the idea of Sila in a way which then gives rise to a distorted perception of the Path and / or vice versa. ;-) =========== Suk: 5) So when Sarah or anyone of us are talking about "understanding the realities appearing now", she is not talking about the need particularly, for direct experience of characteristics, but rather *understanding* as much as conditions allow. In this regard, it is enough to have any little intellectual understanding arise, without which we may otherwise think to try and be mindful of `concepts'. T: No, not enough. Indeed I have been trying to caution Sarah, or anyone of her same-minded DSG gang members, that it is better to move away from getting stuck in the deep pit of being contented with mediocre worldling's intellectual understanding of "the realities appearing now", to directly experiencing the dhammas. S: Pariyatti cannot lead to Pativedha without Patipatti, and this too, lifetimes over lifetimes. But pariyatti must include the fact of this moment being conditioned and beyond control. This means that on seeing the value of patipatti over pariyatti, one understands that it can’t be made to arise by will. To think otherwise would be a reflection of not really having had right intellectual understanding / pariyatti! And indeed with this kind of understanding, there is a degree of detachment towards whatever has arisen by conditions. And given that without this we are liable to struggle needlessly against “reality”; this is good reason to be contented, momentarily. ;-) =========== T: How many years have they been talking, just happily talking and dreaming, about the same themes of intellectual understanding, or about the theoretical paramttha dhammas that arise and pass away much faster than they can blink? Too many. S: Too many? And you are surely talking about this lifetime only, aren’t you? I think they have been at it for billions of years, (‘self’ not implied). ;-) I think you misunderstand if you think that the DSG gang members are ‘dreaming’ about direct experience. Even pariyatti comes with it a level of detachment / alobha. And even though in looking back, one could refer to the fact of the knife handle wearing away, the real test and proof is the saddha which arises in knowing the present moment with some level of understanding, to then not be distracted into wanting things to be otherwise. =========== >Suk 6): Besides we are not talking about the need to catch individual dhammas, but such common experiences as seeing, thinking, feeling which we otherwise take for "I see, think or feel", this is to be gradually understood as mere elements. This is the effect of having developed a correct intellectual understanding of the way things are being that without this, our understanding of these are otherwise informed by wrong view. T: Good, very good for you to admit, because it is not possible to "catch" those paramattha dhammas in real time. Have you ever wondered why the Buddha or the Arahants (Sariputta, Maha Kaccana...) never mentioned how to citta-synchronize with paramattha dhammas that arise/pass-away in less than a nano-second? S: It was never intended to be understood that way. The details of the Abhidhamma are meant to increase one’s understanding of anatta and not to be able to experience one citta at a time. The description about the different cittas in a process helps us to break away from any tendency to think for example, that ‘seeing’ arises because we decide to open our eyes. On the other hand however, let us not go on to think that some of these realities can’t be understood directly. After all, if they arise, they can be the object of developed panna. But be it bhavanga citta or jivitindriya cetasika, or be it seeing or thinking, to on the other hand think that we can experience only some of these and deciding therefore to select and do so, *this* is a problem. And it is here that the Arahats didn’t have the tendency to go wrong. We on the other hand do, thus for us, to be reminded about ‘impersonal dhammas’ is of great help. ============ T: Concerning the second point, can you explain how the common experiences (as seeing, etc.) may be understood as "mere elements"? There is a huge gap between "a correct intellectual understanding of the way things are" and abandonment of the "I see" view. How would you compare Khun Sujin's approach with the discernment of nama and rupa in Chapter XVIII of the Vism ? I also asked Sarah the same question. S: Yes there is a huge gap between pariyatti and pativedha. But how are these two related? The latter being the result of deep insight into the present moment realities, this would not have come by without having heard about these same realities. For otherwise we are forever swimming in the ocean of concepts and having much wrong view based on the kind of perception. On hearing say, that seeing is an element and thinking is another element, the attention being drawn to the present moment perceiving which, instead of then thinking as before, that we see people and trees for example, we can begin to appreciate the difference between seeing and the thinking which follows. And just this is already a level of understanding ‘about elements’. Sure this is still a long way to understanding directly nama as nama and rupa as rupa and that these are dhatu, still, just the fact that they are understood intellectually as being dhammas arisen by conditions and performing particular functions, is a step towards the right direction and away from the wrong one which otherwise takes these same for ‘self’. I don’t know the Vism. Reference, so can’t compare. ============ >Suk: 7) To deny this and instead to go along with an as yet undeveloped understanding of the Dhamma, including the common idea of practice /meditation, the effect is not really being interested in studying the Dhamma for the sake of understanding, but rather seeking support for what one `does' re: meditation. What started off as being ditthi papanca namely the idea of `meditation', one ends up adding more fuel and proliferating further away to everything else but the need to understand the present moment, "now". T: You are assuming a lot here. Alex may be aggravated. S: This moment may be ignorance or it may be some level of understanding. If the former arises and is known to any degree, this would be an instance of the latter and would include the fact of the one having arisen by conditions beyond control and already fallen away. It would also include the fact that this must be the same with any and every moment and therefore such ideas as better time, posture, object or even to ‘look’, this goes against the kind of understanding. So yes, I’m assuming that this is how it is generally. ============== T: If you cannot explain how you can go from the raw intellectual understanding to the very first Namarupa-pariccheda~nana, then it is hopeless to convince anyone else that I, Sukin, has developed "understanding of the Dhamma, including the common idea of practice /meditation". Why so? S: I don’t know how well I can explain or even if at all. But I hope that this will come up in the course of our other discussion. So please be patient. ============== >Suk: 8) In conclusion, I think it is wrong to believe that the Buddha taught us to begin the practice/patipatti with noting concepts. This is denying the effect of having heard about dhammas and how this effects a change in our understanding of experiences. Sure, we will still have atta sanna, but how would even this be known if we kept encouraging the same while trying to note `bodily postures' and such?! Indeed how could any nama or rupa be known if `patipatti' is not understood as being a `conditioned nama' but instead as something which a `self' has to do?! The development of understanding takes time as it must given the accumulated ignorance and wrong view, but let's not make it harder by insisting on an interpretation of the Dhamma, theory and practice, which seems so clearly to be taking us in the wrong direction! T: Again, you are claiming a lot here. Review the Mahasatipatthana Sutta again, Sukin, The very first kayanupassana is Anapanasati, the first tetrad (of four vatthus). If the in-and-out breaths are not "concepts", then what are? Denying Anapanasati, you are doomed to failure of missing what samatha-vipassana means. And that is a lot of missing ! S: I refer you to a post I wrote to TG in May this year and you will see that all this has to do more with ‘interpretation’ than empty claim. Here is the link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/85377 I quote the relevant part: <> Sorry for the great length of the post. If not for any other reason, I think this is good one to move on to the other thread. ;-) Metta, Sukin #90258 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:56 pm Subject: Re: Getting comfort from deep teachings that one doesn't have true insight into? kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Ken. > It is very helpful for me the way you explain beginner. When we read > the text we may wonder who is a beginner, but now it is clear. > Thanks, Nina. I was just a rewording the explanations you and others here have given me over the years. You have explained what jhana is and how it is developed. And so I used those explanations to suggest a possible definition of "jhana beginner" - as found in the Visuddhimagga. I see that Phil has left us for another group. He has said, in effect, "Thanks for the Dhamma talk, friends, but no thanks, I don't want to learn about anatta, I want to learn about being a better person. I want to *be* a person." That's understandable, of course. Misguided, but understandable. :-) Ken H #90259 From: "gazita2002" Date: Mon Sep 15, 2008 11:21 pm Subject: Re: Getting comfort from deep teachings that one doesn't have true insight into? gazita2002 Hello KenH wAS jst thinking bout you on my way to this internet place. More specifically about the time you, Sukin and I were shopping for a shirt, when you were here in Bangkok - strange the things that pop into the mind, all pannatti eh? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Phil, > > I have already replied to this post, but I left the first part out. So > I'll go back to it. I wouldn't want you having the last word on > anything. :-) ----------- > - snip - > If the rare conditions for being a jhana beginner (knowing kusala from > akusala) are not present there will be no benefit whatsoever from > mimicking actions of a jhana beginner in the hope of developing > kusala calm. Only a fool would do it. > azita; I have been reading this part of the Vis. recently and we discussed it one Sat at the Foundation. It is quite amazing that the jhana 'practioner' has wisdom that knows kusala from akusala yet whn jhana states fall away/cease then those kusala states are taken for 'mine' if there is no understanding on the insight level. The 'me, mine, I' concept is sooo deeply rooted in beings that samsara would be endless if it wasnt for the wisdom, compassion, loving-kindness etc of the Buddha who found a way out and proceeded to show the way to us poor fools. Patience, courage and good cheer, azita #90260 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:VisM nilovg Dear Alex, Op 15-sep-2008, om 21:52 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Here, what is given canonically as a simile for the mind, in the > Vimuttimagga is taken literally as visual percepts, although > appropriately, given as images to which one should not pay attention. > The Visuddhimagga, however, both mistakenly takes the > similes "smoke", "mist", "dust", "gleam", "glows", "shines", > and "moon", as literal visual images, and also misapprehends them as > the counter-sign, the mark of success!, in direct opposition to the > Vimuttimagga. ------- N:Further on we read that he should go to a teacher and tell him about the nimitta. The teacher does not say right or not right, but should tell him to go on giving attention to it. It is different for different people because of different sa~n~nas, it is said. Ven. Sona likes to compare the Visuddhimagga with the Vimuttimagga, but the Vimuttimagga is different. He concludes too hastily that the Vis. is not right. Nina. #90261 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Skype chat nilovg Dear Tep, Op 15-sep-2008, om 22:02 heeft Tep het volgende geschreven: > T: Now please read again the message below that was posted earlier: > > > >N (#90093): > I can add that the point Sutta versus Abhidhamma is also a topic that > recurs all the time on dsg, as you kow. ... ... Again, no > contradiction but a different way of treatment. Also the suttas > remind us to be aware now, but the details given in the Abhidhamma > are most valuable. > > T: By saying "but the details given in the Abhidhamma are MOST > valuable", isn't it clear that it means the suttas are LESS valuable? > It's fine if you still insist that you "never said" that. ------- N:I did not say: the most valuable (a comparison), but: most valuable= very valuable. Nina. #90262 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 3:33 am Subject: Re: Doubts and Siilana szmicio Dear Sarah, Your answers are really helpfull. Recently I feel dosa and a lot of thinking about Dhamma with akusala. I forgot about seeing, hearing in daily life. When I want to read anything, any Sutta I feel dosa and unplesant vedana with it. >S: In truth, they are just different mental states arising and falling away, not belonging to anyone. This of course applies to any kusala, including wisdom, too. Nothing to be attached to. > ... L: Yeah, but there is usually a concept,a idea of a self, of Lukas. I like it very much when you are talking about anatta. It helps so much. It can condition right understanding. But when I feel I've done something wrong. Say something what I sholudn't. I feel that's mine. That I am doing wrong. And I feel regret about this. I still dont understand ditthi cetasika. Can you give me example, when diithi arises in daily life? > L:> The Buddha said that siila is siilana a base/root of our practice. > So whe should start here. But I cant. I really cant. > I cant induce right speech or the other siila. I cant make wrong > speech disappeard. > .... > S: Exactly! This is the truth that the Buddha taught us, such as in the Anattalakkhana Sutta, that we can't control or make any dhammas arise because there is no self to do this. As you say: "I can't". > So, various dhammas arise and fall away all day long. The most important thing is the development of understanding of them as anatta: L: sadu! > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.059.than.html > "Form, monks, is not self. If form were the self, this form would not lend itself to dis-ease. It would be possible [to say] with regard to form, 'Let this form be thus. Let this form not be thus.' But precisely because form is not self, form lends itself to dis-ease. And it is not possible [to say] with regard to form, 'Let this form be thus. Let this form not be thus.' > > "Feeling is not self... > > "Perception is not self... > > "[Mental] fabrications are not self... > > "Consciousness is not self. If consciousness were the self, this consciousness would not lend itself to dis-ease. It would be possible [to say] with regard to consciousness, 'Let my consciousness be thus. Let my consciousness not be thus.' But precisely because consciousness is not self, consciousness lends itself to dis-ease. And it is not possible [to say] with regard to consciousness, 'Let my consciousness be thus. Let my consciousness not be thus.' " > **** L: Yeah, that's my favourite one > S: Appreciating that there really is just this moment of seeing, hearing or thinking now, for example, we appreciate more and more that there's no use in dwelling on what's gone or what might be. Just develop understanding of what appears now and I think you'll find there is less feeling of depression in a day. When it arises, it too can be known as another fleeting conditioned dhamma too. L: Yeah, but usually there is a thinking about conditioned dhamma. Is it ok? I always think that I can change this thinking, but I cant. I cant stop thinking and thinks about this or that. When I am typing, the words appers and build sentences and fall away. It's conditioned. But I wonder is it just thinking or understanding? > In your other message, you mentioned being so busy and that kusala citta doesn't arise often enough. Again, I think the problem is not being busy, but the attachment - attachment to kusala for oneself. > So we see that right understanding has to develop with detachment all the way. L: but there is no understanding now. Maybe I sholud start doing sitting meditation, to have more kusala, more understanding? > p.s did you have a chance to listen to any of the edited recordings of discussions with A.Sujin? I'm sure you'd find them helpful. Yeah, I like them very much. Especially those about seeing, hearing. #90263 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 3:40 am Subject: Re: Doubts and Siilana szmicio > I always think that I can change this thinking, but I cant. I cant > stop thinking and thinks about this or that. It should be: I always thought I can change thinking, but I can't. Best wishes Lukas #90264 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 3:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vinnana & Sanna ... Is It Greed or Ambition? .. sarahprocter... Dear Tep & all, --- On Sat, 13/9/08, Tep wrote: T:> Concerning "understanding nama-rupa appearing now", would you feel comfortable enough to discuss the Vism, XVIII, 5-8 in contrast with Khun Sujin's idea? .... S: I'm not sure what the 'contrast' you see is. In any case, I'm not enthusiastic about going over this text as Larry already 'led' us through this chapter of Vism quite recently. For example, see Nina's comments here on the same paragraphs: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/81395 The important point to stress is that whaterver the accumulations, nama and rupa have to be clearly understood and distinguished in order for all ideas of atta to be eradicated. At the end of para 4, it said: "After that he defines in brief as 'mentality-materiality' (naama-ruupa) the mentality that has the characteristic of 'bending' and the materiality that has the characteristic of 'being molested'. Seeing is nama, visible object is rupa. Right understanding has to know any object appears without any selection at all. It's not a matter of working through lists and counting cittas or anything else. A little later in the chapter we come across the "chariot" again: "25. After defining mentality-materiality thus according to its true nature, then in order to abandon this worldly designation of 'a being' and 'a person' more thoroughly, to surmount confusion about beings and to establish his mind on the plane of non-confusion, he makes sure that the meaning defined, namely, 'This is mere mentality-materiality, there is no being, no person' is confirmed by a number of suttas. For this has been said: "'As with the assembly of parts The word "chariot" is countenanced, So, when the aggregates are present, "A being" is said in common usage'. (S.i,135)." S: A little later: "28. So in many hundred suttas there is only mentality-materiality that is illustrated, not a being, not a person. Therefore, just as when the component parts such as axles, wheels, frame, poles, etc., are arranged in a certain way, there comes to be the mere conventional usage 'chariot', yet in the ultimate sense when each part is examined, there is no chariot... " S: And as for trees and people... " - just as when trunk, branches, foliage, etc., are placed in a certain way, there comes to be the mere term of common usage 'tree', yet in the ultimate sense, when each component is examined, there is no tree, - so too, when there are the five aggregates [as objects] of clinging, there comes to be the mere term of common usage `a being', `a person', yet in the ultimate sense, when each component is examined, there is no being as a basis for the assumption `I am' or `I'; in the ultimate sense there is only mentality-materiality. The vision of one who sees in this way is called correct vision." Please let me know if there was any point in particular you were wishing to raise here. Metta, Sarah p.s As you wished me to look at several paragraphs from the chapter, I assumed I was 'allowed' to look at what preceded and followed them:-). ============= #90266 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 4:39 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Vinnana & Sanna ... Is It Greed or Ambition? .. dhammanusarin Dear Sarah, - Let me respond to your concern about my violation of the no-book Rule in this message. I will respond to your discussion of the Vism XVIII, 5-8 in another post. T:> Concerning "understanding nama-rupa appearing now", would you feel comfortable enough to discuss the Vism, XVIII, 5-8 in contrast with Khun Sujin's idea? .... >Sarah: p.s As you wished me to look at several paragraphs from the chapter, I assumed I was 'allowed' to look at what preceded and followed them:- ). ============= T: I only want to read what you think, not quoted paragraphs from the Vism. I think we have agreed that the no-book Rule is not violated as long as we can discuss any subject using our own thought. Further, I already talked about an exception in the previous post : # 90172 : T: Your humorous approach above is known in the Kung Fu literature as "hiding sword under a smile". But you got a valid point about fairness. I must apologize for having given you such impression : Only King Tep is above the Rule ! Well, if you think it is critical to quote from commentaries and other sources, once in a while, that is considered as acceptable exception to the Rule, I guess. For myself from now on the most I may do in regard to the references is to just give the sources (Web link, for example) without giving even one passage. Can you do the same, Sarah? BTW, Alex has not agreed to follow this rule, has he? [endquote] .............................. Tep === #90267 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 4:52 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Only for the Wise to See .. Less Book Recitation dhammanusarin Hello Sukin, - I am delighted to see your reply in a long post. I was about to write an even longer post, but what you said below stopped me in the track ! >Sukin: I'll respond to this post, and you may or may not wish to respond further, but I think it is time that we move our discussion to the other thread. What do you say? T: Are you too tired of this thread? Is it like a bone that has no meat left to chew on? ;-) If you are so (sick and) tired to discuss it further, then I'll only happily read your post without responding to it. Tep === #90268 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How what we do affects others (or doesn't) upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 9/15/2008 7:31:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/9/15 : > Hi, Herman - > >> >> Who would swap real life for impersonal dhammas? >> ---------------------------------------------- >> Howard: >> How can something be *replaced* by what is not different from it? >> ----------------------------------------------- > > It may not be what you are meaning, but I see no overlap between being > engaged in a social situation, and seeing instances of categories. > > ============================== > My point was that "real life" and "impersonal dhammas" are one and the > same. The terminology just reflects different "takes" on the same thing. > I'm afraid I'm going to dig my heels in and utter a resounding "NO, NO, NO". If there is no valid distinction between a sentient being, and say, a brick, or a garbage can full of trash, then compassion, karuna, metta, harm and benefit are meaningless, and Buddhism with it. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Where in the world do you get from what I wrote that I make no such distinction????? Sentient beings are sentient!! What are you talking about, Herman? What I'm saying is no different from what the Buddha said about them - amalgams of namas and rupas, with mentality being the centerpiece. ---------------------------------------------- As I was writing to Nina, a rose pulled apart is no longer a rose. A human being is not only the aggregation of it's component parts. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: A human being consists of parts in relation. Remove the relation, and there is no human being. Of *course* I say that! So, IMO, does the chariot metaphor. (In fact, somewhere, perhaps in the Songs of the Elder Monks (or Nuns), the functional relationship aspect of the metaphor is emphasized.) I have repeatedly pointed out the central importance of relation in the Dhamma. Aren't you aware of that? ----------------------------------------------- Cheers Herman ========================== With metta, Howard #90269 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 9/15/2008 8:34:59 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: Hi Howard Your above seemed to come "out of left field." LOL Must have been something you had on your mind. I don't think we are on the same page (at least not the same paragraph) ... as what I think I'm talking about doesn't seem to be what you're talking about except maybe obliquely. Anyway, wish you well and we'll talk later. --------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. ;-) ----------------------------------- TG ==================== With metta, Howard #90270 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 5:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How what we do affects others (or doesn't) egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/9/16 : > Hi, Herman - > >> ============================== >> My point was that "real life" and "impersonal dhammas" are one and the >> same. The terminology just reflects different "takes" on the same thing. >> > > I'm afraid I'm going to dig my heels in and utter a resounding "NO, NO, NO". > > If there is no valid distinction between a sentient being, and say, a > brick, or a garbage can full of trash, then compassion, karuna, metta, > harm and benefit are meaningless, and Buddhism with it. > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Where in the world do you get from what I wrote that I make no such > distinction????? Sentient beings are sentient!! What are you talking about, > Herman? What I'm saying is no different from what the Buddha said about them - > amalgams of namas and rupas, with mentality being the centerpiece. > ---------------------------------------------- Your point was that impersonal dhammas and real life are one and the same. Cheers Herman #90271 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 5:48 am Subject: Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? scottduncan2 Dear Alex, A: "If concepts are 'nothing' then how can 'nothing' be divided into 6 kinds of nothing?" Scott: Excuse my imprecision (and I hope to be subject to correction). I don't know for sure but I'd hazard that classifying concepts is an example of a concept of the unreal by the unreal. By 'nothing' I mean 'not paramattha dhamma', that is, not subject to arising and falling away. Concepts are aarammana (objects), that is, are cognizable, otherwise there would be no thought (objects of thinking - citta). The CMA translation of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha: "Then, as it makes known, it is called concept. It is described as name, nomenclature, etc. "It is sixfold: (1) a (direct) concept of the real; (2) a (direct) concept of the unreal; (3) a concept of the unreal by means of the real; (4) a concept of the real by means of the unreal; (5) a concept of the real by means of the real; and (6) a concept of the unreal by means of the unreal...By following the sound of speech through the process of ear-consciousness, and then by means of the concept conceived by (the process in the) mind door that subsequently arises, meanings are understood as fashioned by worldly convention." A: "Is 6 kinds of concepts found anywhere in the suttas, Patis?..." Scott: I don't feel inclined to limit myself to suttas only, Alex. I read them (I've been taking SN to work and enjoy it when I have a break). Now, I don't particularly enjoy reading suttas just to use them for the purposes of debate. I'm afraid it must be by inclination that I accept a different set of sources than do you. Such being the case, I make no effort to dissuade you. I myself am most careful regarding the modern commentaries, such as by Bh. Sona (or by Bh. Bodhi when he is giving his own opinion, for that matter), and for sure the one's I might make (these I trust least of all). The above being said, please consider this passage from SN 62(10), where at least we see that pa~n~natti is discussed to some extent: "...there are three pathways of language (niruttipathaa), pathways of designation (adhivacanapathaa), pathways of description (pa~n~nattipathaa), that are unmixed, that were never mixed, that are not being mixed, that will not be mixed, that are not rejected by the wise ascetics and brahmins. What three? "Whatever form, bhikkhus has passed, ceased, changed,: the term, label, and description 'was' applies to it, not the term 'is' or the term 'will be'..." [Ya.m, bhikkhave, ruupaṃ atiita.m niruddha.m vipari.nata.m 'ahosii’ti tassa sa"nkhaa, 'ahosii’ti tassa sama~n~naa, 'ahosii’ti tassa pa~n~natti; na tassa sa"nkhaa 'atthii’ti, na tassa sa.nkhaa 'bhavissatii’’’ti...] Scott: I accept that Abhidhamma clarifies such things as pa~n~natti, but here in the sutta the Buddha seems to be referring to the concept of time as he describes the three pathways of language. I accept this as being one example of how pa~n~natti are referred to in the suttas. Sincerely, Scott. #90272 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How what we do affects others (or doesn't) upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 9/16/2008 8:43:15 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/9/16 : > Hi, Herman - > >> ============================== >> My point was that "real life" and "impersonal dhammas" are one and the >> same. The terminology just reflects different "takes" on the same thing. >> > > I'm afraid I'm going to dig my heels in and utter a resounding "NO, NO, NO". > > If there is no valid distinction between a sentient being, and say, a > brick, or a garbage can full of trash, then compassion, karuna, metta, > harm and benefit are meaningless, and Buddhism with it. > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Where in the world do you get from what I wrote that I make no such > distinction????? Sentient beings are sentient!! What are you talking about, > Herman? What I'm saying is no different from what the Buddha said about them - > amalgams of namas and rupas, with mentality being the centerpiece. > ---------------------------------------------- Your point was that impersonal dhammas and real life are one and the same. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes ... so? Is there more to anything than mentality and materiality in a variety of forms? If so, what? (It is a given that their interrelationship is critical. So-called conventional objects are aggregations, not random grab bags.) --------------------------------------------------- Cheers Herman ============================ With metta, Howard #90273 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:10 am Subject: Sri Lanka Revisited, Intro 1. nilovg Dear friends, April 1979 Sri Lanka Revisited Introduction. A great lesson in sincerity, that is what I would call the Dhamma discussions during my second journey in Sri Lanka. A Japanese monk, Bhante Jetananda, gave me as a birthday present the Påli text of a treatise about “wholesome roots”, taken from the “Atthasåliní”, the Commentary to the first book of the Abhidhamma, together with the English translation which he had written out by hand. The text states that one must have a sincere inclination. I did not know that these words would play such an important role during my stay in Sri Lanka. One must develop satipatthåna (the four applications of mindfulness) with a sincere inclination; with a sincere inclination to eradicate attachment (lobha), aversion (dosa) and ignorance (moha). Through satipatthåna one will come to know oneself and one will become more truthful and sincere. Those who have attained enlightenment are called “ujupatipanno”, upright, sincere. We can find out for ourselves that we are not really sincere, that we do not really know ourselves. We have studied the teachings and we have learnt about the many types of consciousness (citta), but we do not sufficiently realize that what we have learnt is the truth about our daily life. We overlook our many moments of unwholesome consciousness (akusala citta). Do we overlook them because we do not want to know them? We have not considered enough the truth of what we have learnt through the Buddhist scriptures and often we are only able to give “textbook answers” about the problems of life. So long as right understanding of the realities that appear in our life has not been developed, we only have a superficial knowledge of what the Buddha taught. I am immensely grateful to Bhante Dhammadhara, an Australian monk, who exhorted us time and again with the words:”Listen more to the Dhamma, consider it more.” Ms. Sujin, “Khun Sujin” as we call her, reminded us often that the realities the Buddha taught are not in the book. They should be known in daily life. I greatly profited from her wise words and from her countless reminders to consider the present moment: ”What about this moment, is it kusala or akusala?” Captain Perera had organised a Buddhist seminar in the International Buddhist Center of Wellawatte in Colombo. He had also organised a Buddhist seminar two years ago. Khun Sujin who lives in Thailand, had been invited again as the principal speaker. At the same time a group of six foreign monks and one samanera (novice) came from Thailand; they were of Australian, New Zealand, American and Indonesian nationalities. Khun Sujin was accompanied by a group of laypeople, a baby included, of Thai, Australian and Canadian nationalities. Sarah had come from England, Ursula from Germany and I from Holland. ****** Nina. #90274 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:53 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:VisM truth_aerator Dear Nina and all, >--- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Alex, > Op 15-sep-2008, om 21:52 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > > > Here, what is given canonically as a simile for the mind, in the > > Vimuttimagga is taken literally as visual percepts, although > > appropriately, given as images to which one should not pay >attention. > > The Visuddhimagga, however, both mistakenly takes the > > similes "smoke", "mist", "dust", "gleam", "glows", "shines", > > and "moon", as literal visual images, and also misapprehends them >as > > the counter-sign, the mark of success!, in direct opposition to >the > > Vimuttimagga. > ------- > N:Further on we read that he should go to a teacher and tell him > about the nimitta. The teacher does not say right or not right, >but > should tell him to go on giving attention to it. It is different >for > different people because of different sa~n~nas, it is said. > Ven. Sona likes to compare the Visuddhimagga with the >Vimuttimagga, > but the Vimuttimagga is different. > He concludes too hastily that the Vis. is not right. > Nina. > How does your reply answer my question? We can compare VisM with the suttas and find a terrible disrepancy. The beautiful metaphor of a bright mind in VisM is taken too literally as a visual sign that is seen. This interpretation is NOT present in the suttas, and it is not present in Patis, Best wishes, Alex #90275 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 2:13 pm Subject: Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? truth_aerator Dear Scott, >"Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > By 'nothing' I mean 'not paramattha dhamma', that is, not subject to > arising and falling away. Concepts are aarammana (objects), that >is, > are cognizable, otherwise there would be no thought (objects of > thinking - citta). > Summary of what you've said re: concepts a) Not paramattha dhamma. Doesn't arise or fall away. b) Concepts *are* objects which are cognazible. So concepts are cognizable objects that do not rise or fall away? Platonic Forms???? Nicca entities? Best wishes, Alex #90276 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 3:23 pm Subject: Re: Warnings ... The No-book Rule Does Not Apply Here?. kenhowardau Hi Herman, ----- <. . .> KH: > . . . Can you name one sutta - or just one sentence from a > sutta - that you understand in the same way as any other DSG member > understands it? > > Ken H > > PS: In case my question was too vague, let me suggest the word > "satipatthana." Is there any agreement its meaning? > H: > I would say there is not. ------ Thank you, that was my point. We haven't proved that the same point applies to *all* formal meditators, but I believe it must. --------------------- H: > And I would suggest that has always been the case, since the very first time the word was used by a sage to convey a particular meaning. --------------------- Now you have strayed onto another topic. My point was that formal meditators inevitably followed their own self-made paths. I was not including non-formal-meditating Dhamma students. ----------------------- H: > However, I am sure that what we will all agree on is that there have been dozens of schools of thought all claiming a superior understanding of the sayings of The Sage from the Sutta Nipata. And that many of these schools have withered and died. (I tell you, it's a jungle of views out there :-) ----------------------- :-) I am sure it is! But I would like to assure you that the path of the Dhamma student who does *not* believe in formal meditation (who does not believe the path can be followed at will) is not a jungle at all. For that student there can be only one path, and the path is clear. ------------------------------- H: > What we can also know and all agree on as well is that the views that survive are the incorrect ones, by necessity, because the view of The Sage is for and leads to cessation. What survives are views more likely to guarantee almsfood to those who are in competition for it, and the survival of their brotherhood. ------------------------------- The Theras preserved the Pali Canon by recitation. If, as you have alleged, some of them were fraudulent tricksters - interested only in their material welfare - then for sure some of the teachings will have been lost. In any case, the essential teachings of anatta and conditionality have got through to us. That is the main thing. (It would be a pity if some of the detailed descriptions of conditioned dhammas had been lost, but I think we have more than enough details to keep us busy for this lifetime.) :-) Ken H #90277 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 3:59 pm Subject: Re: Warnings ... The No-book Rule Does Not Apply Here?. truth_aerator Hi Ken, >--- "kenhowardau" wrote: > > :-) I am sure it is! But I would like to assure you that the path of > the Dhamma student who does *not* believe in formal meditation (who > does not believe the path can be followed at will) is not a jungle >at > all. For that student there can be only one path, and the path is > clear. Is anapanasatimeditation "formal or not"? The suttas and Patisambhidhammaga are clear. There is such a thing as Anapanasati anapanasamadhi. Best wishes, Alex #90278 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 4:09 pm Subject: The Vism's Meditation for Developing Namarupa-pariccheda~nana dhammanusarin Dear Sarah (Nina, Larry, Sukin, Herman, Alex, Han), - Now I am going to comment on your reply to my question : T:> Concerning "understanding nama-rupa appearing now", would you feel comfortable enough to discuss the Vism, XVIII, 5-8 in contrast with Khun Sujin's idea? .... S: I'm not sure what the 'contrast' you see is. In any case, I'm not enthusiastic about going over this text as Larry already 'led' us through this chapter of Vism quite recently. For example, see Nina's comments here on the same paragraphs: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/81395 T: The contrast I see is in a big difference between the two ideas; Nina's idea sounds like thinking/theorizing to me, while the Vism's idea is verifiable by experience. The message 81395 is a discussion by Nina about Vism.XI, 27 (a chapter on samadhi: purification of consciousness). Chapter XVIII is on purification of view. Vism XI, 27 is about defining(vavatthana), word definition, of the four elements(earth, water, wind, and fire) of a meditation subject. XVIII, 5-8 is about observing of the essences of the four elements in each of the 32 bodyparts (head hair, body hair, nail, ...) for people whose "vehicle is pure insight". Here we learn that once the four elements(dhatus) have "become clear in their essential charateristics", say in the head hair, then other 44 instances of rupa will "become plain" in detail, etc. This is a tedious meditation practice that can take a long practice before the materiality understanding arises through direct knowing thus "Taking all these together under the characteristice of 'being molested' he sees them as 'materiality' ". It is interesting to notice that the immaterial states (namas) "become plain" to the meditator "with the sense doors" only after s/he has a clear vision of the materialities first. This is what I see as a meditation theme for developing Namarupa- pariccheda~nana. The Vism method in XVIII, 5-8 above is very different from the following Nina's explanation to Larry: > > Larry: "discerns the four elements in brief or in detail" > > consists of finding hardness (earth element) in all the > > various parts of the body, > > and the same for the other elements. Two paragraphs detail > > various ways of counting these manifestations of elements. > ------- > N: When we read this we should remember all the time that this is not meant as book knowledge. Even when we read about counting. Hardness of the body apopears, and only when this is realized right now, it can be known that it is a mere element, or a mere dhamma, not my body. If we overlook this, we do not get the essence of the teachings. > ---------- T [to Nina]: Why only "hardness" appears? Does hardness "become plain" after the meditation of the earth element in, say, head hair ? How does it become plain -- by touching the hair on your head with your hand, or what? Hardness in the head hair (or a body part) can be known by anybody. What is so special? The rest of your reply below only talks about paragraphs 4, 25, and 28. Sarah, why did you skip over paragraphs 5 - 8 ? Don't feel comfortable? Sincerely asking, Tep ===================== S: The important point to stress is that whaterver the accumulations, nama and rupa have to be clearly understood and distinguished in order for all ideas of atta to be eradicated. At the end of para 4, it said: "After that he defines in brief as 'mentality-materiality' (naama- ruupa) the mentality that has the characteristic of 'bending' and the materiality that has the characteristic of 'being molested'. Seeing is nama, visible object is rupa. Right understanding has to know any object appears without any selection at all. It's not a matter of working through lists and counting cittas or anything else. A little later in the chapter we come across the "chariot" again: "25. After defining mentality-materiality thus according to its true nature, then in order to abandon this worldly designation of 'a being' and 'a person' more thoroughly, to surmount confusion about beings and to establish his mind on the plane of non-confusion, he makes sure that the meaning defined, namely, 'This is mere mentality-materiality, there is no being, no person' is confirmed by a number of suttas. For this has been said: "'As with the assembly of parts The word "chariot" is countenanced, So, when the aggregates are present, "A being" is said in common usage'. (S.i,135)." S: A little later: "28. So in many hundred suttas there is only mentality-materiality that is illustrated, not a being, not a person. Therefore, just as when the component parts such as axles, wheels, frame, poles, etc., are arranged in a certain way, there comes to be the mere conventional usage 'chariot', yet in the ultimate sense when each part is examined, there is no chariot... " S: And as for trees and people... " - just as when trunk, branches, foliage, etc., are placed in a certain way, there comes to be the mere term of common usage 'tree', yet in the ultimate sense, when each component is examined, there is no tree, - so too, when there are the five aggregates [as objects] of clinging, there comes to be the mere term of common usage `a being', `a person', yet in the ultimate sense, when each component is examined, there is no being as a basis for the assumption `I am' or `I'; in the ultimate sense there is only mentality-materiality. The vision of one who sees in this way is called correct vision." Please let me know if there was any point in particular you were wishing to raise here. Metta, Sarah p.s As you wished me to look at several paragraphs from the chapter, I assumed I was 'allowed' to look at what preceded and followed them:-). ============= #90279 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 4:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How what we do affects others (or doesn't) egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/9/16 : > Hi, Herman - > > Your point was that impersonal dhammas and real life are one and the same. > ----------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes ... so? Is there more to anything than mentality and materiality in > a variety of forms? If so, what? (It is a given that their interrelationship > is critical. So-called conventional objects are aggregations, not random grab > bags.) It's just that the "impersonal" in "impersonal dhammas" is a red herring. Dhammas, just like conventions, come into being through persons. There is no free-floating mentality, there are no free-floating sense bases, mentality requires very specific conditions for it to occur. Those specific conditions are well captured in the word "person". All dhammas are specific to a being. And that is such a good line, I'm going to repeat it. In a paragraph of it's own. All dhammas are specific to a being. And because we here are persons, and not dogs or devas, it is true to say that all dhammas are personal. Whoever concocted the idea of impersonal dhammas, and I know it wasn't you, has not considered the matter with any rigour. Cheers Herman #90280 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How what we do affects others (or doesn't) upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 9/16/2008 7:50:28 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/9/16 : > Hi, Herman - > > Your point was that impersonal dhammas and real life are one and the same. > ----------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes ... so? Is there more to anything than mentality and materiality in > a variety of forms? If so, what? (It is a given that their interrelationship > is critical. So-called conventional objects are aggregations, not random grab > bags.) It's just that the "impersonal" in "impersonal dhammas" is a red herring. Dhammas, just like conventions, come into being through persons. There is no free-floating mentality, there are no free-floating sense bases, mentality requires very specific conditions for it to occur. Those specific conditions are well captured in the word "person". All dhammas are specific to a being. And that is such a good line, I'm going to repeat it. In a paragraph of it's own. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: That's not what I meant by "impersonal." I agree that all dhammas are specific to beings. What I meant by impersonal is an aspect of anatta. The heat I feel, a sight I see, the seeing, etc are all just phenomena, not "mine" in the sense of owned by some core/soul hidden in the mix. ----------------------------------------------- All dhammas are specific to a being. And because we here are persons, and not dogs or devas, it is true to say that all dhammas are personal. Whoever concocted the idea of impersonal dhammas, and I know it wasn't you, has not considered the matter with any rigour. Cheers Herman ============================ With metta, Howard #90281 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 5:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Chariot Simile egberdina Hi Tep, 2008/9/16 Tep : > Hi Herman and Phil (Howard, Sarah), - > > I hope you might find my comment below useful as a supplement to the > on-going discussion. Yes, I found it very useful indeed. I would be interested to read your further comments on my thoughts below, if you have any. > .................. > > T: Pondering over the Chariot Simile : > > Just as, with an assemblage of parts, > The word 'chariot' is used, > So, when the aggregates are present, > There's the convention 'a being.' > > I think the simile's logic/reasoning/theme is that a 'being' is a > name/label for an assembly of the (five) aggregates. Same logic is > again seen in the definition of a 'contact' as the coming-together of > three dhammas : an external sense object, an internal sensing medium > (eye, ear, ...), and a consciousness. > > If we stop at this point, there would be no need to ask questions on > self, no self, existence, non-existence, ultimate realities, concepts. > I think what you wrote above makes sense in that it is internally consistent. There could be a world where this would be good advice. But not in this world :-). Simply because the definition (and that is all it is) of a contact as being the coming together of an external sense object, an internal sensing medium and a consciousness, does not refer to anything that is to be found in this world. If we take that model, and use that as a basis for our understanding, we are not going to have understanding of this world, we are going to have understanding of this model. I see parallels here with what I have just written to Howard. The model above (I know you didn't invent it, so I don't hold you responsible :-)) stipulates free floating dhammas. Not only that, they can never be more than just stipulations, for how can these three component dhammas be known, if it requires their contact for any dhamma (characteristic) to be known? Cheers Herman #90282 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 5:29 pm Subject: Re: Warnings ... The No-book Rule Does Not Apply Here?. kenhowardau Hi Alex, ------ A: > Is anapanasatimeditation "formal or not"? ------ In the Buddha's Dhamma there is no such thing as formal practice. However, there can be a 'misguided belief' in formal practice. The Pali word for it is silabbataparamasa. If we were talking about something other than the Dhamma - about football practice or violin practice, for example - then there would be no objection to the idea of formal practice (something that can be controlled). But we are *not* talking about football and violins, (or about walking into trees and trains) we are talking about the Dhamma - the 'way things ultimately are.' It's easy to forget which reality we are talking about and to slip back into the world of trees and trains. That's when silabbataparamasa is likely to occur (when we confuse ultimate reality with conventional reality). But don't worry: when that happens at DSG someone will point it out to you. :-) Ken H #90283 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 5:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting comfort from deep teachings that one doesn't have true insight into? egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/9/16 kenhowardau : > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom > wrote: >> > > Thanks, Nina. I was just a rewording the explanations you and others > here have given me over the years. You have explained what jhana is > and how it is developed. And so I used those explanations to suggest > a possible definition of "jhana beginner" - as found in the > Visuddhimagga. > Do you do this on purpose so that you can jump to the defense of Nina, even when she is not being attacked :-)? I mean to say, do you really believe that Nina believes she knows what jhana is? And do you really believe I am attacking Nina by saying that? I'll tell you what I believe. Nina has read lots and lots of stuff about jhanas. She has passed on her understanding of what she has read. That does not mean that she has explained what jhana is. No more than a blind Nina could explain the colour red, regardless of how much she has heard about it. I would advise you to learn jhana from a seasoned practioner, not about jhana from a seasoned theoretician :-) > I see that Phil has left us for another group. He has said, in effect, > "Thanks for the Dhamma talk, friends, but no thanks, I don't want to > learn about anatta, I want to learn about being a better person. I > want to *be* a person." > > That's understandable, of course. Misguided, but understandable. > :-) I do not think that effort expended on causing less harm is misguided. Cheers Herman #90284 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 5:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Getting comfort from deep teachings that one doesn't have true insight into? egberdina Hi azita, 2008/9/16 gazita2002 : > Hello KenH >> > > azita; I have been reading this part of the Vis. recently and we > discussed it one Sat at the Foundation. > It is quite amazing that the jhana 'practioner' has wisdom that > knows kusala from akusala yet whn jhana states fall away/cease then > those kusala states are taken for 'mine' if there is no understanding > on the insight level. > > The 'me, mine, I' concept is sooo deeply rooted in beings that > samsara would be endless if it wasnt for the wisdom, compassion, > loving-kindness etc of the Buddha who found a way out and proceeded > to show the way to us poor fools. > I'm glad that you are enjoying yourself in Bangkok. If I follow you correctly, then is wasn't the Buddha's wisdom, compassion and loving-kindness, was it? And it is not our foolishness, is it? I really don't know know what you did mean, azita, but rest assured, it doesn't matter :-). As long as you understand it and it is of some real and lasting benefit to you. Cheers Herman #90285 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 5:47 pm Subject: Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? dhammanusarin Hi Scott and Alex, - I used to make a mistake by claiming that the Suttanta Pitaka never mentions 'pa~n~natti'. Thank you for the quote below from SN 62(10); I am corrected. But I have only one-half satisfaction. > Scott: > > ... ... ... > The above being said, please consider this passage from SN 62(10), > where at least we see that pa~n~natti is discussed to some extent: > > "...there are three pathways of language (niruttipathaa), > pathways of designation (adhivacanapathaa), pathways of description > (pa~n~nattipathaa), that are unmixed, that were never mixed, > that are not being mixed, that will not be mixed, that are > not rejected by the wise ascetics and brahmins. What three? > > "Whatever form, bhikkhus has passed, ceased, changed,: the term, > label, and description 'was' applies to it, not the term 'is' or the > term 'will be'..." > > > Scott: I accept that Abhidhamma clarifies such things as pa~n~natti, > but here in the sutta the Buddha seems to be referring to > the concept of time as he describes the three pathways of > language. I accept this as being one example of how pa~n~natti > are referred to in the suttas. > ====================== T: Have you found other suttas that deal with pa~n~natti? Are you saying that concepts apply only to past events or objects? Further, is paramattha only meant for present and future dhammas? [I am a little confused.] I often heard that the khandhas are paramattha dhammas. But khandhas are defined in past, present and future as in the following sutta : "Whatever form is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: that is called the aggregate of form. "Whatever feeling is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: that is called the aggregate of feeling. "Whatever perception is past, future, or present; ... "Whatever (mental) fabrications are past, future, or present; ... "Whatever consciousness is past, future, or present; ... "These are called the five aggregates. [SN 22.48] So is it inaccurate to consider them as paramattha dhammas? Tep === #90286 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 5:52 pm Subject: Buddha Dhamma only. Accept no compromises. truth_aerator Hi Ken >--- "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > ------ > A: > Is anapanasatimeditation "formal or not"? > ------ > > In the Buddha's Dhamma there is no such thing as formal practice. Ok, lets call it informal. The fact remains is that when you actually read anapanasati sutta it clearly states about sitting crosslegged bringing mindfulness to the fore and so on. > However, there can be a 'misguided belief' in formal practice. The > Pali word for it is silabbataparamasa. Please provide sutta quotes. What you have said is SLANDER of Buddha's teaching. Buddha has on numerous occasions talked about Jhana. ====================== Ananda, what is the path and method, to dispel the lower bonds of the sensual world? Ananda, the bhikkhu secluding the mind thoroughly, by dispelling things of demerit, removes all bodily transgressions that bring remorse. Then secluding the mind, from sensual thoughts and thoughts of demerit, with thoughts and discursive thoughts and with joy and pleasantness born of seclusion abides in the first jhana. Established in it he reflects all things that matter, all feelings, all perceptive things, all intentions, all conscious signs are impermanent, unpleasant, an illness, an abscess, an arrow, a misfortune, an ailment, foreign, destined for destruction, is void, and devoid of a self. Then he turns the mind to the deathless element: This is peaceful, this is exalted, such as the appeasement of all determinations, the giving up of all endearments, the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation and extinction (* 1). With that mind he comes to the destruction of desires. If he does not destroy desires on account of greed and interest for those same things. He arises spontaneously, with the destruction of the five lower bonds, of the sensual world, not to proceed. Ananda, this too is a method for overcoming the five lower bonds of the sensual world.. [alex: same with higher jhanas and aruppas] http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/064-maha-malunkhyaputta-e1.htm The Blessed One said: "Develop concentration, monks. A concentrated monk discerns in line with what has come into being. And what does he discern in line with what has come into being? The origination & disappearance of form. The origination & disappearance of feeling... perception... fabrications. The origination & disappearance of consciousness." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.005.than.html Jhana IS the path to awakening - MN36 Jhana Is what Buddha awakened to. AN9.42 & SN2.7 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.042.than.html Jhana Is Practiced by awakened ones: Dhp 23 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.02.than.html#dhp-23 Jhana Leads to 4 fruits: From Stream to Arhatship. (DN29) Jhana Is Right Concentration - SN 45.8 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.008.than.html Ending of Mental Fermentations depend on Jhana http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.036.than.html 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 Jhana is the only 4 Meditative absorptions thay Buddha praised. MN108 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.108.than.html Jhana goes together with discernment (panna): Dhp 372 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.25.than.html#dhp- 372 Jhana Is a mark of a great discernment, great man http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.035.than.html Jhana is the escape from confinement. AN 9.42 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.042.than.html Released through Panna (Pannavimutti) = Jhanas 1-9 AN 9.44 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.044.than.html 7 Parts of Noble 8 Fold path are Support for Noble concentration (Jhana) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html 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 Thus, verily, monks, concentration is the way, non-concentration the no-whither way. Samadhi Maggo, asamadhi kummaggo Anguttara Nikaya The Lion Roar text iii, 414, Vi, vi, 64 "Over there are the roots of trees; over there, empty dwellings. Practice jhana, monks. Don't be heedless. Don't later fall into regret. This is our message to you." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.145.than.html Best wishes, Alex #90287 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 5:56 pm Subject: What do you do? egberdina Hi all, An email arrives in your inbox. The subject heading is "There are no emails". You wonder why your spam filter didn't pick it up, but you open it anyway. It reads "There are no written words". The email is signed "Jon, Sarah, Nina, KenH and Scott". There is a PS. It says "There are no Jon, Sarah, Nina, KenH and Scott. But please join our group and discuss it with us" What do you do? Cheers Herman #90288 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 5:58 pm Subject: Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? scottduncan2 Dear Alex, A: "So concepts are cognizable objects that do not rise or fall away?" Scott: I think so, among other things. A: "Platonic Forms???? Nicca entities?" Scott: These above would be two very good examples of concepts. They don't exist and yet we can both think about them. They are like Isomorphic Vasoliths and Digital Crania. Very conceptual. I am curious as to why you would not pursue a discussion of the sutta reference I gave. Did it not refer quite clearly to this whole area of discourse? I specifically searched in the suttas, your preferred source of reference, in order to facilitate this important discussion with you. Do you have anything to add regarding this reference? Sincerely, Scott. #90289 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 5:59 pm Subject: Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? truth_aerator Hello Scott and Tep, > "Tep" wrote: > Hi Scott and Alex, - > > I used to make a mistake by claiming that the Suttanta Pitaka never > mentions 'pa~n~natti'. Thank you for the quote below from SN 62 > (10); > I am corrected. > But I have only one-half satisfaction. > Dear Tep. That sutta quote is not convincing. All that the Buddha is saying is that dont mix past, present & future. It doesn't say that "concepts do not exist" only paramattha dhammas do. > > T: Have you found other suttas that deal with pa~n~natti? I'll quickly tell you. According to a very learned Bhikkhu (Nanananda) paramattha does NOT mean "ultimate reality" it means ultimate goal, ultimate aim, etc. The reification came later. And lets not forget Puggalapannati. What does that AP book talk about and what does it classify? Does it talk about ultimate categories??? Best wishes, Alex #90290 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 6:09 pm Subject: Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? truth_aerator Dear Scott, > "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > A: "So concepts are cognizable objects that do not rise or fall >away?" > > Scott: I think so, among other things. How does that not contradict that all things impermanent? The mind is impermanent and thus it cannot permanently cognize objects, and it is impossible to have concepts (which are products of the mind) without the mind! > I am curious as to why you would not pursue a discussion of the >sutta > reference I gave. Did it not refer quite clearly to this whole area > of discourse? I specifically searched in the suttas, your preferred > source of reference, in order to facilitate this important >discussion > with you. Do you have anything to add regarding this reference? > > Sincerely, > > Scott. All that the Buddha is saying is that dont mix past, present & future in that SN sutta. It doesn't say that "concepts do not exist" only paramattha dhammas do. I wonder if the Buddha has stated anywhere in the 4 nikayas that such and sucj are ultimate dhammas, and these are just concepts. As far as I am concerned, !!!anything!!! in Samsara is dependently arisen, has no sabhava (check Patis) and liable to arise-stay-and fall away. Best wishes, Alex #90291 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 6:32 pm Subject: Re: The Chariot Simile dhammanusarin Hi Herman (and Scott), - I wrote earlier the following : > I think the simile's logic/reasoning/theme is that a 'being' is a > name/label for an assembly of the (five) aggregates. Same logic is > again seen in the definition of a 'contact' as the coming-together > of three dhammas : an external sense object, an internal > sensing medium(eye, ear, ...), and a consciousness. > > If we stop at this point, there would be no need to ask questions on > self, no self, existence, non-existence, ultimate realities, concepts. > >Herman: I think what you wrote above makes sense in that it is internally consistent. There could be a world where this would be good advice. But not in this world :-). >Simply because the definition (and that is all it is) of a contact as being the coming together of an external sense object, an internal sensing medium and a consciousness, does not refer to anything that is to be found in this world. If we take that model, and use that as a basis for our understanding, we are not going to have understanding of this world, we are going to have understanding of this model. T: Contact is a momentary event -- good only while it lasts-- ; because of contact as condition, there is a feeling. When your hand touches a hot plate, it is painful. You feel the pain and so the painful feeling is "found in the world", i.e. it is "real" to you. But if there is no consciousness of the touch, there would be no contact. If there is no contact, there is no feeling (according to Dependent Origination). Only eye and form do not condition seeing. You need eye- consciousness; then there is seeing along with a feeling. >I see parallels here with what I have just written to Howard. The model above (I know you didn't invent it, so I don't hold you responsible :-)) stipulates free floating dhammas. Not only that, they can never be more than just stipulations, for how can these three component dhammas be known, if it requires their contact for any dhamma (characteristic) to be known? T: This is the first time I find myself talking like an Abhidhammika! The three dhammas are mutually dependent. In the seeing example above, contact is the consequence of the three dhammas coming together. Form is known via eye-consciousness; eye-consciousness does not know eye; eye does not know form or eye-consciousness. Makes sense? I admit that contact is not as clear to justify as form or eye or eye-consciousness. Contact is like a pannatti rather than a reality. We need an expert to tell us more. Tep === #90292 From: "Sukinder" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:07 pm Subject: Re: What do you do? sukinderpal Hi Herman, Are Jon, Sarah etc. known to us or not? Say that I don't know these people, with or without knowledge of the Abhidhamma I'd say many thoughts would arise, some conditioned by curiosity. In the end however, I think I would just ignore it. ;-) Sukin #90293 From: "Sukinder" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:21 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Only for the Wise to See .. Less Book Recitation sukinderpal Dear Tep, It is not that I don't see any point in continuing with this thread. It is just that I think the other one will be more useful and would in time answer many of the questions posed in other threads. I intend to deal with basic assumptions which both of us have and which seem to be difficult to uncover or else overlooked in many of the other discussions. I hope that this is fine by you. Metta, Sukin #90294 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:54 pm Subject: Re: What do you do? kenhowardau Hi Herman, You have addressed your message to all of us. However, as one of the signatories on the hypothetical email I don't know how to answer your question, "what would you do if you received it?" Why would I be sending emails to myself? If I did I hope I wouldn't be answering them! :-) My advice to anyone else in receipt of that invitation would be to politely accept. Who knows, you might learn something! Is there a way in which apparently rational human beings could say they didn't exist? Otherwise, my advice would be to politely decline. Certainly don't join the group if your sole intention is to make a mockery of it. Ken H PS: Not that I mind the mockery! The one about "throw yourself under a train if you don't exist" is a corker. Breaks me up every time! :-) #90295 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 8:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Vism's Meditation for Developing Namarupa-pariccheda~nana lbidd2 Hi Tep, Tep: "Hardness in the head hair (or a body part) can be known by anybody. What is so special?" Larry: My comment is that when hardness or whatever is known through insight there is also a glimpse of "not me" or "impermanent" or "unsatisfactory" that cuts through the usual clinging to "me", "lastingness" or "desirableness", resulting in an empty but not unpleasant feeling, aka, "what is so special". Larry #90296 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 8:14 pm Subject: Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? scottduncan2 Dear Tep, (and Alex), Regarding SN 62 (10): "...there are three pathways of language (niruttipathaa), pathways of designation (adhivacanapathaa), pathways of description (pa~n~nattipathaa), that are unmixed, that were never mixed, that are not being mixed, that will not be mixed, that are not rejected by the wise ascetics and brahmins. What three? "Whatever form, bhikkhus has passed, ceased, changed,: the term, label, and description 'was' applies to it, not the term 'is' or the term 'will be'..." [Ya.m, bhikkhave, ruupaṃ atiita.m niruddha.m vipari.nata.m 'ahosii’ti tassa sa"nkhaa, 'ahosii’ti tassa sama~n~naa, 'ahosii’ti tassa pa~n~natti; na tassa sa"nkhaa 'atthii’ti, na tassa sa.nkhaa 'bhavissatii’’’ti...] T: "I used to make a mistake by claiming that the Suttanta Pitaka never mentions 'pa~n~natti'. Thank you for the quote below from SN 62(10); I am corrected. But I have only one-half satisfaction...Have you found other suttas that deal with pa~n~natti?" Scott: No, not yet. Shall I keep looking? I have no doubts about the distinction between concept and ultimate reality. I think the Buddha talks about concepts in the suttas all the time - people, beings, trees, mountains and the like. The thing I find significant about this sutta is not that it defines concepts, but that it refers to concepts - in this case the concept 'time' - in ways that suggest his listeners were well-acquainted with the distinction between concepts and something else - ultimate realities. Ruupa is a reality (paramattha dhamma). This is the one referred to in the extract I gave. The concept time is being applied to the ceasing of form. T: "Are you saying that concepts apply only to past events or objects? Further, is paramattha only meant for present and future dhammas? [I am a little confused.]" Scott: No, the concept being referred to in the sutta, as I understand it, is 'time', i.e. 'past', 'present', and 'future'. It is the concept of 'time' that is being discussed. I think he is clarifying that when ruupa has fallen away, the temporal concept that applies is known as 'past'. T: "I often heard that the khandhas are paramattha dhammas. But khandhas are defined in past, present and future as in the following sutta...So is it inaccurate to consider them as paramattha dhammas?" Scott: Not in my opinion. The khandhas are paramattha dhammas. I understand that the concept of 'time' (past, present, and future) is explained in reference to these ultimate realities, in particular, to the reality of their arising and ceasing. Sincerely, Scott. #90297 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 4:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What do you do? upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 9/16/2008 8:59:23 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi all, An email arrives in your inbox. The subject heading is "There are no emails". You wonder why your spam filter didn't pick it up, but you open it anyway. It reads "There are no written words". The email is signed "Jon, Sarah, Nina, KenH and Scott". There is a PS. It says "There are no Jon, Sarah, Nina, KenH and Scott. But please join our group and discuss it with us" What do you do? Cheers Herman ============================== LOL! Well done, Herman, provided that your meaning is simply that these aggregations are not fictions. But if what you wrote signifies clinging to identity, that is not quite so well done, I think, for identity (or own being) is really what atta is all about. Folks here such as those you mention above countenance identity in namas and rupas, and to that extent, I believe they accept atta-view. And if you extend countenancing of identity to aggregations of namas and rupas, then that would also be reifying. The extent to which you do, is, I think, the extent to which you accept an atta-view. (You might not at all, of course, but I can't tell from your words.) If in saying that there are emails, that there are written words, and that there are Jon, Sarah, Nina, Ken and Scott, what is *meant* is that emails have identity (or self), and written words as well, and Jon, Sarah, Nina, Ken and Scott as well, then it quite correct to say "There are no emails" and "There are no written words" and "There are no Jon, Sarah, Nina, KenH and Scott." The Zen folks make statements along those lines, and when they do, I understand them to exactly be denying identity, for, as Thich Nhat Hanh says, any A consists entirely of things that are not A. Nothing exists of itself. With metta, Howard #90298 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 4:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? TGrand458@... Hi Scott, Tep, and Alex Its amazing to see such scholarly precision and focus on Pali source material to get at the meaning...and yet just wildly assume that the Buddha means "ultimate realities" even when he doesn't say so. Or, is it possible that there is a predisposition to "look for" "ultimate realities," (a concept learned elsewhere) in the Buddha's teaching, and just use the rest of the Suttas as a backdrop to try to become convinced of it? TG #90299 From: "colette" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 3:43 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ...Rode hard, tied up wet to ... ksheri3 Howard, only a second or two, PSYCHOLOGICAL CONDITIONING is the phrase you're looking for. Robotics is the applicable reality that we see today in the function of the ANGRY WHITE MAILE PARTY and their PARTICIPANTS/SLAVES. think of what it could mean to the MIND-ONLY SCHOOL and/or YOGACARA SCHOOL. toodles, colette #90300 From: "colette" Date: Tue Sep 16, 2008 10:29 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ...Rode hard, tied up wet to ... ksheri3 Hi Howard, > > > > You suggest that a thought has no foundation upon which it can be > seperated and/or distinguished. > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I do? I wasn't aware of that - or maybe I don't understand you. colette: that is how I interpreted what you wrote. Maybe you could get me to the exact post and I'll run you through the thought process of psychology. ------------------------ Thoughts > have foundations. colette: that's questionable! Each morning when you wake up, what is the thought and what is the foundation? Here I'm refering to thoughts that come from our Dreams or Dream Yoga/Dream Time (see Aboriginese practices). We also have to consider the action reality of the dreams and the other foundations of "thoughts". If shunyata is in play then the foundation is another avenue to suffering because it's an illusion of an unreal thing. I find that the docrines of shunyata are very applicable toward esoteric practices such as "astral projection", et al, but I've still got a long way to go on how a person's mind can and does play tricks on them. In real life or every day life and interaction the doctrine of shunyata is fairily difficult to master and extremely bothersome. Especially for me, at this time since I've just begun learning about practicle issues such as "ethical egoism" and deeper questions concerning the broader topic "ETHICS" ------------------------------------------ And what is it I calim that thoughts can't be > distinguished from? colette: I haven't a clue. I was interpreting your post/reply. That is the trouble with only being allowed 2 hours a day on a library computer, having no privacy at home to actually study, read, concentrate, etc. but that condition is the norm since society really does not like me nor what I do, nor what I study, etc. It's been this way for 30 years now so I've kinda got their Standard Operating Procedure down pretty good by now. Surely you've gone to university and written papers that are required to fit into the doctrine of the A.P.A.? Now is that the American Psychiatric Assoc., or is it the American Publishers Assoc. or, just what is it? Whose rules and regs are they? These are Relative Truths. Lets move on. Crowd control for instance. there are masses of people all competing for limited supplies of everything. How do you compete against the billions of other people for those limited supplies? Well, what happens if you have the nerve to screw somebody and create another competitor? You would be at an advantage to compete since you would have two people competing for what I am competing for. I am handicapped, no? Your actions changed the equilibrium of the playing field, no? What other actions could you take that places you in a competative advantage over me? Can you callude with others? Can you make deals with others? I hope you get my drift. That is also a Relative Truth. Moving on... I deal with my problems that were created from a NEAR DEATH EXPERIENCE in 1978, and have found that there are countless truths that work in what I consider to be my experience with the ULTIMATE TRUTH, as limited and as transient as it was. Still it was a tremendous and profound experience that has changed my life forever. <....> Is thinking a form of "conditioning" according to Abhidhamma theory? Thank You. toodles, colette > I'm not follwing what you are asserting, Colette. > --------------------------------------------- #90301 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:23 am Subject: Sri Lanka Revisited, Intro, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, The theme of the seminar was: “World Peace through the Dhamma”, but actually, each day during the seminar the topic was the development of right understanding in daily life. Bhante Dhammadhara remarked that the cause of the problems in Sri Lanka and in the world are in reality the defilements which arise on account of what is experienced through the five senses and through the mind. Being freed from defilements means real peace. The arahat who has eradicated all defilements is truly at peace. The prime Minister, the Honorable Premadasa opened the seminar by lighting the traditional oil lamp and after that he spoke about the study of Dhamma. Each of the following days was to be dedicated to one of the eight factors of the eightfold Path as topic of discussion, but since the development of the eightfold Path is the development of right understanding in daily life we did not restrict ourselves to one factor a day. We found that in order to know what the development of right understanding means we had to consider all kinds of wholesome deeds and the different types of consciousness which motivate them. So often we take for wholesome what is not wholesome, and we realized this more and more during our journey. It is beneficial to find out the truth about oneself and to begin to become more sincere. After the seminar in Colombo we traveled to Anurådhapura where we stayed for more than a week in order to pay respect at the Bodhitree and other sacred places and to have Dhamma discussions. We then proceeded to Kandy where Khun Lim, a Thai lecturer in Påli, had organised Dhamma sessions. From Kandy we returned to Colombo where Bhante Dhammadhara led the Dhamma discussions in the Buddhist Information Center after Khun Sujin had left for Thailand. I wish to express my gratitude for the warm hospitality and friendship I received in the homes of the families I stayed with in Sri Lanka. I stayed with Mr. and Mrs. Gunasekera during my last days in Colombo and I still hear my host saying that one never should delay kusala because one does not know what kind of rebirth one will have. He helped me to find robes for a monk in the Hague and offered one set to this monk. ****** Nina. #90302 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Doubts and Siilana nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 16-sep-2008, om 12:33 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > Sarah: p.s did you have a chance to listen to any of the edited > recordings > of discussions with A.Sujin? I'm sure you'd find them helpful. > Lukas:Yeah, I like them very much. Especially those about seeing, > hearing. --------- N: In what way you found it helpful to know about seeing and hearing? What did you get from these talks? What did you hear that you had not heard before? Writing about this is sharing Dhamma. Sharing Dhamma is one way of kusala. There are many ways. If you cannot give something yourself to someone else, there are other ways of daana: appreciating someone else's kusala and expressing this in words. Or helping, even in small things such as handing something to someone else, is kusala. Or politeness is kusala. You asked whether thinking is OK, but no need to ask this, it has already arisen because of conditions and nobody can push it back. I heard this morning on a recording:< we study Dhamma so that we shall know ourselves better. Some people think a great deal, others less so, and this depends on accumulations. Whatever appears has conditions to appear. So long as right understanding has not been developed we take thinking for self.> N: Nobody causes thinking to appear, it appears because of its own conditions. There can be more understanding of it as a conditioned reality. Nina. #90303 From: "szmicio" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 3:13 am Subject: Re: Doubts and Siilana szmicio Dear Nina > > Sarah: p.s did you have a chance to listen to any of the edited > > recordings > > of discussions with A.Sujin? I'm sure you'd find them helpful. > > Lukas:Yeah, I like them very much. Especially those about seeing, > > hearing. > --------- > N: In what way you found it helpful to know about seeing and hearing? L: When I hear about seeing and hearing, and there are no self,which can be experienced, then usualy kusala arise. And sati I think so. I am not sure now, becouse there is only one moment when I can know it. Moment of sati. But in daily life there is usually thinking about things and there is a lot of dosa. So I wonder is it a right way to lead the life? Maybe I am doing something wrong, becouse I allow akusala arise naturaly?? I wonder is there something wrong? Becouse akusala arises very often. > What did you get from these talks? What did you hear that you had not > heard before? L: What do you mean? > Writing about this is sharing Dhamma. > Sharing Dhamma is one way of kusala. L:sometimes, but usually there is akusala citta even when I am talking about Dhamma. > There are many ways. If you > cannot give something yourself to someone else, there are other ways > of daana: appreciating someone else's kusala and expressing this in > words. Or helping, even in small things such as handing something to > someone else, is kusala. Or politeness is kusala. L: But they don't arise so often. > You asked whether thinking is OK, but no need to ask this, it has > already arisen because of conditions and nobody can push it back. > I heard this morning on a recording:< we study Dhamma so that we > shall know ourselves better. Some people think a great deal, others > less so, and this depends on accumulations. Whatever appears has > conditions to appear. So long as right understanding has not been > developed we take thinking for self.> > N: Nobody causes thinking to appear, it appears because of its own > conditions. There can be more understanding of it as a conditioned > reality. L: Yeah that's what I am doing. Just seeing it's out of control. I asked you befor about vedana, and you said that's out of control and it's better to know it. It was really wise. But sometimes I doubt about this. Nina, you ask me what did I get from Ajahn Sujin talks? I can't answer you, becouse I dont know. Sometimes there is yoniso manasikara, sometimes a lot of akusala arising on account what I have heard. I mean a lot of thinking about Dhamma with akusala. But there is one thing I can say. When I hear about seeing it helps much more than I hear about, for example visudhi magga. Becouse hearing is real for me, and I can experience it. I wonder about panja, becouse there is usually thinking about old panja which has gone now. Best wishes Lukas #90304 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 3:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vinnana & Sanna ... Is It Greed or Ambition? .. sarahprocter... Dear Tep, --- On Tue, 16/9/08, Tep wrote: >Let me respond to your concern about my violation of the no-book Rule in this message. .... S: Let me assure you that I have no concern about it whatsoever. Feel free to violate any of your no-book Rules as often as you like. After all, you're the King:-). T:> I will respond to your discussion of the Vism XVIII, 5-8 in another post. .... S: Whatever is convenient for you, your Majesty:-). Metta, Sarah p.s I'll keep your Rules and Requests in my mind when I write to you, but at risk of losing my head, no promises, conditions being what they are:-)). ========== #90305 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 3:43 am Subject: Meeting Phil and Naomi buddhatrue Hi Everyone, I wanted to write an update about my experiences meeting Phil and his wife Naomi. First, I was so happy that Phil and Naomi offered to let me stay at their apartment in Tokyo! Otherwise I would have been stuck at the airport for days. And, airports are not very comfortable. :-) Phil and Naomi have a beautiful apartment! It's not too big and not too small: polished wood floors, textured walls, sliding dividers between rooms, beautiful plants in each room- a traditional Japanese apartment. It was immediately very peaceful and relaxing to me. I told Phil that he doesn't need a meditation room because his whole apartment is a meditation room! :-) Phil is exactly like his posts portray him: very nice, energetic, thoughtful, animated, and deeply devoted to the Dhamma. Actually, his practice at the moment is much more intense than mine. He faithfully meditates every morning, reads Dhamma books, keeps Dhamma notebooks, and guards the sense doors out in public and at home (they don't even own a television!). Phil is on the fast track while I am more meandering. But, meeting Phil and seeing how he lives gives me inspiration to tighten up my practice and not be so slack. As the Buddha said, noble friends are the entirety of the Dhamma, and meeting Phil I can see how that is true. He doesn't just talk the talk, he walks the walk. Naomi was much different than I expected. For some reason, I expected a traditional Japanese woman uninterested in Buddhism and spiritual matters. Actually, she is quite the opposite! Naomi is very talented at aromatherapy, natural healing (including energy healing with charkas, auras, etc.), and making natural cosmetics. She even teaches classes to local Japanese women on these subjects. She is also a dedicated member of Amnesty International and Greenpeace- both organizations with a good purpose but not too popular with most Japanese. She definitely marches to her own beat and that beat is very spiritual in nature. I was surprised that I had pictured her so wrongly. Actually, I consider her to be just as spiritual and devoted as Phil, but in a different manner. As I told Phil, some people have to study Buddhism to learn about spiritual matters and some people are just natural Buddhists. Naomi is what I consider to be a natural Buddhist. So they make a good team and I am happy they found each other. Phil and I talked about so many Dhamma topics that it would be impossible to mention them all. It was an ongoing discussion for about three days. We spoke about all of the popular DSG topics: meditation, non-self, metta, and mindfulness (especially guarding the sense doors). We disagreed on a few minor points but nothing really too major. The one area where we agreed most strongly and talked about most often is that the Theravada tradition needs to be more open to the practice of compassion. Well, that is about all I can think of. I had to immediately go to teach today so I still have to unpack and clean my apartment. Hope this post was enlightening to the members. Metta, James #90306 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 3:53 am Subject: More Tales from Big Wave Bay, Hong Kong sarahprocter... Dear Nina, Ken H, Jessica & all, Jon and I have been in a state of shock today. I hope you don't mind my sharing a little. I keep thinking about 'the story'! The weekend was a long holiday weekend here. The full moon on Saturday night was the mid-autumn festival. The weather is very warm and families go out in the evening to watch the moon with lanterns, have picnics and barbeques. Moon-cakes are fattening but popular! The festival has a long history, dating back 600 years to a Mongolian uprising in China. Messages to arrange a counter-uprising on the same Full Moon were spread around the country in moon-cakes. In the morning, we went to Big Wave Bay as usual for a swim and little surf with crowds of others. As we walked down to the beach we chatted with Nelson who runs the small surf shop in the sleepy village and one two other friends who 'hang out' there. They were telling us about the great surf they'd had the day before and seemed relaxed and happy, probably looking forward to their evening barbeque party near the beach. The next morning (Sunday), we went again to the beach for an early morning swim before the heat and crowds arrived. This time there was a very different scene. There were crowds of uniformed police and also detectives everywhere. We were told there had been a vicious fight the night before in the barbeque area near the surf shop and that one man had been killed and three others injured. Parts of the village, including the surf shop were cordoned off. Nelson was in front of the shop being interviewed by detectives, but seemed calm. We couldn't talk to him. We had our swim and a snack and left before noon. Later we heard on the news that several men had been arrested for what was now classified as murder. We assumed it was a case of outside Triad gangs that had come to Big Wave Bay during the night. Pretty shocking for a small sleepy village in Hong Kong which is a particularly safe city compared to other cities I've lived in, like London. And then this morning we read the names of those arrested. They are all surfer friends of ours! They include Nelson, a couple of company directors and an airline pilot. All are in their 30s and 40s. Whenever we've spent time with any of them, they've always been friendly, polite, courteous and helpful to us, the novice surfers. How could these gentle surfers find themselves behind bars now, paraded off in hoods, in serious trouble? Latent tendencies and accumulations - different characters at different moments, perhaps. Conditions, circumstances, vipaka, kilesa, kamma. So many different ingredients which make up the present citta now. Metta, Sarah p.s Jessica, it was lovely chatting to you briefly on the phone the other day and finding out more about your interesting background. We'll look forward to meeting you in due course and having some dhamma chat too. No hurry. ========== #90307 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 4:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meeting Phil and Naomi sarahprocter... Hi James (& Phil), Thank you so much! This is a lovely report and I'm so glad it worked out so very well for you all. Wonderful. I was glad to read about the dhamma discussions and also of your fine impressions of Phil and Naomi, obviously a delightful couple to spend time with:-). I'm also glad to hear you're now back safely in Taiwan. Best wishes for your new school and school-year. Phil (if you're reading), also many thanks for your interesting comments about your discussions with James. It sounds as though they were very fruitful discussions. As Tep and I were saying the other day, much better to share and discuss one's ideas (even when there are differences), than to just go on thinking about them on one's own. Many thanks for all your recent contributions and as we always say, look forward to seeing you back in your own time:-)). Metta, Sarah --- On Wed, 17/9/08, buddhatrue wrote: Hi Everyone, I wanted to write an update about my experiences meeting Phil and his wife Naomi. First, I was so happy that Phil and Naomi offered to let me stay at their apartment in Tokyo! Otherwise I would have been stuck at the airport for days. And, airports are not very comfortable. :-) <.....> #90308 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 12:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ...Rode hard, tied up wet to ... upasaka_howard Hi, Colette - In a message dated 9/17/2008 1:44:06 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ksheri3@... writes: Thoughts > have foundations. colette: that's questionable! Each morning when you wake up, what is the thought and what is the foundation? ======================= What I meant isn't deep. I had two things in mind. The general meaning: Nothing arises other than from conditions. The more specific meaning: Thinking draws upon and is conditioned by experience through all six sense doors. With metta, Howard #90309 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 12:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meeting Phil and Naomi upasaka_howard Hi, James (and Phil & Naomi) - In a message dated 9/17/2008 6:44:50 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: Hi Everyone, I wanted to write an update about my experiences meeting Phil and his wife Naomi. =================================== James, as usual you paint a vivid and enticing word picture! I feel I know much more of Phil & Naomi than previously, and clearly they lead lovely and full lives - calm, spiritual, and energetic. How wonderful. I'm so pleased that the three of you came together in this way. With metta, Howard #90310 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 12:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] More Tales from Big Wave Bay, Hong Kong upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah & Jon (and all) - In a message dated 9/17/2008 6:54:45 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: We had our swim and a snack and left before noon. Later we heard on the news that several men had been arrested for what was now classified as murder. We assumed it was a case of outside Triad gangs that had come to Big Wave Bay during the night. Pretty shocking for a small sleepy village in Hong Kong which is a particularly safe city compared to other cities I've lived in, like London. And then this morning we read the names of those arrested. They are all surfer friends of ours! ---------------------------------------------- Howard: At this point in my reading, Sarah, I muttered "Omigod!" out loud!! ---------------------------------------------- They include Nelson, a couple of company directors and an airline pilot. All are in their 30s and 40s. Whenever we've spent time with any of them, they've always been friendly, polite, courteous and helpful to us, the novice surfers. ============================= I'm so sorry for that upset of yours. I hope matters get straightened out and that many of your young friends are shown to have been innocent in the matter. With metta, Howard #90311 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 4:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Doubts and Siilana sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, It's a real joy to share and discuss the Dhamma with you. I'm sure Nina feels the same. --- On Tue, 16/9/08, szmicio wrote: >Dear Sarah, Your answers are really helpfull. Recently I feel dosa and a lot of thinking about Dhamma with akusala. I forgot about seeing, hearing in daily life. When I want to read anything, any Sutta I feel dosa and unplesant vedana with it. .... S: Recently I was chatting with a friend, Ivan, in Bangkok and discussing about how 'dosa will always find an object'. In other words, while there is the tendency for such, there can even be dosa for suttas or Dhamma discussions. Yes, there's forgetfulness most the day and awareness and understanding can't be forced as we discussed. When you feel dosa for reading suttas, just put them aside. There's no rule about any action or activity. The most important thing is just the understanding of whatever has been conditioned to arise already. I once told Phil about a period when I was really working very hard (teaching and counselling very long hours) and I wasn't in the mood to pick up a dhamma text as the end of the day. I did appreciate listening to the tapes at such times, though. No internet discussions then, which I would have enjoyed, but we'd arrange discussions with friends. ... >S: In truth, they are just different mental states arising and falling away, not belonging to anyone. This of course applies to any kusala, including wisdom, too. Nothing to be attached to. > ... >L: Yeah, but there is usually a concept,a idea of a self, of Lukas. >I like it very much when you are talking about anatta. It helps so much. It can condition right understanding. ... S: Like you, I've always found it helpful to be reminded of realities such as seeing and visible object now and how such realities are anatta. When there's thinking about the concept or story of Lukas, such thinking can be known too as another transitory dhamma, anatta again. .... L:> But when I feel I've done something wrong. Say something what I sholudn't. I feel that's mine. That I am doing wrong. And I feel regret about this. .... S: Yes, because it's 'Me' and 'I' who has done something wrong. It's very deeply ingrained, isn't it? Also, very, very common:-) ... L:> I still dont understand ditthi cetasika. Can you give me example, when diithi arises in daily life? ... S: When we take any of the khandhas for atta in someway, for example. For example, when we take people or trees or computer screens for being in the visible object, there is ditthi. Of course, only panna can know whether at the moment of thinking about people or computers whether there is any ditthi. Usually, there's just moha and lobha. Of course, usually we're more concerned about the dosa because it always arises with unpleasant feeling, as you stress. But what about the lobha now? Without the lobha, there wouldn't be any dosa. .... <...> > S: Appreciating that there really is just this moment of seeing, hearing or thinking now, for example, we appreciate more and more that there's no use in dwelling on what's gone or what might be. Just develop understanding of what appears now and I think you'll find there is less feeling of depression in a day. When it arises, it too can be known as another fleeting conditioned dhamma too. >L: Yeah, but usually there is a thinking about conditioned dhamma. Is it ok? .... S: Such thinking can be kusala or akusala, but in any case it's arisen by conditions, so there's no use wondering if it's OK. Just understand the thinking for what it is! .... L:> I always think that I can change this thinking, but I cant. I cant stop thinking and thinks about this or that. .... S: True...like the monkey jumping from branch to branch. (Scott wrote a great post on this recently, #89431) ... L:> When I am typing, the words appers and build sentences and fall away. It's conditioned. But I wonder is it just thinking or understanding? ... S: Thinking about concepts. That's fine, just understand the thinking for what it is, rather than being lost in the concepts! ... > In your other message, you mentioned being so busy and that kusala citta doesn't arise often enough. Again, I think the problem is not being busy, but the attachment - attachment to kusala for oneself. > So we see that right understanding has to develop with detachment all the way. >L: but there is no understanding now. ... S: It'll develop, conditioned by these wise reflections and considerations. Better to have lots of akusala and develop right understanding than not develop it! Again, no self can bring about results and any wishing or expectations for more kusala or understanding is a hindrance. ... L:> Maybe I sholud start doing sitting meditation, to have more kusala, more understanding? ... S: The only time is ever now and there is never an 'I' to do anything:-). ... S: > p.s did you have a chance to listen to any of the edited recordings of discussions with A.Sujin? I'm sure you'd find them helpful. ... L:> Yeah, I like them very much. Especially those about seeing, hearing. .... S: As Nina suggested, maybe you could copy down a few lines you like or point to a track for others to listen to as well. Only if you feel like it and it isn't a condition for more dosa!! Even though you refer to various difficulties, I'm confident that you have a very sincere interest in really understanding the Dhamma and this is by far the most important thing in life, Lukas. Please keep sharing your thoughts and reflections honestly, just as you've been doing. Metta, Sarah ============ #90312 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 4:41 am Subject: Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "How does that not contradict that all things impermanent? "The mind is impermanent and thus it cannot permanently cognize objects, and it is impossible to have concepts (which are products of the mind) without the mind!" Scott: I think you are mixing up the reality which thinks (citta - 'mind') with the object of citta. Citta has anicca as characteristic for sure. Citta can take concept as object as its characteristic is cognizing. Citta is paramattha dhamma - subject to arising and falling away. Concept does not have this characteristic and is said to be 'time-freed'. While there can be no concepts independent of mind, as you say, 'mind' and 'concept' differ. The word 'mind' is concept. The reality it points to, or is a shadow of, is paramattha dhamma. A: "All that the Buddha is saying is that dont mix past, present & future in that SN sutta. It doesn't say that 'concepts do not exist' only paramattha dhammas do." Scott: In the excerpt one can discern that there are two things being discussed. One is 'form' (ruupa), the other is 'time' ('was'/past, 'is'/present, 'will be'/future). Ruupa is paramattha dhamma. Time is concept. Do you see any difference between 'ruupa' and 'time'? As you are fond of saying, if one experiences hardness - a characteristic of ruupa - by walking into a tree, one can know hardness. But does one know 'tree'? The Buddha mentions pathways of description (pa~n~nattipathaa) and shows that these are in relation to realities - ruupa in the case of the excerpt. It can't be a stretch to see that the descriptor and that which is described differ. There are many types of concepts. Something real (ruupa) can be described in terms of something unreal (time). In fact, I think time is derived in reference to the arising and ceasing of realities. When one thinks of 'hardness' is this the same as what is experienced by the body-sense when 'one walks into a tree'? Again, concepts are not subject to arising and falling away. The name given to some reality or other is not the same as that reality of which the name is a shadow. I think that learning to differentiate concept from absolute reality is very important. Any opinion of mine is subject to correction. Sincerely, Scott. #90313 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:02 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Only for the Wise to See .. Less Book Recitation dhammanusarin Dear Sukin, - I think you have a high self confidence. >Suk: >It is not that I don't see any point in continuing with this thread. It is just that I think the other one will be more useful and would in time answer many of the questions posed in other threads. I intend to deal with basic assumptions which both of us have and which seem to be difficult to uncover or else overlooked in many of the other discussions. T: That sounds like a purposeful plan. However, do other discussants in "the other discussions" agree with you that our discussion may "answer many of the questions posed in other threads" and that they may have "overlooked" some relevant basic assumptions? They may say, "Sukin is self confident." >I hope that this is fine by you. T: Yes, I'll go along with you, although I think your objective to help other discussants may not be achievable unless they agree. Tep === #90314 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Only for the Wise to See egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/9/15 sarah abbott : > Hi Herman, > > > H:>I did ask you recently if you had ever encountered a doorway, and I > may have missed your reply. ... > ... > S: Try: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/90085 > > and then we can discuss further if you like. > Thank you for digging this out for me. Sorry I missed it when you posted it. H:> But what on earth is a doorway? Have you ever met one? Should you be talking about them as though you know them? ... S: It's just a short-hand way of referring to the various senses. Obviously sounds are not experienced by seeing through the eye-sense and visible objects are not experienced by hearing through the ear-sense. So can I safely assume that sense-doors are not something to be known directly? Cheers Herman #90315 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Only for the Wise to See egberdina Hi colette, 2008/9/15 colette : > Hi Herman, > > Why does it appear as though you are taking the position of a "god of > the threshhold" since all doorways have threshholds that must be > crossed upon entering or leaving, passing through the doorway? > > Good hearing from you again. It's always somewhere between good and mind-blowing to read your posts, too:-) Do you know doorways? Or are they stories you tell yourself? What is the characteristic of a doorway, any doorway? Cheers Herman #90316 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Only for the Wise to See upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Sarah) - In a message dated 9/17/2008 8:08:39 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: So can I safely assume that sense-doors are not something to be known directly? ============================ Here's my perspective on this matter - just how I think about it, and nothing even semi-official: The five physical sense-doors are experientially (to me) what I would call "locational rupas." Associated with the body door are all the bodily locations, associated with hearing is a "space" of physical locations, associated with seeing is a "cone" of physical locations, and so on. And the mind door, derivatively, encompasses the five physical sense doors. With metta, Howard #90317 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? egberdina Hi TG, 2008/9/15 : > > > Hi Howard > > > Yea, we disagree. There is just what arises. There is no "unarisen > referent" nor an "arisen referent that doesn't exist." The idea of the tree in the > backyard is just the memory and associations thereof. > I disagree with you here. You seem to limit what there is to only what arises or what is known. That is a slippery slope, IMO. Otherwise, and more importantly, how has your day been? I had a day off from work today, so, yes, my day was good :-) Cheers, TG Herman #90318 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:42 am Subject: Re: The Vism's Meditation for Developing Namarupa-pariccheda~nana dhammanusarin Hello Larry, - Thank you for responding to my question : > >Tep: "Hardness in the head hair (or a body part) can be known by anybody. What is so special?" >Larry: My comment is that when hardness or whatever is known through insight there is also a glimpse of "not me" or "impermanent" or "unsatisfactory" that cuts through the usual clinging to "me", "lastingness" or "desirableness", resulting in an empty but not unpleasant feeling, aka, "what is so special". .............. T: You may have missed the point I made in the question above. Hardness is known by simple contact that anybody, instructed or uninstructed worldlings, even an animal, can experience. It doesn't take an insight to know contact. Your above comment doesn't clarify how (by what conditions) and why (for which reasons) such "insight" may appear. You seem to believe that namarupa-pariccheda~nana will arise if you keep thinking/reading about hardness in a body part (or whatever object of your choice), and this ~nana will cut through the clinging to 'me, mine and my self'. The Vism is more convincing than you (see my previous post again) because it at least shows a systematic approach to develop the insight (namarupa- pariccheda~nana). Mahasi Sayadaw expounds upon the development of this ~nana more clearly. Read it, please, and tell me what you think. BTW I am not Mahasi Sayadaw's student or trying to promote his teaching for any self benefit. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/mahasi/wheel370.html Tep === #90319 From: "dsgmods" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:44 am Subject: Re: A visit from James and another farewell to DSG dsgmods [Phil has asked that the folloiwng message be forwarded to the list - Jon] Hi Nina I forgot to thank you when posting re my latest departure the other day. As you know, I've come to disagree strongly with some things you and your teacher say, but I'm very grateful for the good push you gave me to consider deeper things. I still think the Abhidhamma is important to consider, and without your great efforts to make it understandable, it would be even less appreciated today. Now I am at e-sangha, and people often make reference to your books. Thanks again and talk to you again someday, I hope - you know me, I'll be back someday. metta, phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > > Hi all > > Just saw James off at the station. He was here for 3 nights. It > worked out very well, really. ... > Thanks again for everything, Sarah and Jon. ... see you all again someday. > > Metta, > > Phil #90320 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 6:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A visit from James and another farewell to DSG egberdina Hey Phil, > Now I am at e-sangha,, and people often make reference to your books. I'd be interested to hear about your experiences at e-sangha. My own impression, and the feedback I get from others, is that it is a totally fascist site. In other words, you will be dealt with if you disagree with the party line. The great thing is they have a special page for Buddhism for homosexuals. As we all know, the Buddha was big on that. Anyways, I've been thinking that what the world lacks is a Buddhist site where uptight and angry women can discuss yoghurt. Cheers Herman #90321 From: "szmicio" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 6:45 am Subject: Re: Doubts and Siilana szmicio Dear Sarah, I am happy I have such good friends in Dhamma. I like yours and Nina's posts very much. They are very beneficial. And always rememeber me what is important. >S: I once told Phil about a period when I was really working very hard (teaching and counselling very long hours) and I wasn't in the mood to pick up a dhamma text as the end of the day. I did appreciate listening to the tapes at such times, though. No internet discussions then, which I would have enjoyed, but we'd arrange discussions with friends. L: We usually discussing that right understending is conditioned by reading and considering Dhamma but can there be any moments of understanding even when we dont listing Dhamma or reading Suttas? > L:> I still dont understand ditthi cetasika. Can you give me example, when > diithi arises in daily life? > ... > S: When we take any of the khandhas for atta in someway, for example. For example, when we take people or trees or computer screens for being in the visible object, there is ditthi. Of course, only panna can know whether at the moment of thinking about people or computers whether there is any ditthi. Usually, there's just moha and lobha. L: but lobha and diithi cannot arise at the same time? > Of course, usually we're more concerned about the dosa because it always arises with unpleasant feeling, as you stress. But what about the lobha now? Without the lobha, there wouldn't be any dosa. L: Those moements of lobha are very unclear for me. How can we know the characteristic of lobha, there is a lot of conceptions. How can we know it? we discuss with Nina about such moments as giving Dhamma or be happy of someone merits. I think I know this moments, becouse they arise sometimes in my life, but how can i be sure that is kusala??? I think in such moments lobha has the same chance as kusala to arise. > L:> When I am typing, the words appers and build sentences and fall away. > It's conditioned. > But I wonder is it just thinking or understanding? > ... > S: Thinking about concepts. That's fine, just understand the thinking for what it is, rather than being lost in the concepts! > ... L: I forgot about this. You're right!Thinkin is just thinking. > S: > p.s did you have a chance to listen to any of the edited recordings > of discussions with A.Sujin? I'm sure you'd find them helpful. > ... > L:> Yeah, I like them very much. Especially those about seeing, hearing. > .... > S: As Nina suggested, maybe you could copy down a few lines you like or point to a track for others to listen to as well. Only if you feel like it and it isn't a condition for more dosa!! > It will be pleasure. thanks a lot Lukas Lukas #90322 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 7:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A visit from James and another farewell to DSG nilovg Dear Phil, Thanks for your nice post. It does not matter that you disagree with things. Since the perfections are highly regarded in Mahayana you may take up again Kh Sujin's book about them. And after all, I am not very much inclined to lable Mahayana and Theravada. Yes, I expect you back. Nina. Op 17-sep-2008, om 14:44 heeft dsgmods het volgende geschreven: > I forgot to thank you when posting re my latest departure the > other day. #90323 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 7:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meeting Phil and Naomi nilovg Hi James, you wrote a lovely report, thank you very much. Nina. Op 17-sep-2008, om 12:43 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > But, meeting Phil and seeing how he > lives gives me inspiration to tighten up my practice and not be so > slack. As the Buddha said, noble friends are the entirety of the > Dhamma, and meeting Phil I can see how that is true. He doesn't > just talk the talk, he walks the walk. #90324 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 7:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] More Tales from Big Wave Bay, Hong Kong nilovg Dear Sarah, Yes, we never know what was accumulated in past lives. Perhaps we were also violent, who knows. That is why we have to be cautious today, not wasting opportunities for kusala and the development of understanding. In particular I thought of Nelson who could conquer his sickness and live longer. And now, for what? It certainly is a story we can learn from. Nina. Op 17-sep-2008, om 12:53 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > How could these gentle surfers find themselves behind bars now, > paraded off in hoods, in serious trouble? Latent tendencies and > accumulations - different characters at different moments, perhaps. > Conditions, circumstances, vipaka, kilesa, kamma. So many different > ingredients which make up the present citta now. #90325 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:28 am Subject: Sun Lun Sayadaw's Formal Practice Of Aaanapaanasati Re: Buddha Dhamma only. abhidhammika Dear Alex and all How are you? Here is the story of an illitrate Burmese farmer who was said to gain attainment of awakening by having pursued the formal practice of Aanapaanasati and who was said to be able answer questions asked by the learned Sayadaws about Buddha Dhamma in Pali texts. Put it another way, his awakening was verified by checking if his dhamma knowledge agreed with Pali texual teachings. Here is the link. http://www.sunlun-meditation.com.mm/ Best wishes Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org PS- Alex, I will get back to you regarding Vasubandhu, and anusaya issues. You need a lot of work ahead of you to understand my writings such as anusaya phenomena being not in existence. They are counter-intuitive. Increase your formal development of Noble Eightfold Path to a more intense level. Keep up the good work! Suan Lu Zaw #90326 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 6:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? TGrand458@... In a message dated 9/17/2008 6:33:01 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > Yea, we disagree. There is just what arises. There is no "unarisen > referent" nor an "arisen referent that doesn't exist." The idea of the tree in the > backyard is just the memory and associations thereof. > I disagree with you here. You seem to limit what there is to only what arises or what is known. That is a slippery slope, IMO. .............................................. Hi Herman I am limiting myself to the view that the only phenomena that occur are the phenomena that arise/appear. In reference to my discussion with Howard, I'm saying there is no occurrence of something that doesn't arise. I'm uncertain as to how that is a slippery slope. Here I am just addressing principles, not experience. So the "known" is not the issue. I'll have to leave that sort of purist phenomenological venue for Howard. ;-) If you still disagree, could you tell me in what way? Thanks. The day is OK, thanks. Glad you are doing good today. Take care. TG Otherwise, and more importantly, how has your day been? I had a day off from work today, so, yes, my day was good :-) Cheers, TG Herman #90327 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 12:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:VisM nilovg Dear Alex, Op 16-sep-2008, om 22:53 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > The Visuddhimagga, however, both mistakenly takes the > > > similes "smoke", "mist", "dust", "gleam", "glows", "shines", > > > and "moon", as literal visual images, and also misapprehends them > >as > > > the counter-sign, the mark of success!, in direct opposition to > >the > > > Vimuttimagga. ---------- He said: in opposition to Vimuttimagga, but as I understand this work is not included in the commentaries. But as to visual sign, is see it as mental, not experienced through the eyes. But I do not know anything about the nimitta acquired through breathing meditation. I cannot find this important. What matters: how much detachment is there? Nina. #90329 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:17 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? dhammanusarin Hi TG, - Thank you for the comment. TG : Its amazing to see such scholarly precision and focus on Pali source material to get at the meaning...and yet just wildly assume that the Buddha means "ultimate realities" even when he doesn't say so. Or, is it possible that there is a predisposition to "look for" "ultimate realities," (a concept learned elsewhere) in the Buddha's teaching, and just use the rest of the Suttas as a backdrop to try to become convinced of it? T: There is a clear evidence of pa~n~natti (concepts) in SN 62(10) that Scott quoted from. But it is also clear that our Greatest Teacher used the term to describe "designation" in language, without saying anything about ultimate (paramattha). Ultimate reality was "invented" outside the Tipitaka. Tep === #90330 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:44 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Vinnana & Sanna ... Is It Greed or Ambition? .. dhammanusarin Dear Sarah (Nina, Sukin), - In the message below I can sense your uncomfortableness and change-of- mind about the no-book discussion. It is okay, Sarah. .................... Dear Tep, --- On Tue, 16/9/08, Tep wrote: >Let me respond to your concern about my violation of the no-book Rule in this message. .... S: Let me assure you that I have no concern about it whatsoever. Feel free to violate any of your no-book Rules as often as you like. After all, you're the King:-). T:> I will respond to your discussion of the Vism XVIII, 5-8 in another post. .... S: Whatever is convenient for you, your Majesty:-). Metta, Sarah p.s I'll keep your Rules and Requests in my mind when I write to you, but at risk of losing my head, no promises, conditions being what they are:-)). ========== T: Don't worry about those troubles, Sarah. Perhaps, you miss your programmed Q&As and the prepared collection of the various quotes you have been using again and again over the years. Many teachers still have to go to the classroom with prepared lecture notes and books, even after having taught the same subject for a decade. I understand your reason and thus consider the Rule cancelled. ;-)) Tep === #90331 From: "colette" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:30 am Subject: EMPTINESS ksheri3 Good Morning Herman, Isn't Emptiness the chief characteristic of any doorway? Mind-blowing, now that's one helluva characteristic, wouldn't you agree? Some people, typically the slaves of dogma, only have a mind in their pants. Doorways can be vehicles. I've past through many a doorway and I've walked on and over many a threshhold as well. Can you tell the difference between the two sides of the doorway? I mean, which side is inside and which side is the outside? What is internal and what is external? Where is this inside and it's accompanying internal? Is it like that WEstern christian god that can only appear as being beneficial as long as that "god" has a devil that can deliver and distribute RETRIBUTIVE JUSTICE? Do make the payment before you step on and over the Threshhold to pass through the doorway or is the payment due after you've crossed the threshhold? the seeds have been and are being planted which will certainly germinate and bring about an explosion as if an explosive material, at some given point in time, won't they? Kindof like fruit on a tree or tubors in the dirt? Are Tube Worms in the dirt? toodles, colette #90332 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 4:33 pm Subject: Sun Lun Sayadaw's Formal Practice Of Aaanapaanasati Re: Buddha Dhamma only. truth_aerator Hi Suan, >--- "abhidhammika" wrote: > > Dear Alex and all > > How are you? > > Here is the story of an illitrate Burmese farmer who was said to > gain attainment of awakening by having pursued the formal practice > of Aanapaanasati and who was said to be able answer questions asked > by the learned Sayadaws about Buddha Dhamma in Pali texts. > > Put it another way, his awakening was verified by checking if his > dhamma knowledge agreed with Pali texual teachings. > > Here is the link. > > http://www.sunlun-meditation.com.mm/ Very good argument. And Ven. Sunlun DID practice very hard. Very inspiring. I've read about him before. I've even posted it at msg #77393 > PS- Alex, I will get back to you regarding Vasubandhu, and anusaya > issues. Please do. Also there was this meditator called Asanga (300 CE) who is supposed to have been to Tusita Heaven from where he learned some teaching of Future Buddha Metteya and written Abhidharmasammuccaya Best wishes, Alex #90333 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 4:43 pm Subject: Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? truth_aerator Dear Scott, > "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > > A: "How does that not contradict that all things impermanent? > > "The mind is impermanent and thus it cannot permanently cognize > objects, and it is impossible to have concepts (which are products >of > the mind) without the mind!" > > Scott: I think you are mixing up the reality which thinks (citta - > 'mind') with the object of citta. Ok, lets substitute Vinnana for citta. > Citta has anicca as characteristic > for sure. Citta can take concept as object as its characteristic is > cognizing. Citta is paramattha dhamma - subject to arising and > falling away. But how can something that is subject to arise and fall away be in any sense Ultimate? How do you precisely define what is ultimate and what is not? > Concept does not have this characteristic and is said > to be 'time-freed'. While there can be no concepts independent of > mind, as you say, 'mind' and 'concept' differ. The word 'mind' is > concept. The reality it points to, or is a shadow of, is paramattha > dhamma. If there was no mind or consciousness, would there be any concepts? Would it even make sense to say "concepts exist independent of reality". > Scott: In the excerpt one can discern that there are two things >being > discussed. One is 'form' (ruupa), the other is 'time' ('was'/past, > 'is'/present, 'will be'/future). Ruupa is paramattha dhamma. Time >is > concept. Do you see any difference between 'ruupa' and 'time'? One of the characteristics of Rupa is existence in some place and at some time. > As > you are fond of saying, if one experiences hardness - a >characteristic > of ruupa - by walking into a tree, one can know hardness. But does > one know 'tree'? Word 'Tree' is a label (nama?) pointing to a mass of rupa. That mass of rupa does exist. Thank you for your reply, Best wishes, Alex #90334 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 4:48 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:VisM truth_aerator Dear Nina, >---Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Alex, > Op 16-sep-2008, om 22:53 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > > > The Visuddhimagga, however, both mistakenly takes the > > > > similes "smoke", "mist", "dust", "gleam", "glows", "shines", > > > > and "moon", as literal visual images, and also misapprehends >them > > >as > > > > the counter-sign, the mark of success!, in direct opposition >to > > >the > > > > Vimuttimagga. > ---------- > He said: in opposition to Vimuttimagga, but as I understand this >work is not included in the commentaries. And in direct opposition to the suttas and Patis. >But as to visual sign, is see it >as mental, not experienced through the eyes. Mental or visual, doesn't matter. What the Buddha was talking about wasn't supposed to be literalized so much. "Bright" mind doesn't mean that someone literally sees bright sun inside of the head. > But I do not know anything about the nimitta acquired through > breathing meditation. I cannot find this important. It is important in a sense that *some* info found in VisM doesn't reconcile with the Suttas and Patis. >What matters: how > much detachment is there? > Nina. Yes this is important. Best wishes, Alex #90335 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 4:54 pm Subject: Sun Lun Sayadaw's Formal Practice Of Aaanapaanasati Re: Buddha Dhamma only. truth_aerator Dear Suan and all, >--- "abhidhammika" wrote: > > > > Dear Alex and all > > How are you? > > Here is the story of an illitrate Burmese farmer who was said to > gain attainment of awakening by having pursued the formal practice > of Aanapaanasati and who was said to be able answer questions asked > by the learned Sayadaws about Buddha Dhamma in Pali texts. > > Put it another way, his awakening was verified by checking if his > dhamma knowledge agreed with Pali texual teachings. > > Here is the link. > > http://www.sunlun-meditation.com.mm/ > > > Best wishes > > Suan Lu Zaw Do you practice his method? Any tips regarding it? I do have few reservations about it though. a) Rapid Breathing seems to be different from passive instructions in the suttas. It is even safe to breath at up to 200 breaths per minute? Thank you very much for bringing this method up. Another link http://www.sunlun.com/index1.html and yours slightly modified: His talks -> http://www.sunlun-meditation.com.mm/Contents.htm Best wishes, Alex #90336 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 4:08 pm Subject: Get Up! Arousal Wins... bhikkhu0 Friends: Enthusiastic Energetic Effort gains all Success: The Blessed Buddha once said: Friends, the lazy person dwells in misery, soiled by evil detrimental states. Great is the personal advantage, which one thereby neglects. But the energetic & enthusiastic person lives happily, secluded from evil detrimental states, and great is the personal advantage, that one thereby wins. It is not by the inferior, that the supreme is attained. Rather, it is only by truly supreme effort, that the supreme state is attained. Friends, this Noble Life is a sublime juice! Therefore, friends, while this Teaching is present arouse your energy for the attainment of the yet unattained, for the achievement of the yet unachieved, for the realization of the yet unrealized... Considering your own future, friends, is enough motivation to make every effort for reaching this goal; considering the good future of others, is enough motivation to do your best; considering the best of both, is far enough inspiration to strive for the supreme goal with diligent thoroughness! Thus enthusiastically, friends, should you train yourselves. More on Energy (Viriya): The root Cause of all Success: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Enthusiastic_is_Energy.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Energy_Viriya.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Feeding_Energy.htm Source: The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya II 29 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice energetic day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) .... #90337 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? egberdina Hi TG, 2008/9/18 : > In a message dated 9/17/2008 6:33:01 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, > hhofmeister@... writes: > > > You seem to limit what there is to only what arises or what is known. > That is a slippery slope, IMO. > > .............................................. > > > Hi Herman > > > I am limiting myself to the view that the only phenomena that occur are the > phenomena that arise/appear. Well, yes, but that is nothing more than a tautology. Only what is experienced is experienced. In reference to my discussion with Howard, I'm > saying there is no occurrence of something that doesn't arise. I'm uncertain > as to how that is a slippery slope. Here I am just addressing principles, > not experience. So the "known" is not the issue. I'll have to leave that > sort of purist phenomenological venue for Howard. ;-) > > > If you still disagree, could you tell me in what way? Thanks. > The point of disagreement is that I say that there is a world that exists independently of it being experienced. If we restrict ourselves to experience only, then there is nothing that differentiates the real from the imagined. The real is that which is there regardless of whether it is known, the imagined is that which is subject to intention. No matter what, I cannot intend this real computer in front of me to vanish. At best, I can avert, to elsewhere in the real world which is given, or to an imagined world which is intended. Cheers Herman #90338 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Calm & Content = Without Expectation! egberdina Hi Justin, 2008/9/12 Herman Hofman : > Hi Justin, > > 2008/9/12 Justin Whitaker : >> Dear Herman, et al. >> >> I've been a lurker for some time now but thought I might kindely jump >> in here. (I'll give a short bio below) >> > I'm hoping that you are well, and that nothing I wrote or didn't write has prompted you to become a lurker again :-) Cheers Herman #90339 From: "jessicamui" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:44 pm Subject: Re: More Tales from Big Wave Bay, Hong Kong jessicamui Dear Sarah, It is hard to believe our gentle friends become violent and involved in crimes. Like you said, it is the latent tendencies and the "right condition" that triggers the anger, hatred.. I'm sorry to hear about it. We had a short weekend retreat at Lantau island. We had good time during the retreat for people are like family members that get together once a month to meditate, serve and this time, enjoy the moon cake in candle light with our guest from Myanmar. By the way, you told me that you've meditated at Buddha Goya in the early years. Have you met with Munindraji - Deepa Ma's teacher. The guest that we invite is Deepa Ma's niece. I look forward to seeing you soon. Warmly, Jessica. #90340 From: Sukinder Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 6:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Only for the Wise to See .. Less Book Recitation sukinderpal Dear Tep, ======= Tep: I think you have a high self confidence. S: Someone else may think it to be due to arrogance. ;-) But no Tep, I wasn’t thinking about others, just you and me, we both read posts in other threads. In fact in the end there is only me and the stories I spin up, so no need for me to seek permission from others about this, but just hope that I write with a few more kusala cittas than usual. ;-) =========== >Suk: >It is not that I don't see any point in continuing with this thread. It is just that I think the other one will be more useful and would in time answer many of the questions posed in other threads. I intend to deal with basic assumptions which both of us have and which seem to be difficult to uncover or else overlooked in many of the other discussions. T: That sounds like a purposeful plan. S: It is one of my main motivating factors. ;-) Metta, Sukin #90341 From: Sukinder Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 6:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream sukinderpal Dear Rinze, ========= Sukin: Today's audience in disagreeing with the Abhidhamma, insist that conventional realities *exhibit* characteristics to be known, for example, that mountains could be studied and seen as being impermanent, suffering and non-self. Or else they believe that breath or posture as `conceived' by them, these when attended to can lead ultimately to insight, enlightenment…. Rinze: Lord Buddha talks of 37 factors of enlightenment of which 5 are, (1) Faith, (2) Energy, (3) Mindfulness, (4) Concentration and (5) Wisdom. Wisdom, if not balanced with Faith, would result in needless queries of this sort, even disagreement of either one or the other facets of Dhamma. S: I’ve heard explanations, but I can’t recall them. I therefore remain clueless what it means for wisdom to be out of balance with faith. It would seem to me that wisdom arises with faith and therefore when it does it performs its function as it must. Are you talking about different moments of citta? And are you referring to panna when you mention “queries of this sort” or something else? Although I can imagine thinking with attachment about the Dhamma and thus also questioning with the same kind of mind….. ========= Rinze: Unless we aspire to be a Buddha and investigate things on our own, without any guidance from others, the need for Faith is there in us. This can be seen when we are helpless, destitutes in Life or when about to die. At such times, some look up to God, but we would seek refuge in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha. S: I’d be careful to make the kind of comparison. Since when it comes to the Dhamma, faith must go together with wisdom. Even when referring to parts of the Teachings which we can’t as yet understand, the faith in that is still based on those parts which we ‘do’ understand, whatever extent that may be. In any case, taking care not to fall prey to doubt, wisdom will have it that we don’t believe blindly anyway. Taking refuge in the Triple Gem must do justice to what they really stand for. The refuge is taken with the arising of understanding, otherwise it is quite meaningless, I would think. ========= Rinze: Unlike the Faith in other religions, in the Buddhist perspective, Faith is Confidence (a cetasika). Fundamentally, Faith (in something), is a set of instructions, which when followed, alters the mental state of a person, to the better (vis-à-vis Nibbana, in this case). One should have the wisdom to see this change in mental state to the "better", this is Reflective Knowledge in the simplest form, and would be, how wisdom is involved in the Buddhist perspective of Faith. S: So indeed there must be panna, otherwise “lobha” can be mistaken for “saddha”. The other kind of faith as found outside of the sasana is that which arises with Dana, Sila and Samatha bhavana, and in the latter, also panna of one kind is required. Can you elaborate on what you mean by, “Faith (in something), is a set of instructions, which when followed, alters the mental state of a person…?” ========== Rinze: This `change in mental state', need not necessarily be the kind experienced from Sotapanna to Sakadagami and beyond, if so, seeing Paticcha Samuppada would be confined to Sotatpanna and above only! S: Yes. ========== Rinze: In fact we all are founded on the Dhamma. The Dhamma touches all of us. Our existence is Dhamma, or at least the part that we see. When PS is seen in some aspects, faith and wisdom works in tandem (apart from the other enlightenment factors). This is how Faith becomes the foundation for all of the Dhamma to be seen. S: Can you expand further, especially the part about “When PS is seen in some aspects, faith and wisdom works in tandem (apart from the other enlightenment factors)”? ========= Sukin: Today's audience, let alone knowing the distinction, their insistence on a formal practice whereby concepts of time, place, posture and particular object become all important, this being exactly due to wrong view, causes them to move further and further away from the intended goal. Rinze: Not having followed the "set of instructions" (or having understood the Dhamma in all its aspects), as given in the Sutta or the Abhidhamma (in which case the instructions are, as given in the commentaries, hence not the `Buddha words'), one cannot come to the definite conclusion that, "they believe that breath or posture as `conceived' by them, these when attended to can lead ultimately to insight, enlightenment" or that "their insistence on a formal practice whereby concepts of time, place, posture and particular object become all important" is right or wrong view Unless one can prove to the contrary, either by experience or citing the Dhamma, in ether way it should be Patccha Samuppada. S: We come to the Dhamma having judged other teachings as not being right. We continue with the kind of discriminative thinking as we go along, otherwise we won’t go very far. And discriminate right or wrong we all do, regardless there is direct experience or not, besides what would any discussion be like without this? We may feel duty bound to cite a Sutta, or we may prefer to discuss using reason. Who is to say which is better? But you introduce another element, namely “following a set of instructions”. You may want to quote a text or you may use reason to prove to me that the Buddha required this of us, especially as precondition before one can accept or reject anything stated by anyone regarding the Dhamma, because I don’t think that there is such a thing. ========= Rinze: Lord Buddha talks of 4 types of individuals in Samdhi Sutta AN 4.94 "There is the case of the individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness, but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. Then there is the case of the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquillity of awareness. Then there is the case of the individual who has attained neither internal tranquillity of awareness nor insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. And then there is the case of the individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment." Samadhi Sutta AN 4.94 Both, internal tranquillity of awareness (concentration), & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment (insight), are needed for one to progress in Dhamma. And when one part is lacking, Lord Buddha, instructs us, to go to the other individual who has that part in full. So who are we, Sukin, to say that, "this way is better than the other", when perhaps, both "ways" may be necessary, to complement each other, isn't it? S: I refer you to the fact of the Noble Eightfold Path or Satipatthana / Vipassana being the One Way. How does Jhana fit in here? The fact that the Buddha valued Jhana and encouraged it even for those who were already ariyans is because it must be better than ordinary kaamavacara kusala cittas. Even though I value all kusala cittas and have very high regard for Jhana, I don’t see it as being part of the Path to enlightenment. If what you are trying to show is the value of all kinds kusala as being support for the development of understanding, I agree and would particularly highlight the need for the development of all the Parami. The reason why I object to people’s suggestion about the need for some kind of samatha ‘practice’ is that because this is seen as being necessary for enlightenment. One never hears talk about the development of ordinary kusala as can arise in daily life, but instead the need for some kind of formalized practice for the higher development of samatha, including Anapanasati. This is due to ‘ambition’ and / or a distorted view of the Path, and results in Silabattaparamasa, as far as I can see. Thanks Rinze for corresponding with me. I like it that you believe firmly in the Abhidhamma. :-) Metta, Sukin #90342 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 6:22 pm Subject: MN36. Buddha about Jhana 'That is the path to Awakening.' truth_aerator Dear Sukinder and all, >--- Sukinder wrote: > Even though I value all kusala cittas and have very high > regard for Jhana, I don't see it as being part of the Path to > enlightenment. "I thought: 'I recall once, when my father the Sakyan was working, and I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, then — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. Could that be the path to Awakening?' Then, following on that memory, came the realization: 'That is the path to Awakening.' I thought: 'So why am I afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to do with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities?' I thought: 'I am no longer afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to do with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.036x.than.html Best wishes, Alex #90343 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? TGrand458@... Hi Herman I love you but did you even read my response? LOL Well, below you'll see I said this -- "Here I am just addressing principles, > not experience. So the "known" is not the issue. I'll have to leave that > sort of purist phenomenological venue for Howard." I completely agree with your "independent world view" and am not aware of ever indicating otherwise. Its something I sometimes challenge Howard about; i.e., experience only. I'm not sure how you came to think that I take a "experience only" type view. I've often argued against it. You seem to be debating me on a point that I never make and even right after I clarified that in extremely clear terms (I thought). Please review our prior communications below and let me know if you still think what you think I think. (In the first sentence...when I say arise, I don't not mean only arise through experience. I mean very literally what I say and am not implying something else. So, my first sentence below is very banal, but banal is what I'm all about. ;-) ) Rest assured, the "point of disagreement" you mention is actually the point of agreement. TG In a message dated 9/17/2008 6:13:30 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: I am limiting myself to the view that the only phenomena that occur are the > phenomena that arise/appear. Well, yes, but that is nothing more than a tautology. Only what is experienced is experienced. In reference to my discussion with Howard, I'm > saying there is no occurrence of something that doesn't arise. I'm uncertain > as to how that is a slippery slope. Here I am just addressing principles, > not experience. So the "known" is not the issue. I'll have to leave that > sort of purist phenomenological venue for Howard. ;-) > > > If you still disagree, could you tell me in what way? Thanks. > The point of disagreement is that I say that there is a world that exists independently of it being experienced. If we restrict ourselves to experience only, then there is nothing that differentiates the real from the imagined. The real is that which is there regardless of whether it is known, the imagined is that which is subject to intention. No matter what, I cannot intend this real computer in front of me to vanish. At best, I can avert, to elsewhere in the real world which is given, or to an imagined world which is intended. Cheers Herman #90344 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and TG) - In a message dated 9/17/2008 8:13:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: The point of disagreement is that I say that there is a world that exists independently of it being experienced. If we restrict ourselves to experience only, then there is nothing that differentiates the real from the imagined. ==================================== If we accept that there is an unexperienced world, there would be no more of a means to distinguish, for all that we know is what we experience. With metta, Howard #90345 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 6:44 pm Subject: Re: MN36. Buddha about Jhana 'That is the path to Awakening.' dhammanusarin Hi Alex (Sukin), - The sutta homework for Sukin to see for himself that jhana is indeed the "path to Awakening" is right to the point and does not require extremely high I.Q. to see that the Buddha exactly said so. MN 36: Then, following on that memory, came the realization: 'That is the path to Awakening.' I thought: 'So why am I afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to do with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities?' I thought: 'I am no longer afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to do with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities, ... T: However, I do not have a clue why the Buddha-to-be was afraid of sukha (pleasure) in the jhana. Can you explain? Thanks. Tep === #90346 From: "Tep" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 6:51 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Only for the Wise to See .. Less Book Recitation dhammanusarin Dear Sukin, - Acceptable reasoning ! > Tep: > I think you have a high self confidence. > > S: Someone else may think it to be due to arrogance. ;-) > > But no Tep, I wasn't thinking about others, just you and me, we both read posts in other threads. In fact in the end there is only me and the stories I spin up, so no need for me to seek permission from others about this, but just hope that I write with a few more kusala cittas than usual. ;-) > T: Arrogance is indeed in the neighborhood of high self-confidence. > =========== > >Suk: > >It is not that I don't see any point in continuing with this thread. It is just that I think the other one will be more useful and would in time answer many of the questions posed in other threads. I intend to deal with basic assumptions which both of us have and which seem to be difficult to uncover or else overlooked in many of the other discussions. > > T: That sounds like a purposeful plan. > > S: It is one of my main motivating factors. ;-) > T: Great! I am ready. Tep === #90347 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 7:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? egberdina Hi TG, 2008/9/18 : > > > Hi Herman > > > I love you but did you even read my response? LOL Well, below you'll see > I said this -- "Here I am just addressing principles, Sorry that I misunderstood you. I tripped over the word arise, thinking that you meant that the world arises and falls away. > > > I completely agree with your "independent world view" and am not aware of > ever indicating otherwise. Its something I sometimes challenge Howard about; > i.e., experience only. I'm not sure how you came to think that I take a > "experience only" type view. I've often argued against it. > > > You seem to be debating me on a point that I never make and even right after > I clarified that in extremely clear terms (I thought). Please review our > prior communications below and let me know if you still think what you think I > think. (In the first sentence...when I say arise, I don't not mean only > arise through experience. I mean very literally what I say and am not implying > something else. So, my first sentence below is very banal, but banal is what > I'm all about. ;-) ) > > > Rest assured, the "point of disagreement" you mention is actually the point > of agreement. > Cool :-) Not that disagreement between people who understand each other would have been uncool. Cheers Herman #90348 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 7:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/9/18 : > Hi, Herman (and TG) - > > The point of disagreement is that I say that there is a world that > exists independently of it being experienced. If we restrict ourselves > to experience only, then there is nothing that differentiates the real > from the imagined. > ==================================== > If we accept that there is an unexperienced world, there would be no > more of a means to distinguish, for all that we know is what we experience. > One of the things we know is that every act of ours is an act of faith, in that we do not know whether our expectation, what we set out to achieve, will be met. A tree in the backyard is a tree in the backyard, because it continues to meet my expectation of it being there when I look out the window. We do distinguish between met and unmet expectations, and classify accordingly. Cheers Herman #90349 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 7:57 pm Subject: Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Please consider my reply to be my own ongoing study and subject to correction. A: "Ok, lets substitute Vinnana for citta." Scott: No, we can't in this case, Alex. I mean to refer to citta, which, although it can be synonymous with vi~n~naa.na, it has an other sense which I mean to use and so the substitution is not necessary. Vi~n~naa.na refers to general consciousness, while I'm using citta to refer to a state of consciousness and its conative aspects. Atthasaalinii (p.84): "By 'consciousness' (citta) is meant that which thinks of its object, is aware variously. Or, inasmuch as this word 'consciousness' [citta] is common to all states or classes of consciousness, that which is known as worldly, moral, immoral, or the great inoperative, is termed 'consciousness' [citta], because it arranges itself in a series (cintoti, or, its own series or continuity) by way of apperception in a process of thought..." Atthasaalinii (p.186-187): "Vi~n~naa.na is cognizing. Vi~n~naa.na khandha is conciousness as an aggregate..." A: "But how can something that is subject to arise and fall away be in any sense Ultimate? How do you precisely define what is ultimate and what is not?" Scott: The term 'paramattha' (parama/superiour + attha/meaning) refers to the fact that a dhamma can not be further reduced into components. Citta, cetasika, ruupa, and Nibbaana are paramattha dhammas; the rest are concepts. The ti-lakkha.na are characteristics of conditioned paramattha dhammas - citta, cetasika, and ruupa. (Nibbaana is not subject to arising and falling away since it is the unconditioned element.) The ti-lakkha.na are not characteristics of pa~n~natti because pa~n~natti are asabavha - they are without characteristic, as I understand it. Therefore, it is in relation to the paramattha dhammas that the Buddha refers when he teaches the ti-lakkha.na. These dhammas arise and fall away and it is for this reason that they are impermanent, lead to suffering, and are not self. A: "If there was no mind or consciousness, would there be any concepts? Would it even make sense to say 'concepts exist independent of reality'." Scott: Citta takes pa~n~natti as object. Pa~n~natti is mental object. I don't think it would make sense to say 'concepts exist independent of reality', but then I might not know exactly what you mean. The reality which is citta cognizes pa~n~natti. It takes both together. I don't think there is a place where pa~n~natti go when they are not objects of citta but I don't know how this works exactly. Sorry. A: "Word 'Tree' is a label (nama?) pointing to a mass of rupa. That mass of rupa does exist." Scott: 'Tree' is a label, therefore concept since it makes known - it is a direct concept of the unreal, in this case. Yes, ruupa does exist. As regards pa~n~natti, these are mental objects within the mind door, and hence, as I see it, are cognized by citta which is mind-base. (Corrections here please, as I'm out on a limb). Sincerely, Scott. #90350 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:50 pm Subject: Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? scottduncan2 Dear Alex, A: "Ok, lets substitute Vinnana for citta." Scott: I checked SN 22 62 (10) again. In reference to 'consciousness', as in, for example: "...Whatever consciousness has been born, has become manifest..." The Paa.li for 'consciousness' is: "Ya.m vi~n~naa.na.m..." So I stand corrected and must return to the drawing board. It is 'vi~n~naa.na'. Sincerely, Scott. #90351 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:25 pm Subject: Re: Meeting Phil and Naomi philofillet Hi all I had to rejoin to thank James and Nina for their kind words and report a follow up to something James and I discussed. > Phil is exactly like his posts portray him: very nice, energetic, > thoughtful, animated, and deeply devoted to the Dhamma. Ph: James is very nice too. Really warm and funny and passionate (surprise, surprise) about the Dhamma. Naomi can be a touch picky about my friends, to tell the truth (I'm like that too) but she was crazy about James from the word go! Actually, > his practice at the moment is much more intense than mine. He > faithfully meditates every morning, reads Dhamma books, keeps Dhamma > notebooks, and guards the sense doors out in public and at home. Ph: Yes, I'm really into guarding the sense doors. James and I had a good talk about this. I explained how I've developed the practice I posted the other day, about avoiding glancing at women in order to avoid the proliferation that I know follows for me and to avoid making them feel threatened. (Japanese women in particular are easily frightened by foreign men approaching them on the street. It is a fact.) James asked me to show him a sutta in which the Buddha told all householders to guard the sense doors in the way it is described in SN 35. (Avoiding proliferation from initial contact kind of thing.) He said I was practicing like a monk, but said it in a complimentary way. I told him about the sutta about the man (a king?) who asks the Buddha how the black-haired monks manage to stay pure, and how he could avoid lusting when entering his harem. Te Buddha gave him three suggested courses, with guarding the senses in the "avoiding attending to signs and features" way (i.e avoid proliferating on details) being the implied best if the others fail. And James said that's different, because it was an individual person asking the Buddha for help with the issue, not a blanket statement to all householders that they should guard the sense doors. And lo and behold, when I checked my SN anthology the next day I found he was right. There is a section entitled "Householders" but all of the suttas are individual householders seeking out the Buddha's advice. This doesn't solve the issue for good, because as I pointed out that night when we got home from our excursion, there is a sutta in which it says "without guarding the sense doors, there is no morality, without morality there is no concentration" etc. James was impressed with that. So I'll keep looking into it. But the crux of this matter is that I feel energized by realizing that I have a natural tendency to be quite monk-like about certain things. It's not new. It's been going on for 20 years. So I feel as James kindly said that there is a natural diligence at work in this area. If it led to trouble in my marriage or bad feelings on Naomi's part that would be a different matter...that's another topic we talked about a lot but I'd rather not go into it here. > (they don't even own a television!). Ph:Nothing to do with guarding the sense doors, really. They take up too much space and spew crap on the world! (So maybe it does have to do with guarding the sense doors.) Phil is on the fast track > while I am more meandering. But, meeting Phil and seeing how he > lives gives me inspiration to tighten up my practice and not be so > slack. As the Buddha said, noble friends are the entirety of the > Dhamma, and meeting Phil I can see how that is true. He doesn't > just talk the talk, he walks the walk. Ph: It was really good having all that Dhamma talk. As is often said, really is different from writing. If he gets Skype I hope we'll do it again. Thanks to James also for the kind words re Naomi. She is great. metta, phil #90352 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:28 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: A visit from James and another farewell to DSG philofillet Hi Nina > Thanks for your nice post. It does not matter that you disagree > with things. Since the perfections are highly regarded in Mahayana > you may take up again Kh Sujin's book about them. Yes, yesterday I did a big house cleaning and stored away a lot of Dhamma books, including most of yours. But I kept The Perfections and Abhidhamma in Daily Life out on the shelf for ready reference. I like her Perfections a lot. Today I realized there is no way on earth I'm going to drop the Pali Canon. It is really in my blood now. But I may use some meditation techniques from Mahayana to boost metta etc. I feel we can be very liberal with metta and whatever works, kind of thing. metta, phil #90353 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:42 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: A visit from James and another farewell to DSG philofillet Hi Herman (and all, including esp. the moderators, I guess.) > I'd be interested to hear about your experiences at e-sangha. My own > impression, and the feedback I get from others, is that it is a > totally fascist site. In other words, you will be dealt with if you > disagree with the party line. Ph: I think that's not always a bad thing. For example, in the Abhidhamma section (pretty dormant, mind you) there is no questioning that the Abhidhamma is the Buddha's teaching. That can be done elsewhere. So people who take the Abhidhamma as the deep essence of the Dhamma can discuss in the light of that belief. Right or wrong, they can discuss in peace, their understanding can settle in. In the "Classical Theravada" section, all posts must refer to texts rather than personal experience/opinions. In the "odern Theravada section" it is more anything goes, but discussions involving Mahayana teachings are frowned upon. THere is a general forum for that. I think there is not enough of that at DSG. I used to complain about dojo busting then I became a dojo buster but I still feel that something like a sub-forum where people who do not take Abhidhamma and the commentaries as valid would be asked and then forefully required to abstain from participating *in that sub forum only* would be good for all. Same for "formal" meditation. Meditators cannot discuss various techniques etc here without their discussion being derailed by contesting. What a joy at e-sangha to post in detail about my meditation experiences and know that we can just stick to that rather than getting into all the wrong view stuff! So I would wonder if someday DSG won't be set up with sub-forums, some of which are more strictly moderated. Personally speaking, it would be much more fruitful. Then there could be the big main forum where anything goes! :) The great thing is they have a special > page for Buddhism for homosexuals. As we all know, the Buddha was big > on that. Ph: I didn't know that! Being bisexual myself, I'm glad to hear it! ;) Anyways, I've been thinking that what the world lacks is a > Buddhist site where uptight and angry women can discuss yoghurt. Ph: Herman that's it exactly! I love the aspect of people who are going through hard times coming to the Dhamma looking for help, even if it is in not-so-intellectually-profound ways. I'm very much interested in the mental health aspect of the Dhamma, and I think the Buddha was too - that he saw happiness and freedom from gross and intense forms of suffering as helping to lead to conditions for the subtler kinds of liberation. OK, now I really am out of here for a few months, at least. I can't post at two forums, my computer would explode. metta, phil #90354 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? TGrand458@... In a message dated 9/17/2008 8:46:05 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Sorry that I misunderstood you. I tripped over the word arise, thinking that you meant that the world arises and falls away. Hi Herman This reminds me of the time Alex was calling me an "Abhidhammika." LOL As far as your statement above, there is a way I would agree with it and a way I would disagree with it. If it implied "pure phenomenology" or "dhammas" as ultimate realities or states with their own characteristics, I'd disagree. As it stands, it doesn't contain enough information for me to say one way or another. I would simply say that I would deal with it as I think the Suttas would deal with it. Along the lines of the following quote... “…it is said, ‘the world, the world.’ In what way, venerable sir, is it said ‘the world’?â€? It disintegrates, bhikkhu (Buddhist monk), therefore it is called the world. And what is disintegrating? The eye, bhikkhu, is disintegrating, forms are disintegrating, eye-consciousness is disintegrating, eye-contact is disintegrating, and whatever feeling arises with eye-contact as condition … that too is disintegrating. The ear is disintegrating … The nose is disintegrating … The tongue is disintegrating … The body is disintegrating … The mind is disintegrating … Whatever feeling arises with mind-contact as condition … that too is disintegrating. It is disintegrating, bhikkhu, therefore it is called the world.â€? (The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 2, pg. 1162) TG #90355 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Vism's Meditation for Developing Namarupa-pariccheda~nana lbidd2 Hi Tep, Tep: "Your above comment doesn't clarify how (by what conditions) and why (for which reasons) such "insight" may appear." Larry: In my view the development of understanding begins with book learning, progresses with mindfulness (wise attention), and culminates with insight, which just spontaneously happens. There are various strategies for cultivating mindfulness and every teacher has a favorite. The cultivation of virtue and tranquility also play an important role. Without these values none of it makes sense. Larry #90356 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:35 pm Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 301 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 301 Intro: in the following section it is shown how each link of the Dependent Origination works upon the next one. Formerly all the different ways by which each link conditions the next one were shown, but here one salient feature is taken of each link and it is explained as a function performed in relation to the following link. The aim is to show the dangerous aspect of each link. -------- Text Vis. 301:[As to function:] ignorance confuses beings about physical objects [of sense desire] -------- The Tiika explains that because of ignorance the nature of dukkha and so on in relation to the objects is concealed. N: An object, such as sound, has to fall away immediately and thus it is dukkha. Because of ignorance one does not see that it is impermanent and thus dukkha. Ignorance is not knowing the four noble Truths. TheTiika adds that ignorance prevents knowing and penetrating the characteristic of dhamma (dhammasabhaava). ---------- Text Vis.: and is a condition for the manifestation of formations; likewise [kamma-] formations form the formed and are a condition for consciousness; consciousness recognizes an object and is a condition for mentality-materiality; mentality-materiality is mutually consolidating and is a condition for the sixfold base; -------- N: The Tiika adds as to mutually consolidating, that they, without mutual support, cannot stand on their own, just like two bunches of reed (that can stand supporting each other). --------- Text Vis.: the sixfold base occurs with respect to its own [separate] objective fields and is a condition for contact; ------- N: The Tiika adds: each with their own object, such as visible object and so on. Visible object impinges on the eyebase so that there are conditions for seeing. ------------ Text Vis. : contact touches an object and is a condition for feeling; feeling experiences the stimulus of the object and is a condition for craving; craving lusts after lust-arousing things and is a condition for clinging; clinging clings to clinging-arousing things and is a condition for becoming; becoming flings beings into the various kinds of destiny and is a condition for birth; birth gives birth to the aggregates owing to its occurring as their generation and is a condition for ageing-and-death; --------- Tiika: As to the words: ‘ owing to its occurring as their generation (abhinibbatti)', birth generates as it were the khandhas, because of the nature of change of the khandhas that were born. N: New khandhas arise at birth, and therefore it is said that birth as it were generates the khandhas. P. Maung translates: ‘ birth produces the aggregates by proceeding as their first appearance’. Rebirth-consciousness succeeds the dying-consciousness of the preceding life and it may arise in a different plane of existence. The new birth marks a change. ---------- Text Vis.: and ageing-and-death ensures the decay and dissolution of the aggregates and is a condition for the manifestation of the next becoming because it ensures sorrow, etc. ------------ N: The Tiika elaborates on it that the nature of the khandhas is maturing and breaking up (paakabhedabhaava). This is the way the khandhas occur. Note 45 (taken from the Tiika): 'Sorrow, etc., have already been established as ignorance; but death consciousness itself is devoid of ignorance and formations and is not a condition for the next becoming; that is why "because it assures sorrow, etc." is said' (Pm. 640) N: The Tiika mentions that dying-consciousness is a condition for rebirth-consciousness by way of contiguity-condition (anantara- paccaya). Rebirth-consciousness immediately succeeds the dying- consciousness, but it is not produced by it. ---------------------- Text Vis. : So this [Wheel of Becoming] should be known accordingly as occurring in two ways 'as to function' in whichever way is appropriate to each of its parts. ----------- N: In two ways: the way each link conditions the next one has been shown. ------------ Conclusion: As we have read, ‘becoming flings beings into the various kinds of destiny and is a condition for birth.’ The term ‘flinging’ (vikkhiparti) shows the power of kamma that causes rebirth. Nobody can prevent kamma from producing its appropriate result in the form of rebirth-consciousness. Birth is the appearance of the khandhas, and these are of a nature of maturing and breaking up (paakabheda), maturing and breaking up, and that means: as soon as they arise they are decaying and ceasing. As we read about dying-consciousness, this ‘ is a condition for the manifestation of the next becoming because it ensures sorrow, etc.’ Or it is 'the abode of sorrow' as P. Maung translates. The danger and the sorrow of each link that conditions the next one has been emphasized in this text. As we read in the beginning of the text: ignorance confuses beings about physical objects [of sense desire], and the Tiika adds to this: ignorance prevents knowing and penetrating the characteristic of dhamma (dhammasabhaava). The text states: ‘craving lusts after lust-arousing things (rajjaniiye dhamme) and is a condition for clinging; clinging clings to clinging-arousing things (upaadaaniye dhamme) and is a condition for becoming’. By these words the conditioning nature is emphasized of craving and clinging and also the danger of being subject to them. Because of ignorance it is not known that sense objects that seem so enticing are only ruupas, mere elements that fall away as soon as they have arisen. We are deluded about the true nature of objects. Ignorance conceals the danger of rebirth, of being in the cycle. It also conceals the danger of clinging. This can remind us to begin to know the characteristics of dhammas appearing through the six doorways, one at a time, so that these will eventually be seen as they are. Understanding of realities will lead out of the cycle. ---------- Nina. #90357 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:38 pm Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Corner: DN 33 Twos (30 - 31), Commentary, part 1. nilovg Dear friends, Sutta: 'Being moved to a sense of urgency *1028 by what should move one, and the systematic effort of one so moved. (Sa.mvego ca sa.mvejaniiyesu .thaanesu sa.mviggassa ca yoniso padhaana.m.) The Co refers to the grounds for a sense of urgency and explains that this is seeing the danger of birth, ageing, sickness and death. Birth, ageing, sickness and death are dukkha, and this fact causes a sense of urgency. Because of this, he exerts himself in an appropriate way. The Co refers to the text about the four right efforts: ‘The Bhikkhu generates desire (chanda) to prevent the arising of akusala dhammas that have not yet arisen....” ---------- Co: ‘‘Sa.mvego ca sa.mvejaniiyesu .thaanesuu’’ti ettha ‘‘sa.mvegoti jaatibhaya.m jaraabhaya.m byaadhibhaya.m mara.nabhaya’’nti eva.m jaatiaadiini bhayato dassana~naa.na.m. Sa.mvejaniiya.m .thaananti jaatijaraabyaadhimara.na.m. Etaani hi cattaari jaati dukkhaa, jaraa dukkhaa, byaadhi dukkho, mara.na.m dukkhanti eva.m sa.mveguppattikaara.nattaa sa.mvejaniiya.m .thaananti vuttaani. Sa.mviggassa ca yoniso padhaananti eva.m sa.mvegajaatassa upaayapadhaana.m. ‘‘Idha bhikkhu anuppannaana.m paapakaana.m akusalaana.m dhammaana.m anuppaadaaya chanda.m janetii’’ti eva.m aagataviiriyasseta.m adhivacana.m. -------- The four right efforts are right effort of the eightfold Path accompanying right understanding of the eightfold Path. A sense of urgency refers to pa~n~naa arising together with right effort and all kinds of sobhana cetasikas. The Subco. explains that sa.mvega is pa~n~naa associated with ottappa, fear or conscientiousness. It states as to the words seeing fear, that seeing, dassana~naa.na, is the occurrence of understanding, ~naa.na. As to sa.mvejaniiya, what should be feared, the subco. elaborates and states that one should be stirred, should fear, should be frightened. As to the grounds of a sense of urgency, this is the cause or basis of it. N: Fear or fright is in this context not fear arising together with dosa, it is a wholesome fear, seeing the danger of birth, etc. It is wholesome because the seeing is pa~n~naa. We read about eight grounds of a sense of urgency in the “Dispeller of Delusion’ (Ch 7, in the context of the enlightenment factor of concentration, p. 349): <...These are the four, namely, birth, old age, sickness and death, and the suffering of the states of woe as the fifth, and the suffering rooted in the past round [of existence], the suffering rooted in the future round [of existence] and the suffering rooted in the present search for food.> ---------- N: We are in the cycle of birth and death and therefore, we are not sure whether we in a next life still have an opportunity to listen to the Dhamma and develop right understanding of realities. Hearing about the grounds for a sense of urgency can be a condition for considering without delay any reality that appears at this moment. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- Nina. #90358 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:44 pm Subject: Sri Lanka Revisited, Intro, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, Our friend Janaki da Silva prepared dåna for the monks almost every day and she drove around cheerfully and wholeheartedly many of our friends who had come for the seminar. I shall quote from the account of the “Dhamma Visit” written by her thirteen year old daughter Rangita: “Our days were full and happy. Devoted preparations for dåna to the bhikkhus, ‘Upasthama’ (service) to the venerable Dhammadhara and the other bhikkhus, serving the needs of the lay delegates-- all gave us much joy... My father was overjoyed to get the opportunity to offer Påli Dhamma books to Venerable Dhammadhara and two other bhikkhus. I helped my mother to prepare for Khun Nina’s birthday dåna. Sarah, I noticed, was full of fun and joy and so I changed my ideas that Dhamma makes one very solemn. We attended Dhamma discussions. They made me realize how much attachment I have and how important it is to eradicate it, but how difficult this is. I at least have begun to learn that everything in our world is nåma and rúpa-- and that it is necessary to live in the present moment and study it with sati. Venerable Dhammadhara had explained this to us before, so now I understood just a very little bit more than nothing. I realized how much there was to know, how little I knew, and how much I needed to study. One day our home was a hive of activity. We had all the delegates, including lovely Susie and friendly Jill, for dinner. I don’t think the seminar helped me to eradicate attachment to people. When the delegates left for Anurådhapura we all felt so sad. I found that with the Dhamma one can do anything. My mother could drive around the delegates spontaneously, at short notice, because the Dhamma gives her so much joy, and it does this to me too.” Rangita gave her collection of golden sovereigns to her mother in order that an invitation ticket could be bought for Bhante Dhammadhara. In this way he would have the opportunity to return to Sri Lanka. With regard to her understanding of the Dhamma Rangita expressed what we all discovered during the sessions: we understand a very little bit more than nothing, and we realized how much there still was to learn. This should not discourage us, because realizing this is the beginning of right understanding. The following chapters are my account of the discussions about the development of right understanding we held in different places. ******* Nina. #90359 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 1:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Doubts and Siilana nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 17-sep-2008, om 12:13 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > Nina, you ask me what did I get from Ajahn Sujin talks? > I can't answer you, becouse I dont know. > Sometimes there is yoniso manasikara, sometimes a lot of akusala > arising on account what I have heard. I mean a lot of thinking about > Dhamma with akusala. --------- N: As Sarah also said, akusala citta is very common. We have accumulated much more akusala than kusala. When you read suttas or anything about Dhamma and you do not understand it, it is a condition for dosa. This shows impatience. Do not try to understand everything you read, that is impossible. Also the language of the sutta translations may create difficulties. Rob K knows about Theravada in Poland and I am trying to find out more. Perhaps there is a site with Polish translations. Thus, I would say: go very, very slowly. The Visuddhimagga is for later on. Just read what you are inclined to read, like the sutta that is your favorite. Try those in Kindred Sayings IV, Kindred Sayings on Sense. -------- > > L: But there is one thing I can say. When I hear about seeing it helps > much more than I hear about, for example visudhi magga. Becouse > hearing is real for me, and I can experience it. ------- N: Quite right. Hearing is an experience, it is nama. It experience sound only, nothing else. Hearing is different from knowing the meaning of what we hear. We tend to have confusion. That is why I also like to listen and consider what is said about seeing, hearing. It never is enough. Theoretical understanding only knows names of realities, but realities have to be considered when they appear now. This takes a long, long time and we have to be patient. -------- > L: I wonder about panja, becouse there is usually thinking about old > panja which has gone now. ------- N: There are many degrees of pa~n~naa, and first there is understanding of the level of thinking. Again, we have to go slowly, with patience. You asked about examples of wrong view, di.t.thi: when there is a firm belief that kamma does not produce result. Or that after death there is no rebirth. There may be doubt, and that is not wrong view. Wrong view goes together with clinging, it arises with citta rooted in lobha. Doubt arises with citta rooted in ignorance, moha. But doubt can condition dosa, and dosa is another unwholesome root. Akusala cittas can be rooted in three akusala roots: lobha, dosa or moha. Thus, some types are rooted in lobha, some in dosa, some in moha. It may seem that dosa arises together with doubt, but they arise with different types of citta. I appreciate your interest in the Dhamma, Nina. #90360 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 2:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] MN36. Buddha about Jhana 'That is the path to Awakening.' egberdina Hi Alex, 2008/9/18 Alex : > Dear Sukinder and all, > >>--- Sukinder wrote: >> Even though I value all kusala cittas and have very high >> regard for Jhana, I don't see it as being part of the Path to >> enlightenment. > > "I thought: 'I recall once, when my father the Sakyan was working, > and I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, then — > quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental > qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & > pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & > evaluation. Could that be the path to Awakening?' Then, following on > that memory, came the realization: 'That is the path to Awakening.' I > thought: 'So why am I afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to do > with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities?' I > thought: 'I am no longer afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to > do with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities, > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.036x.than.html > Well done !! Cheers Herman #90361 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 2:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Corner: DN 33 Twos (26-29), Commentary, part 2. egberdina Hi Nina, 2008/9/15 Nina van Gorkom : > Dear Herman, > I appreciate it that you follow Sangiiti corner. > Op 15-sep-2008, om 4:14 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > >> In the above you make reference to kamma that is one's own, and what >> is not one's own. But then you also say that if sila is taken as self, >> it is not sila. I assume that you mean that sila is not one's own. I >> have tried to make sense of what you wrote, but I cannot. Can you >> clarify it? > --------- > N: No, I did not say this. I said: so long as siila is taken for self > it is not purity of siila, siila visuddhi. The visuddhis, purities, > point to satipatthaana that is developed. OK. Sorry for misrepresenting what you said. > Now, to return to the beginning, kamma is one's own: each individual > receives the result of his own deeds. The word own is by way of > explanation, it does not mean that a self receives the result of his > deeds. I have no idea what to understand by your statements, I'm sorry. If the word "own" is by way of explanation, what does it explain? "Own" refers the subject to itself. Itself. Itself. Yes, itself. That's what it means. If you mean that the subject, itself, is not eternal and/or unchanging, then yes, I agree. If you mean there is no subject, I have no idea what you mean, especially if you can also say this in the thread concerning Nelson: "Yes, we never know what was accumulated in past lives. Perhaps we were also violent, who knows. That is why we have to be cautious today, not wasting opportunities for kusala and the development of understanding". Thanks if you want to clarify further Herman #90362 From: Sukinder Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 2:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] MN36. Buddha about Jhana 'That is the path to Awakening.' sukinderpal Hi Alex, I think I have responded to you on this before. ============= > > Even though I value all kusala cittas and have very high > > regard for Jhana, I don't see it as being part of the Path to > > enlightenment. > > "I thought: 'I recall once, when my father the Sakyan was working, > and I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, then — > quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental > qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & > pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & > evaluation. Could that be the path to Awakening?' Then, following on > that memory, came the realization: 'That is the path to Awakening.' I > thought: 'So why am I afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to do > with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities?' I > thought: 'I am no longer afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to > do with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities, > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.036x.than.html What I suggested then was that Jhana by way of Anapanasati was the path taken by all Buddhas-to-be. Being that the Buddha was enlightened to the Four Noble Truths of which the Path is one, he could not have known the Path prior to this. He was meant to ‘discover’ it and then teach it to others. Metta, Sukin #90363 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 3:27 am Subject: Sun Lun Sayadaw's Formal Practice Of Aaanapaanasati Re: Buddha Dhamma only. abhidhammika Dear Alex and formal practitioners of samatha and vipassanaa How are you? Alex asked regarding Sun Lun Sayadaw's breathing practice method: "Do you practice his method? Any tips regarding it?" Suan answered: I practice the standard method of Aanaapaanassati taught in the Suttas such as Mahaa Satipa.t.thaana Suttam exactly as prescribed by the Buddha. Alex wrote; "I do have few reservations about it though. a) Rapid Breathing seems to be different from passive instructions in the suttas." Suan answered: No, Alex. Rapid breathing is what the Buddha taught as short inhalation and short exhalation in Aanaapaanapabba in Mahaa Satipa.t.thaana Suttam and Aanaapaanassati Suttas found in other Nikaayas. The Buddha taught the following: Rassam vaa assasanto `rassam assasaamii'ti pajaanaati, rassam vaa passasanto `rassam passasaamii'ti pajaanaati. "When inhaling in short breaths, the practitioner knows well that I inhale in short breaths. When exhaling in short breaths, the practitioner knows well I exhale in short breaths." The above passage can be found in Section 374, Kaayaanupassanaa Aanaapaanapabbam, Mahaa Satipa.t.thaana Suttam. The rationale for deliberate rapid breathing would be to arouse the mind from sleepiness and boredom associated with prolonged focussing on a single object such as breathing in this case. Alex also asked: "It is even safe to breath at up to 200 breaths per minute?" We could experiment how rapid or how short we could breathe safely. These types of issues are for each practitioner to find out for themselves. The Buddha has provided us with fail-safe methods called yoniso manasikaaro and majjhimapa.tipadaa, the middle practice avoiding the extremes. Best wishes Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org #90364 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 9/17/2008 10:52:06 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/9/18 : > Hi, Herman (and TG) - > > The point of disagreement is that I say that there is a world that > exists independently of it being experienced. If we restrict ourselves > to experience only, then there is nothing that differentiates the real > from the imagined. > ==================================== > If we accept that there is an unexperienced world, there would be no > more of a means to distinguish, for all that we know is what we experience. > One of the things we know is that every act of ours is an act of faith, in that we do not know whether our expectation, what we set out to achieve, will be met. A tree in the backyard is a tree in the backyard, because it continues to meet my expectation of it being there when I look out the window. We do distinguish between met and unmet expectations, and classify accordingly. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: I agree with that, but it implies nothing with regard to ontology. It pertains directly to experience and conditionality. ------------------------------------------------ Cheers Herman ============================ With metta, Howard P. S. The following are sutta excerpts that I *interpret* as a teaching of phenomenalism, especially the 1st: ________________________ 1) "Thus, monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't construe an [object as] seen. He doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-seen. He doesn't construe a seer. "When hearing... "When sensing... "When cognizing what is to be cognized, he doesn't construe an [object as] cognized. He doesn't construe an uncognized. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-cognized. He doesn't construe a cognizer." (From the Kalaka Sutta) 2) "Then, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Bahiya, there is no you in terms of that. When there is no you in terms of that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress." (From the Bahiya Sutta) _______________________ #90365 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] More Tales from Big Wave Bay, Hong Kong sarahprocter... Hi Howard & Nina, --- On Wed, 17/9/08, upasaka@... wrote: ============ ========= ======== >I'm so sorry for that upset of yours. I hope matters get straightened out and that many of your young friends are shown to have been innocent in the matter. ... S: Thank you for your kind thoughts as always, Howard and Nina. Of course we hope the same and have left a message on Nelson's ans. machine offering any assistance. Last night I was somewhat agitated and had trouble sleeping as I thought of the predicament these men (and their families) are in. It's interesting, we take the concern and thinking for care and compassion when often, as in this case, there's really a lot more unwholesome worry and nervousness. It's not the compassion and metta don't keep us awake at night! In our case, no particular akusala vipaka, but lots of accumulated thinking, attachment, aversion and ignorance on account of objects experienced through the various door-ways. Metta, Sarah p.s Nina, I wish to clarify that it is not Simon the artist who had the brain lymphoma cancer. These are Nelson and other (Chinese) surfer friends. ================== #90366 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:36 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Vism's Meditation for Developing Namarupa-pariccheda~nana dhammanusarin Hello Larry, - I agree with your broad picture of understanding (pa~n~na) development , i.e. virtues-concentration-insight as seen in Buddhism books. > > Tep: "Your above comment doesn't clarify how (by what conditions) and > why (for which reasons) such "insight" may appear." > > Larry: In my view the development of understanding begins with book > learning, progresses with mindfulness (wise attention), and culminates > with insight, which just spontaneously happens. There are various > strategies for cultivating mindfulness and every teacher has a favorite. > > The cultivation of virtue and tranquility also play an important role. > Without these values none of it makes sense. > > Larry > T: But you did not answer the question. Tep === #90367 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Difference of opinion sarahprocter... Dear Han, I know the example you gave from pre-war Burma about the two groups of Sayadaws and their followers was just an illustration of useless debates. However, I find your tales and examples from pre-war Burma very interesting. Would you kindly (in simple language) give a short summary of how you understand the difference in view you refer to here as I couldn't quite understand it: H:> In Burma before WWII there was a group of Sayadaws and their followers who believed that the kamma (kaaya kamma, vacii kamma, mano kamma) is more important in accumulating kusala and akusala. These persons were called Kamma Sect. >Then, there was another group of Sayadaws and their followers who believed that the dvaara (kaaya dvaara, vacii dvaara, mano dvaara) is more important in accumulating kusala and akusala. These persons were called Dvaara Sect. .... Thanks in advance for any further comments. Metta, Sarah ========= #90368 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:46 am Subject: Distinguishing and Identity upasaka_howard Hi, all - We can and do distinguish sights, sounds, tastes, odors, bodily sensations, various mental features and operations, and various aggregations of such phenomena from each other, and instances from instances within any given one of these categories, but to do so does not imply identity/self in anything, for each thing is constantly ceasing or becoming other. The essential requirement for "identity" and "essence" is a remaining unchanged. The first part of the Merriam-Webster definition of 'identity' goes as follows: Etymology: Middle French identité, from Late Latin identitat-, identitas, probably from Latin identidem repeatedly, contraction of idem et idem, literally, same and same 1 a : sameness of essential or generic character in different instances b : sameness in all that constitutes the objective reality of a thing : _ONENESS _ (javascript:lookWord('oneness');) Likewise for 'essence', the first part of the dictionary definition goes as follows: Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French & Latin; Middle French, from Latin essentia, from esse to be -- more at _IS _ (javascript:lookWord('is');) 1 a : the permanent as contrasted with the accidental element of being With metta, Howard #90369 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 5:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Jhana as Requisite for Nibbana sarahprocter... Dear Tep, --- On Mon, 15/9/08, Tep wrote: > S: I'm questioning/ disagreeing with the suggestion that the passage quoted suggests that prior jhana "is a requisite for Nibbana". When right understanding is developed and enlightenment occurs, I would assume it would be with much joy and happiness. > >T: Do not assume. Everybody can assume. But how do I know if your assumption is right? .... S: Kusala can only arise with neutral or pleasant feeling. When there is dana or metta, what is the feeling usually? If it is really great dana or metta, doesn't it arise with pleasant feeling and joy? When there is right understanding, what is the feeling usually, would you say? If it were the greatest understanding, lokuttara panna, what do you think the feeling would be? As I mentioned, it would of course be neutral feeling for those who had attained the highest jhanas (with which no pleasant feeling or joy arises)immediately prior to enlightenment, but for those who had attained lower jhanas and sukkha vipassikas (dry insight attainers), I understand the feeling to always be pleasant in the case of the jhana attainers and most likely pleasant in the case of the sukkha vipassikas. No need to agree with any of my assumptions, Tep. Thanks for your consideration. Metta, Sarah ========== #90370 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 5:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vinnana & Sanna ... Is It Greed or Ambition? . egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/9/16 sarah abbott : > Dear Tep & all, > > > Seeing is nama, visible object is rupa. Right understanding has to know any object appears without any selection at all. You cannot be discussing Buddhism. MN2 "When a monk attends inappropriately, unarisen fermentations arise, and arisen fermentations increase. When a monk attends appropriately, unarisen fermentations do not arise, and arisen fermentations are abandoned." MN141 "What is right effort? Herein a monk puts forth will, strives, stirs up energy, strengthens his mind, exerts himself to prevent the arising of evil, of unwholesome thoughts that have not yet arisen; puts forth will... (as before) to banish the evil, unwholesome thoughts that have already arisen; puts forth will... to develop wholesome thoughts that have not yet arisen; and puts forth will, strives, stirs up energy, strengthens his mind, exerts himself to maintain, to preserve, increase, to bring them to maturity, development, and to complete the wholesome thoughts that have arisen. This is called right effort." You are not discussing Buddhism. No matter, the people at dsg are very tolerant, and you will get a fair hearing :-) Cheers, Sarah Herman #90371 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 6:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings ... The No-book Rule Does Not Apply Here?. egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/9/17 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman, > > H: > I would say there is not. > ------ > > Thank you, that was my point. > When people understand each other, it is immaterial whether they agree or disagree. It is nice that we agree here, but if we do not understand each other, then our agreement means nothing. Let's see where we're at. > We haven't proved that the same point applies to *all* formal > meditators, but I believe it must. > > --------------------- > H: > And I would suggest that has always been the > case, since the very first time the word was used by a sage to convey > a particular meaning. > --------------------- > > Now you have strayed onto another topic. OK. Accepted. > My point was that formal > meditators inevitably followed their own self-made paths. I was not > including non-formal-meditating Dhamma students. > I think that anyone who portrays themselves as not playing a role in what happens next is either an arahant or a liar. Let's see where we're at. > ----------------------- > H: > However, I am sure that what we will all agree > on is that there have been dozens of schools of thought all claiming a > superior understanding of the sayings of The Sage from the Sutta > Nipata. And that many of these schools have withered and died. (I tell > you, it's a jungle of views out there :-) > ----------------------- > > :-) I am sure it is! But I would like to assure you that the path of > the Dhamma student who does *not* believe in formal meditation (who > does not believe the path can be followed at will) is not a jungle at > all. For that student there can be only one path, and the path is > clear. I believe that anyone who portrays themselves as being without possibilities is either an arahant or a liar. Let's see where we're at. So Ken, are you an arahant :-)? Cheers Herman #90372 From: han tun Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 6:08 am Subject: Re: Difference of opinion hantun1 Dear Sarah, > Sarah: I know the example you gave from pre-war Burma about the two groups of Sayadaws and their followers was just an illustration of useless debates. However, I find your tales and examples from pre-war Burma very interesting. Would you kindly (in simple language) give a short summary of how you understand the difference in view you refer to here as I couldn't quite understand it: -------------------- Han: At that time I was in my early teens and did not have the intellectual capacity to understand the details of their differences. Besides, I had a lot to study at my school and I had no extra time to study these topics. How I came to know the existence of these groups was as follows. When we pay homage to Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha in our shrine in the house or in front of the monks in some religious ceremony, we always start with paying himage to Buddha Dhamma, Sangha in order that our sins that we may have committed through our kaaya kamma (bodily activities), vacii kamma (verbal activities), and mano kamma (mental activities) may be cleansed. Now, these followers of Dvaara Sect said that our sins that we may have committed through kaaya dvaara (bodily doors), vacii dvaara (verbal doors), mano dvaara (mental doors) may be cleansed. [But I must admit that I did not know exactly what they meant by kaaya dvaara, vacii dvaara, or mano dvaara,] I think the idea was that one group attached more emphasis on the actions through bodily, verbal and mental actvities in accumulating kusala or akusala. The other group attached more emphasis on the sense doors and guarding the sense doors so that it would not lead to bodily, verbal and mental unwholesome activities. That was how I understood very roughly. Of course, there must be more important details which I could not grasp at that young age. But the details are not that important in conveying my message. The important point is for whatever topic, or for whatever details, if there is a strong difference between the two groups and if the two groups are stubbornly sticking to their own ideas, there can be no agreement and it will only lead to endless debates getting nowhere. Respectfully, Han #90373 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 6:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Only for the Wise to See sarahprocter... Hi Herman (& all), --- On Wed, 17/9/08, Herman Hofman wrote: H:> But what on earth is a doorway? Have you ever met one? Should you be talking about them as though you know them? ... >S: It's just a short-hand way of referring to the various senses. Obviously sounds are not experienced by seeing through the eye-sense and visible objects are not experienced by hearing through the ear-sense. .... H:> So can I safely assume that sense-doors are not something to be known directly? ... S: Are there any safe assumptions here? :-) It's a bit like discussions on kamma or many other topic. It depends how precise we wish to be. Let's consider the eye-door. To be precise, it refers to the rupa of eye-sense which is an essential condition for seeing and other cittas in the same process to arise. I've always found 'doors' (dvaras) a difficult topic, so I can relate to your questions/comments on it. I thought Colette's comment about the threshold was actually rather good. Without passing the threshold, nothing can appear. Btw, enjoyed the 'What do you do' email. I'd say 'Write On!' and look to 'Zany' in 'U.P.' in due course.....:-) Metta, Sarah p.s Jon and I would request you (Phil and anyone else) to discuss other lists off-list only! TIA!! The same goes for any reply to this:-). ============== #90374 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 6:53 am Subject: Re: Doubts and Siilana szmicio Dear Nina > Rob K knows about Theravada in > Poland and I am trying to find out more. Perhaps there is a site with > Polish translations. L: I know polish theravadins very well. There is a few very big theravadin's portals with sutta translations. We had something about few hundreds of Sutta translations now. I read visudhimagga and making a polish notes, so mayby it will be helpful in the futer. That's not like that I don't like visudhi, i think it will be very beneficial to have a visudhi magga translation. There is a few people knows Pali very well. I am the owner of www.dhamma.pl domain, and I am planing to translate dhammastudy.com in the futer and publish it there. I think it can be very beneficial. Thus, I would say: go very, very slowly. The > Visuddhimagga is for later on. Just read what you are inclined to > read, like the sutta that is your favorite. Try those in Kindred > Sayings IV, Kindred Sayings on Sense. L:I find your "Conditions" very beneficial. It helps so much, so much. > N: Quite right. Hearing is an experience, it is nama. It experience > sound only, nothing else. Hearing is different from knowing the > meaning of what we hear. We tend to have confusion. That is why I > also like to listen and consider what is said about seeing, hearing. > It never is enough. Theoretical understanding only knows names of > realities, but realities have to be considered when they appear now. > This takes a long, long time and we have to be patient. > -------- L: Can you start a new series about nama and rupa. something like like your Metta series? Maybe Sarah can help you? > > L: I wonder about panja, becouse there is usually thinking about old > > panja which has gone now. > ------- > N: There are many degrees of pa~n~naa, and first there is > understanding of the level of thinking. Again, we have to go slowly, > with patience. > You asked about examples of wrong view, di.t.thi: when there is a > firm belief that kamma does not produce result. Or that after death > there is no rebirth. L: But it is thinking. How ditthi can now anything? How dithi can now anything about kamma and its result? best wishes Lukas #90375 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 6:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Only for the Wise to See sarahprocter... Hi Howard (& Herman), --- On Wed, 17/9/08, upasaka@... wrote: Herman:> So can I safely assume that sense-doors are not something to be known directly? ============ ========= ======= Howard: >Here's my perspective on this matter - just how I think about it, and nothing even semi-official: The five physical sense-doors are experientially (to me) what I would call "locational rupas." Associated with the body door are all the bodily locations, associated with hearing is a "space" of physical locations, associated with seeing is a "cone" of physical locations, and so on. And the mind door, derivatively, encompasses the five physical sense doors. .... S: The first part could be 'semi-official' Theravada, when you refer to the five physical sense-doors as "locational rupas". These are eye-, ear-, nose-, tongue- and body-sense. As you suggest, body-sense is all over the body. This is relatively straight forward. However, the mind-door strictly speaking refers to the last bhavanga citta before the mind-door process (vithi). This is the 'threshold' to be 'crossed'. Sometimes mind-door (mano dvara) is used as a short-hand abbreviation for the mind-door process. Then there is the mind-door adverting citta (manodvaravajjana citta), the first citta of the mind-door process which succeeds the last bhavanga citta (the 'mind-door'). As the name suggests, it 'adverts' to the object appearing to the mind-door process after the bhavanga cittas (which have their own object). Well, you did buy into it:-). Metta, Sarah =========== #90376 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 7:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Doubts and Siilana sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- On Wed, 17/9/08, szmicio wrote: >I am happy I have such good friends in Dhamma. ... S: I feel just the same about all our friends here. All the discussions, including your posts, are very helpful for me too. ... >L: We usually discussing that right understending is conditioned by reading and considering Dhamma but can there be any moments of understanding even when we dont listing Dhamma or reading Suttas? ... S: Yes, anytime at all. This is a very important point, otherwise we may think we should be listening to Dhamma or reading texts all the time and have aversion when we're not (or when we are and it's not the 'right' time.) Any time, any place, any location, any activity, any reality..... I never think 'this is time for understanding because I'm reading a sutta' or 'this is not time for understanding because I'm reading the newspaper', for example. Seeing is seeing, visible object is visible object regardless. The rest is thinking about concepts of study. .... >S:.....Of course, only panna can know whether at the moment of thinking about people or computers whether there is any ditthi. Usually, there's just moha and lobha. >L: but lobha and diithi cannot arise at the same time? ... S: When ditthi arises, it is always with lobha. Cittas rooted in lobha can be with or without ditthi. Those without ditthi can also be with or without mana (conceit). Lobha arises very, very frequently, like now! .... >S: Of course, usually we're more concerned about the dosa because it always arises with unpleasant feeling, as you stress. But what about the lobha now? Without the lobha, there wouldn't be any dosa. >L: Those moements of lobha are very unclear for me. How can we know the characteristic of lobha, there is a lot of conceptions. How can we know it? .... S: Panna and sati can become more and more used to its characteristic. For example, feeling comfortable now with lobha, seeing with lobha, hearing with lobha, being concerned about one's own welfare all day long with lobha from the moment we wake up. .... >L: we discuss with Nina about such moments as giving Dhamma or be happy of someone merits. I think I know this moments, becouse they arise sometimes in my life, but how can i be sure that is kusala??? I think in such moments lobha has the same chance as kusala to arise. .... S: Actually, there's so much more accumulated lobha that it has a far greater chance to arise:-). It's not a matter of 'trying to work it out' or 'catch' the kusala moments. Gradually panna can understand more and more about the distinction between kusala and akusala, that's all. Again, I'd like to stress that such dana or merit doesn't belong to anyone, so it's not a matter of trying to have more kusala for oneself or one's character. Clinging to kusala slips in all the time. .... > S: Thinking about concepts. That's fine, just understand the thinking for what it is, rather than being lost in the concepts! > ... >L: I forgot about this. You're right!Thinkin is just thinking. ... S: Yes!! It's good that you appreciate this. It really makes a great difference in life to understand the distinction between thinking (the reality) and concepts, otherwise we'll continue to be lost in our dreams without any understanding that they are dreams. I hope you can help explain "Thinking is just thinking" to others here as well. Metta, Sarah ======= #90377 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 3:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Only for the Wise to See upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - Well, you did buy into it:-). ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, first I'd have to "buy" the notion of bhavanga citta, and though I don't reject it, I can't say I accept it either. I do see how a bhavanga citta, if there were such a thing, would serve as portal for further experience, just as the lovely, commentarial spider-waiting-in -the-middle-of-its-web-for-disturbance metaphor suggests, BUT the subsequent arammana could be via ANY door: It could be a sight, a sound, an odor etc, which makes the identification of bhavanga citta with mind door problematical. ------------------------------------------------- Metta, Sarah =========================== With metta, Howard #90378 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 7:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] MN36. Buddha about Jhana 'That is the path to Awakening.' truth_aerator > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.036x.than.html > > > What I suggested then was that Jhana by way of Anapanasati was the >path > taken by all Buddhas-to-be. Being that the Buddha was enlightened >to the > Four Noble Truths of which the Path is one, he could not have known >the > Path prior to this. He was meant to `discover' it and then teach it >to > others. > > Metta, > > Sukin > Dear Sukin, But the suttas don't seem to say that "it was only for the Buddhas that Jhana *is* the path". The frequency of Jhana teaching is very high in the Suttas. I don't think that if Jhana and ANapanasati was only for the Buddha and his chief disciples that the Buddha would teach it so much and so often. Best wishes, Alex #90379 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 8:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] MN36. Buddha about Jhana 'That is the path to Awakening.' dhammanusarin Dear Alex (and Sukin, Nina, Sarah, Jon), - Sukin just gives his own interpretation, Alex. > Suk: > What I suggested then was that Jhana by way of Anapanasati was the path taken by all Buddhas-to-be. Being that the Buddha was enlightened to the Four Noble Truths of which the Path is one, he could not have known the Path prior to this. He was meant to `discover' it and then teach it to others. > Alex: Dear Sukin, But the suttas don't seem to say that "it was only for the Buddhas that Jhana *is* the path". The frequency of Jhana teaching is very high in the Suttas. I don't think that if Jhana and ANapanasati was only for the Buddha and his chief disciples that the Buddha would teach it so much and so often. ............................... T: I concur with you, Alex. It is obvious that Anapanasati is seen in several suttas (the collection of the Buddha's lectures to His disciples). It was given particularly in the Maha-satipatthana Sutta. Besides Sukin who has more confidence in his opinion than in the Buddha's words, who else can deny that the Buddha taught Anapanasati to the monks as a path for them to follow? It is absurd to think that the Buddha would teach them Anapanasati, knowing that His disciples could not follow it. I advise Sukin to read the following post about the various paths in Buddhissm. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/89407 Sincerely, Tep === #90380 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:56 pm Subject: Re: Latent Views and such truth_aerator Hello Herman, KenH and all, >--- "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > I believe that anyone who portrays themselves as being without > possibilities is either an arahant or a liar. Let's see where we're > at. > > So Ken, are you an arahant :-)? > > > Cheers > > > Herman Herman you are correct. Until one is an Arahant there is still conceit I AM. Until one is stream enterer or on the stream-entry path - there is still latent tendency toward self view and wrong views. What is true of an Arahant's "non-doing" is not true for those below Arhatship (especially below stream). To think that someone below Stream can avoid any "doing" at everytime is delusional. The taint of views, greed, anger, delusion, conceit and you name it, is still there if only in latent, hidden stage. Best wishes, Alex #90381 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 1:18 pm Subject: Re: Latent Views and such ... They're Just Attending Inappropriately dhammanusarin Dear Herman and Alex, - Some people who are misguided because they are not smart enough (don't know how to think clearly for themselves), normally are possessed of one or more of the extreme views such as given in MN 2. They are not necessarily lying. They just attend inappropriately. There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person... does not discern what ideas are fit for attention, or what ideas are unfit for attention. ... As he attends inaptly in this way, one of six kinds of view arises in him: The view I have a self arises in him as true & established, or the view I have no self... or the view It is precisely because of self that I perceive self... [MN 2] > >--- "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > > > I believe that anyone who portrays themselves as being without > > possibilities is either an arahant or a liar. Let's see where we're > > at. > > > > So Ken, are you an arahant :-)? > > Alex: > To think that someone below Stream can avoid any "doing" at everytime > is delusional. The taint of views, greed, anger, delusion, conceit > and you name it, is still there if only in latent, hidden stage. > > .............. Yours truly, Tep === #90382 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 1:21 pm Subject: Being aware only of "Ultimate Realities"? No meditating on concepts? truth_aerator Hello Nina, Sarah, Jon, Sukinder, Scott, KenH and all, I have read that one is not supposed to meditate or be aware of concepts, that only ultimate realities should be seen or read about. However in the suttas the Buddha has given such meditation objects as: Kaygatasati Asubha Maranasati 4 Elements 4 Brahmaviharas (metta, karuna, mudita, uppekha) 10 Kasinas Anapanasati Loathomness of Food Base of Infinite of Space, Base of Infinite consciousness, Base of nothingness, Base of neither perception nor non-perception. ============ Which of them are ultimate realities and which are conceptual? If "conceptual realities" are so bad and shouldn't be meditated on, why did he mention them? Can anyone explain this? Thank you very much, Best wishes, Alex #90383 From: "Tep" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 1:41 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Vinnana & Sanna ... Is It Greed or Ambition? .. dhammanusarin Dear Sarah (Larry, Herman, Alex), - Concerning the discussion of "understanding now" by Ven. Buddhaghosa, > T:> I will respond to your discussion of the Vism > XVIII, 5-8 in another post. > .... > S: Whatever is convenient for you, your Majesty:-). > actually my response to your discussion plus a summary of the Vism method for developing Namarupa-pariccheda~nana are given in message #90278. For your information only; I have no hope that you may read it ! Tep === #90384 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 2:06 pm Subject: Re: MN36. Buddha about Jhana 'That is the path to Awakening.' kenhowardau Hi Herman (and Alex), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > 2008/9/18 Alex : > > Dear Sukinder and all, > > > >>--- Sukinder wrote: > >> Even though I value all kusala cittas and have very high > >> regard for Jhana, I don't see it as being part of the Path to > >> enlightenment. > > > > "I thought: 'I recall once, when my father the Sakyan was working, > > and I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, then — > > quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental > > qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & > > pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & > > evaluation. Could that be the path to Awakening?' Then, following on > > that memory, came the realization: 'That is the path to Awakening.' I > > thought: 'So why am I afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to do > > with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities?' I > > thought: 'I am no longer afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to > > do with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities, > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.036x.than.html > > > > Well done !! > > Cheers > > Herman You are easily pleased Herman! You and Alex have been given hundreds of explanations. Each time your comeback is to quote a sutta and to jubilantly tell us, "Look, the Buddha said he practised jhana: that proves we all have to do it!" "Look, the Buddha said "man" "woman" "person" "tree" "standing" "sitting!" That proves there really are such things!" I know you are frightened by the Dhamma (the way it is explained on DSG) and you want to deny it at every opportunity, but don't you aspire to a higher level of discussion than that? Ken H #90385 From: "colette" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Only for the Wise to See ksheri3 Did I hear a "Booty Call"? Assumputions! Why it is the most safest thing any person that strives to obey and satiate the Corporate Master could do, could believe. The jest is that when people make assumptions the person that applies the word "assumption" is either obligated to instantaneously refer to "making an 'Ass-out-of-U-and-Me" or the person that is being spoken to is obligated to remind the other person what an Assumption is. Never the less, I thought that Sarah was being playful and taking the roll of the "straight man" so that I could make the jokes. Thank You Sarah. see below for one more good point before I have to disappear into the darkness of the mid-day sunshine. > --- On Wed, 17/9/08, Herman Hofman wrote: > H:> But what on earth is a doorway? Have you ever met one? Should you be > talking about them as though you know them? > ... > >S: It's just a short-hand way of referring to the various senses. Obviously sounds are not experienced by seeing through the eye-sense and visible objects are not experienced by hearing through the ear- sense. > .... > H:> So can I safely assume that sense-doors are not something to be known directly? > ... > S: Are there any safe assumptions here? :-) > > It's a bit like discussions on kamma or many other topic. It depends how precise we wish to be. > colette: exactly, if the person wants to gratify themselves and their gang and their social status then they can choose to be L.A.X., I mean lax in their interpretation, loose in interpretation, LIBERTIENE YOU SAY, or they can be the biggest pain <...> because their position is A LOSING POSITION which causes them to make sure that ever T is crossed and every I is dotted, and the procedure to make sure that this is the case will never end because upon completion of the security check from a spell checker means that their position must accept the payment of the loss. Thanks Sarah and Herman. toodles, colette #90386 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 5:23 pm Subject: Re: More Tales from Big Wave Bay, Hong Kong kenhowardau Hi Sarah and Jon, --- S: > Jon and I have been in a state of shock today. I hope you don't mind my sharing a little. I keep thinking about 'the story'! --- Sorry about the shock, but I know you will (as always) be able to think about the story without being "caught out" by it. --------- S: > How could these gentle surfers find themselves behind bars now, paraded off in hoods, in serious trouble? Latent tendencies and accumulations - different characters at different moments, perhaps. Conditions, circumstances, vipaka, kilesa, kamma. So many different ingredients which make up the present citta now. --------- That's the way I would like people to think of me: lots and lots of vipaka and functional cittas (one at a time, of course!), interspersed with mildly akusala cittas (some not so mild, perhaps) and, once in a while, a kusala one. I wouldn't mind that for my epitaph! :-) Ken H #90387 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 7:35 pm Subject: Re: Being aware only of "Ultimate Realities"? No meditating on concepts? scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "I have read that one is not supposed to meditate or be aware of concepts, that only ultimate realities should be seen or read about..." Scott: I've never heard of this, Alex. Do you have a reference for this statement? One cannot help thinking. I appreciated this post from Nina: N: "...I think one of the reasons of confusion with regard to concept, as you mentioned, is the word . In some translations thought stands for thinking. Thinking is the act of thinking, the experience, the nama of thinking. Even the word thinking can stand for the cetasikas vitakka, applied thinking and vicara, sustained thinking. They accompany cittas of the sense-door process, except the sense-cognitions of seeing etc., and cittas of the mind-door process, and also cittas not arising in processes (rebirth consciousness, bhavanga and dying-consciousness). Thus we see that they do not accompany only cittas of the mind-door process, that they are not the same as what we mean by thinking in conventional sense. Seeing just sees, it directly experiences visible object impinging on the eye-base. It does not need vitakka and vicara to experience the object. The other cittas of the sense-door process do not have the eyebase as the physical base, vatthu, they do not see, they need vitakka and vicara in order to experience visible object. We can use thinking in a wider sense: citta experiencing an object through the mind-door, but we have to be careful. Citta can experience through the mind-door paramattha dhammas as well as concepts. We can use the word thinking for citta experiencing concepts. The word *thought*: this is what citta thinks about, the object citta thinks of, and I am inclined to use this for concept, just as you, Kom, explained. You explained about shape and form: this is the concept of a whole. Citta can think of a story, a situation, this is a concept. We can call it also a thought. Thus for me thought is the object of the citta which thinks. For me it is not the act of thinking, the experience which is thinking. Also the long quote about the kinds of concepts given by Larry is very important to consider. When citta does not experience a reality it experiences a concept. As I remarked before, when we reflect on reality and concept the difference cannot be so clear. We may keep on trying to find definitions of reality and concept, of thinking and thought. Only when we learn to be directly aware of at least some realities appearing through different doorways the difference between reality and concept will become clearer. Like the hardness and the table, visible object and (Howard's) tree. I have a mental picture of Howard looking at his tree in the garden. A concept..." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15685 Sincerely, Scott. #90388 From: Sukinder Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] MN36. Buddha about Jhana 'That is the path to Awakening.' sukinderpal Dear Tep and Alex, =========== Tep: > Sukin just gives his own interpretation, Alex. Suk: Don’t we all? And if this is so bad, why then criticize those people who rely on the ancient commentaries, having seen their own limitations with regard to reading and interpreting the Suttas? =========== > > Suk: > > What I suggested then was that Jhana by way of Anapanasati was the > path taken by all Buddhas-to-be. Being that the Buddha was > enlightened to the Four Noble Truths of which the Path is one, he > could not have known the Path prior to this. He was meant to > `discover' it and then teach it to others. > > > > Alex: > But the suttas don't seem to say that "it was only for the Buddhas > that Jhana *is* the path". The frequency of Jhana teaching is very > high in the Suttas. I don't think that if Jhana and Anapanasati was > only for the Buddha and his chief disciples that the Buddha would > teach it so much and so often. Suk: First let us be clear about this. Anapanasati as a ‘samatha’ practice is not only for Buddhas. In fact it exists outside of the sasana as well. Anapanasati as basis for ‘insight’ is also not only for Buddhas. This however, when referring to Savakas, implies having heard about the N8FP. In the case of a Bodhisatta who is going to become a Buddha, Anapanasati as samatha is known to be the practice by which insight will occur and enlightenment will be achieved. This I believe must be the result of a special kind of knowledge which only a Buddha-to-be can have and this too, when the Parami are ripe. It is the result of this very great accumulated wisdom which causes the quantum leap and shift in perception to occur, resulting in the various vipassana nnanas arising, leading to sotapatimagga and on to becoming a Buddha. Savakas with great panna such as Sariputta could also attain enlightenment by way of Anapanasati / Jhana. However, they would have had to hear the Teachings, namely about the 4NTs in order for this to happen. Sariputta would *never* have attained enlightenment without hearing the Dhamma. And had he continued without the Dhamma with his practice of Anapanasati, he would end up at most the highest level of Jhana. Which is a dead end, in light of the fact that only vipassana leads to the experience of Nibbana; hence release. Indeed Anapanasati was taught quite often and why not. Even as a samatha practice it is useful as all kusala are, and if the Buddha encouraged Dana, Sila and other Samatha Bhavana, why would he not teach this most sublime practice capable of leading to the highest Jhana? But samatha is one thing and vipassana is another. Both these have different objects and lead to different goals. As you will agree, Dana can’t be said to lead directly to enlightenment, though in this case it is one of the parami, which when accumulated, supports the other parami. But even this requires satipatthana to qualify as such. In the same way, Jhana on its own does nothing to lead anyone closer to enlightenment, but would require itself to be known by way of satipatthana / vipassana to qualify as being “base” upon which enlightenment occurs. (But don’t ask me about the mechanisms of this :-/ ). Tep wrote: ========== > T: I concur with you, Alex. It is obvious that Anapanasati is seen in > several suttas (the collection of the Buddha's lectures to His > disciples). It was given particularly in the Maha-satipatthana Sutta. > Besides Sukin who has more confidence in his opinion than in the > Buddha's words, who else can deny that the Buddha taught Anapanasati > to the monks as a path for them to follow? Suk: I don’t mind being accused of this. But I wonder with what kind of citta you do it. It is obvious that some of us believe that you and others are giving your own interpretations, not in line with the intended meaning of the Buddha’s words. But have you ever read anyone of us say the same thing about you or those other people, namely that you believe in yourselves more than the Buddha? ========== Tep: > It is absurd to think that the Buddha would teach them Anapanasati, > knowing that His disciples could not follow it. Suk: I hope my explanation above has clarified my position a little more. But you may like to ask yourself these questions: “Am I in the same league as those people?” “Is the important Teaching to which the Buddha was enlightened, samatha or vipassana?” “If the latter, why at any time give more importance to the former, so much so as to go on and argue in support of it at the expense of the other? ========= Tep: > I advise Sukin to read the following post about > the various paths in Buddhissm. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/89407 Suk: Frankly, I don’t understand the quote from the Patisambhidamagga, the subject re: the 37 enlightenment factors is too deep for me. Still I think the “Path” I am talking about, namely the Noble Eightfold Path, has altogether a different meaning and implication from the “path” used in reference to the various dhammas in the quote you cite. My mention of the Path is in terms of its ‘function’ being that of “understanding Dukkha” and gradually leading to enlightenment. In your quote, the same thing can’t be meant, can it? But perhaps you will explain how you see it? Metta, Sukin Ps: Tep, I’ll be busy on and off the next few says. So I will look for a good time to start our other discussion, but not yet. Hopefully in there, because we will not be making direct reference to the Buddha’s words, you will then not perceive me as trusting my own opinions over that of the Buddha. ;-) #90389 From: "colette" Date: Thu Sep 18, 2008 10:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Only for the Wise to See ksheri3 Hi Sarah and Herman, A few minutes to make one half way good observation: > > H:> But what on earth is a doorway? colette: that is a marvelous question since a doorway can be interpreted in many different ways. For instance, is it an ENTRANCE or is it an EXIT? A common practice in today's economic existance is to pay ENTRANCE FEES, but not many people have any consciousness what so ever about an EXIT FEE, which is to say that there is a cost to pass through or traverse ANY DOORWAY. When a person signs a contract to put their money in the hands of a banking institution in the form of say CERTIFIED DEPOSIT (CD) then they have to uphold the time period of that "contract" but if they withdrawal money before the completion of the contract then they are charged a FEE for leaving the confined presence of the contract, an EXIT FEE. A penalty is assessed if the person leaves. I like this one coming up, Herman: > Have you ever met one? colette: Beautiful, yes, that is so Zen of you! Are they related to Parona Brothers that Monty Python used to have such fun acting out their activities? "Dinsdale". What clubs do they attend? Are they the clubbing types or are they the wallpaper types, I mean Wall-Flower types? Maybe, just by chance, can we associate them, doorways, to "vehicles", maybe servants, no? Do they come with metal detectors? -------------------------------------------- Should > you be > > talking about them as though you know them? > > ... colette: indeed! I've heard rumors that they are a rather stuffy type of human. The meat, when cooked, is rather dry and rubbery, well, if it's from Florida then we all know how rubbery those sun worshipers skin gets don't we? Tan lines ya know. If ya talk about them they might not allow you to leave, where ever it is you are, no? Are they kindof like prison guards or prison staffs? Turnkey, or Jailor, I believe the name was, no? In the USNavy we used to watch US Marines sit all day long and watch a gate while every day and every night the gate never went anywhere. ---------------------------------------- > > >S: It's just a short-hand way of referring to the various senses. > Obviously sounds are not experienced by seeing through the eye-sense > and visible objects are not experienced by hearing through the ear- > sense. > > .... colette: what about a musicians ability to make a guitar "scream". Are you speaking of Vibrations and a quantum universe of vibrations? String Theory, isn't it? ------------------------------------- > > H:> So can I safely assume that sense-doors are not something to be > known directly? > > ... colette:why declare it to be an assumption? Why not a Hypothesis? > > S: Are there any safe assumptions here? :-) > > never mind. > > Let's consider the eye-door. To be precise, it refers to the rupa > of eye-sense which is an essential condition for seeing and other > cittas in the same process to arise. > > colette: at first I had similar concepts of the "eye-door" consciousness but I've gone so far that I can't possibly accept that any longer as a valid definition. "Rupas" are a noun and "essential condition" is a state of being so how can they be in the same sentence that way, Sarah? ====================== Gotta go. Thanks for allowing me room to play with the mundane concept of concepts. toodles, colette > > I've always found 'doors' (dvaras) a difficult topic, so I can > relate to your questions/comments on it. I thought Colette's comment > about the threshold was actually rather good. Without passing the > threshold, nothing can appear. > > > > Btw, enjoyed the 'What do you do' email. I'd say 'Write On!' and > look to 'Zany' in 'U.P.' in due course.....:-) > > > > > > Metta, > > > > Sarah > #90390 From: "colette" Date: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:16 am Subject: "I'm only sayin' what's on my mind" Kansas ksheri3 Hi Group, Herman got me thinkin: I'm laying there contemplating in the dark and it strikes me that I don't know if WRATHFUL DIETIES impose exit fees or entrance fees. Does anybody have a clue? Are WRATHFUL DIETIES imprisoned in a BARDO? What about that state of BLISS when the Yin and Yang/Shiva and Shakti etc, come together and disolve into a singularity, become one. Obviously I've got miles upon miles of research yet to do, but what I'm getting at is the personification of the male and female traits that we sentient humans use to characterize dieties, why is it that everybody forgets the objective, objectivity, of the process: we are trying to unite the female and male apsects aren't we? In so doing or accomplishing the feet, gender has no meaning, correct? Well, if the female and male aspects can be intentionally divided then isn't it a forgone conclusion that they will never unite as a means of disolving their differences? <....> Now I'm getting way too deep since it's 2:12 a.m. and I've got things I've gotta do tomorrow but think with me for a second. What about the chakras? I'm obviously experiencing some kind of revelation since my entire system of processes that I've hallucinated the chakras go through as a means of opening the lotus and aiding in activation of the chakra, is now in question if not in flux, a state of transcience. I hope I sleep good tonight. toodles, colette #90391 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Sep 19, 2008 1:27 am Subject: The 5 Obstructing Obstacles! bhikkhu0 Friends: The Five Obstructing Obstacles: The Blessed Buddha once said: There are 5 kinds of mental barrenness, that obstruct any mental growth and any spiritual progress. What are they ? 1: Skeptical doubt about the perfect Awakening of the Buddha is the first mental barrenness. 2: Skeptical doubt about the absolute Truth of the Dhamma is the second mental barrenness. 3: Skeptical doubt about the Purity of the Noble Sangha is the third mental barrenness. 4: Skeptical doubt about the Efficacy of the mental Training is the fourth mental barrenness. 5: Anger towards one's friends & fellows on the Noble Path is the fifth mental barrenness. These 5 kinds of mental barrenness disable all initiative, enthusiasm, energy, effort, exertion, and endurance... Therefore do they eliminate any effective training & thereby also all the advantageous fruit of such mental training... Review the mind regularly so to recognize these obstructions and cure them with faith, investigation, and friendliness. See also: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Doubt_and_Uncertainty.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/How_to_Overcome_Doubt.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Curing_Doubt_and_Uncertainty.htm Source: The Moderated Speeches by the Buddha. Majjhima Nikaya [I 101] http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=25072X http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/index.html Have a nice confident day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) .... #90392 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 19, 2008 2:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Vism's Meditation for Developing Namarupa-pariccheda~nana sarahprocter... Dear Tep, (Larry* & all) --- On Wed, 17/9/08, Tep wrote: >T:.....XVIII, 5-8 is about observing of the essences of the four elements in each of the 32 bodyparts (head hair, body hair, nail, ...) for people whose "vehicle is pure insight". ..... S: with regard to what we take for head hair, body hair, nail and so on, what exactly is experienced through the body-sense would you say? If there is awareness and right understanding of the reality at the moment of touching, say 'head hair', what is known? What is the object of awareness? Remember that here we are talking about the development of satipatthana leading to the various vipassana nanas. .... T:> Here we learn that once the four elements(dhatus) have "become clear in their essential charateristics" , say in the head hair, then other 44 instances of rupa will "become plain" in detail, etc. .... S: Let's consider pathavi dhatu (element of solidity, manifesting as hardness/softness). At the moment of touching what we take for head hair or a cushion, softness is experienced. It isn't in 'the head hair' or 'the cushion' and there is no 'head hair' or 'cushion' in the softness. There is just the pathavi dhatu, just the softness experienced. Gradually we can see that what we take for 'this important body of ours' are really different elements, different rupas. Without such rupas, there'd be no idea of head hair or body at all. Understanding rupas and namas (without selection) as they appear leads to detachment from the idea of self, body, and 'wholes', wouldn't you agree? .... T:> This is a tedious meditation practice that can take a long practice before the materiality understanding arises through direct knowing thus "Taking all these together under the characteristice of 'being molested' he sees them as 'materiality' ". ... S: I don't see/read about any 'tedious meditation practice'. I read about the details of various realities which are enumerated to help us understand more about the anattaness of what is conditioned now. Rupas can only ever be experienced, they are 'molested' all the time, subject to all sorts of influences (like heat, past kamma, cittas and nutriment) about which they have no control at all. .... T:> It is interesting to notice that the immaterial states (namas) "become plain" to the meditator "with the sense doors" only after s/he has a clear vision of the materialities first. This is what I see as a meditation theme for developing Namarupa- pariccheda~nana. .... S: I think we have to be careful not to read this as 'be aware of X first' recipe. Some dhammas are gross, some are subtle, some are more evident. However, it all depends on accumulations what will be the object of awareness at any given time. If there's any idea of self selecting or ordering awarness, right understanding which realises namarupa-pariccheda nana will never arise. .... T:> The rest of your reply below only talks about paragraphs 4, 25, and 28. Sarah, why did you skip over paragraphs 5 - 8 ? Don't feel comfortable? .... S: I feel very comfortable, thanks for enquiring, Tep! When you gave me the reference to certain paragraphs in the Vism, it was a condition for me to open the book to check the context and it was the sections I referred to which caught my eye and interest as being the most useful for the discussion. That's all! As James sometimes says, the full context is often necessary for the discussion and understanding of the passages quoted. I'll look forward to any comments you may have on the parts I quoted too. Metta, Sarah *p.s Larry, thanks for joining in the discussion as well. I look forward to more of it (hint, hint!). I had intended to give a link to your earlier message on Tep's paragraphs as well. Please do so if you think it might be helpful. It's good that Tep is raising this chapter again for further and closer consideration. ============ #90393 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 19, 2008 2:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? sarahprocter... Dear Alex (& Scott), --- On Wed, 17/9/08, Alex wrote: A:> I wonder if the Buddha has stated anywhere in the 4 nikayas that such and sucj are ultimate dhammas, and these are just concepts. >As far as I am concerned, !!!anything! !! in Samsara is dependently arisen, has no sabhava (check Patis) and liable to arise-stay-and fall away. .... S: As the Patis is very much 'in' this month, you might like to take a look at the 'All', the ultimate dhammas as recently (very helpfully) listed by Tep and further discussed by Jon: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/89039 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/90390 As for sabhava in the Patis, if you go to 'sabhava' in U.P. you'll find plenty of material to keep you occupied:-). Metta, Sarah ======== #90394 From: "szmicio" Date: Fri Sep 19, 2008 3:49 am Subject: Re: Doubts and Siilana szmicio Dear Sarah, > >L: We usually discussing that right understending is conditioned by > reading and considering Dhamma but can there be any moments of > understanding even when we dont listing Dhamma or reading Suttas? > ... > S: Yes, anytime at all. This is a very important point, otherwise we may think we should be listening to Dhamma or reading texts all the time and have aversion when we're not (or when we are and it's not the 'right' time.) > > Any time, any place, any location, any activity, any reality..... > I never think 'this is time for understanding because I'm reading a sutta' or 'this is not time for understanding because I'm reading the newspaper', for example. Seeing is seeing, visible object is visible object regardless. The rest is thinking about concepts of study. L: But those moment's of yoniso manasikara, when we put attention to seeing and hearing, cannot arise all the time. There is usually thinking about what to do next, day-dreaming and thinking of what is not important. It reminds me of lack of control of any reality, I cant induce the way I think, or make a proper attention arise. .......... L: When we hear a sound, there is nama and rupa at the same time. There was said that nama and rupa arise at the same moment all the time. But what next? When rupa fall away, then citta can experience any object, for example another citta, is there rupa at that moment? ....... Best wishes Lukas #90395 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 19, 2008 3:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Only for the Wise to See .. Less Book Recitation sarahprocter... Dear Sukin & Tep, --- On Mon, 15/9/08, Tep wrote: >Suk: 5) So when Sarah or anyone of us are talking about "understanding the realities appearing now", she is not talking about the need particularly, for direct experience of characteristics, but rather *understanding* as much as conditions allow. ... S: Hmmm....I'd say both. Yes, understanding can only be 'as much as conditions allow', but there also has to be the direct experience of characteristics, not just thinking about them, however wisely. ... >Suk:. In this regard, it is enough to have any little intellectual understanding arise, without which we may otherwise think to try and be mindful of `concepts'. .... S: I'd put it that the understanding has to being with the correct intellectual understanding in the first place, so, as you say, there isn't the following of the wrong path, trying to be "mindful of 'concepts'". ... >T: No, not enough. Indeed I have been trying to caution Sarah, or anyone of her same-minded DSG gang members, that it is better to move away from getting stuck in the deep pit of being contented with mediocre worldling's intellectual understanding of "the realities appearing now", to directly experiencing the dhammas. ... S: Actually, Tep, I've never said it is enough. I agree that there has to be the 'direct experiencing the dhammas'. Sukin's point, however, is that panna develops, beginning with pariyatti. If there is no pariyatti, there will be no patipatti. .... T:> How many years have they been talking, just happily talking and dreaming, about the same themes of intellectual understanding, or about the theoretical paramttha dhammas that arise and pass away much faster than they can blink? Too many. .... S: This is exactly the same point Ven P made when we were in Bangkok recently - that we must be following the wrong path if we're still discussing these kinds of isssues and details and (he suggested) the Buddha never had these types of discussions and they have nothing to do with the Buddha's teaching. He also referred to people changing their lives as a result of just one meditation course. However, I think the consideration and deep study of realities is exactly what the Buddha's teaching is about and it is these paramattha dhammas which the Buddha taught and discussed. I don't think we're just interested in "intellectual understanding" or 'theoretical paramattha dhammas that arise and pass away much faster than they can blink". I think we're interested in understanding and being aware of seeing which appears now, visible object which appears now, thinking which appears now, so that slowly panna begins to understand the worlds as they really are, not the make-believe worlds of trees, houses, head-hairs and people which we've lived in for so very long, in complete delusion. Metta, Sarah ========== #90396 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Sep 19, 2008 1:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Vism's Meditation for Developing Namarupa-pariccheda~nana upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Tep & Larry & all) - In a message dated 9/19/2008 5:14:44 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: S: with regard to what we take for head hair, body hair, nail and so on, what exactly is experienced through the body-sense would you say? If there is awareness and right understanding of the reality at the moment of touching, say 'head hair', what is known? What is the object of awareness? Remember that here we are talking about the development of satipatthana leading to the various vipassana nanas. .... T:> Here we learn that once the four elements(dhatus) have "become clear in their essential charateristics" , say in the head hair, then other 44 instances of rupa will "become plain" in detail, etc. .... S: Let's consider pathavi dhatu (element of solidity, manifesting as hardness/softness). At the moment of touching what we take for head hair or a cushion, softness is experienced. It isn't in 'the head hair' or 'the cushion' and there is no 'head hair' or 'cushion' in the softness. There is just the pathavi dhatu, just the softness experienced. Gradually we can see that what we take for 'this important body of ours' are really different elements, different rupas. Without such rupas, there'd be no idea of head hair or body at all. Understanding rupas and namas (without selection) as they appear leads to detachment from the idea of self, body, and 'wholes', wouldn't you agree? =============================== Sarah, What you say here is good, IMO, and all true. I only caution against what I think might be the tendency to go too far with it - namely to the point that one says "There is no such thing as hair" or to not go far enough to the point that one says that the rupas I experience as hair are the same as those that you experience as hair. What I end up *taking* for, say, my wife's hair, to narrow the matter a bit, is indeed a mental construct (a.k.a., concept). The reality underlying that - and there IS a reality underlying it - is a huge complex of interrelated conditions, overwhelmingly rupas, though with some cetasikas mixed in (pleasant and unpleasant feeling, recollections, associations etc) all within the namarupic stream called "Howard." Likewise, there is an aggregation of conditions within the namarupic stream I call "my wife" that she calls "her hair." It is a corresponding aggregation, but not at all the same as the one within my namarupic stream. The complex (or aggregation) of conditions within my namarupic stream constitutes the reality of Howard's experience of "my wife's hair," though I don't ordinarily think of it that way. Instead, when not being careful, I think that there is some singular entity, extrinsic to my experience and to the experience of anyone else that is her hair. (The foregoing presumption, an error, I believe, is made by my wife as well.) Commonsense materialists will believe that such an objective perspective, though just an inference, is correct. Phenomenalist Buddhists like me will say that, no, the facts are as expressed above in terms of aggregations of dhammas, and the correspondences among different namarupic streams are due to similar kamma - that is, it is a matter of inter-subjectivity instead of objectivity. With metta, Howard #90397 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 19, 2008 5:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Tales from Big Wave Bay, Hong Kong sarahprocter... Dear Jessica, --- On Thu, 18/9/08, jessicamui wrote: >Dear Sarah, >It is hard to believe our gentle friends become violent and involved in crimes. Like you said, it is the latent tendencies and the "right condition" that triggers the anger, hatred.. I'm sorry to hear about it. ... S: Thanks, Jessica. .... J:> We had a short weekend retreat at Lantau island. We had good time during the retreat for people are like family members that get together once a month to meditate, serve and this time, enjoy the moon cake in candle light with our guest from Myanmar. ... S: Thanks for telling us about it. You mentioned to me (on the telephone) that you had been to Myanmar many times for retreats, but that you weren't allowed to read or ask questions to the monks, so that you appreciate the opportunity to study and discuss the Dhamma now. You also mentioned having listened to all B.Bodhi's Maj. Nikaya talks recently. I'm sure friends here would be interested in any further comments you have on how you value the teachings now and understand 'vipassana'. .... J:> By the way, you told me that you've meditated at Buddha Goya in the early years. Have you met with Munindraji - Deepa Ma's teacher. The guest that we invite is Deepa Ma's niece. ... S: Yes, in 1974/75 I spent about 6 months in Bodh Gaya, living in a Tibetan tent on one rupee a day! I'd travelled overland from England on a shoestring budget (after university) for the purpose of learning more about Buddhism and getting involved in community projects in Bihar, the poorest state of India. Anyway, I ended up attending a retreat with Munindraji, following his (i.e the Mahasi) practise intensely and spending some time with him almost every day during those months in Bodh Gaya. He was always very, very kind to me. During the last 2 or 3 months in particular, almost all the visitors had left B.Gaya (because of the heat and dust storms by then) and I'd often join him for a simple lunch and chat about the teachings and practise. We'd look at some Buddhist books, but also Krishnamurti, Gurdjieff, Carlos Castenada - whatever I was reading at the time. Sometimes other teachers, such as Goenka, would visit him to also ask questions about the teachings and I remember once joining them both for a longish walk down along the river. Munindra used to call me Siila I recall:-). We had occasional correspondence after I left Bodh Gaya and went to stay at a temple in Sri Lanka (also for a few months) and later back to England. I remember his tidy hand-writing, but the letters were mostly to do with me helping to send him a few PTS texts and I don't think I kept them. As I mentioned to you, later (while I was in Sri Lanka as it happens), thanks to Ann (a lurking member here), I listened to a couple of tapes of K.Sujin and read the manuscript of Nina's Ab. in Daily Life and completely dropped the (Mahasi & Goenka) meditation I'd been taught. It was all a kind of overnight 'Yes, yes, this is right, no self, no control, no rules' sort of response. Ann and I then started studying the Visuddhimagga and other texts and I felt for the first time in ages I could freely correspond with family & friends, return to England to help sort out all sorts of family issues, get a job and so on without any conflicts with regard to the practice and path. ... J:>I look forward to seeing you soon. ... S: Likewise - In October while Jon is working in Fiji would suit me well for an initial get-together. Metta, Sarah =========== #90398 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 19, 2008 6:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Tales from Big Wave Bay, Hong Kong sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, --- On Fri, 19/9/08, kenhowardau wrote: >Sorry about the shock, but I know you will (as always) be able to think about the story without being "caught out" by it. ... S: ;-) Oh, we get "caught out" by the stories time and again like everyone else, I assure you. That's why I find it helpful writing here - it reminds me about the clinging to the long story. Like just now, writing to Jessica, but really it's just seeing and thinking now. Nothing but the understanding of these realities matters. --------- K:> That's the way I would like people to think of me: lots and lots of vipaka and functional cittas (one at a time, of course!), interspersed with mildly akusala cittas (some not so mild, perhaps) and, once in a while, a kusala one. >I wouldn't mind that for my epitaph! :-) ... S: :-)) We'll keep it mind:-) Fortunately the archives are being backed up by Connie in case you out-last Yahoo! As you say, that's all Ken H, Sarah or anyone else comes down to....various cittas (and molested rupas!). Metta, Sarah ========= #90399 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 19, 2008 6:11 am Subject: Sri Lanka Revisited, Ch 1, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 1 Dåna. Sri Lanka is a country where dåna is widely practised. The Singhalese are always giving and sharing, they see the value of generosity. Even those who are poor organise dåna for the monks in temples or in their homes. Giving with genuine generosity is dåna, but also at those moments one is not able to give oneself, there can be an opportunity for dåna, namely, for “anumodana dåna”, the appreciation of other people’s good deeds. For us there were many opportunities for anumodana dåna while we were traveling. While we were staying in a hotel in Anurådhapura, we invited each morning for dåna the group of foreign monks who had come from Thailand. They would enter the hotel carrying their bowls and sit down in silence with great discipline. The monks had decided to take only one meal a day. Monks are allowed to have more than one meal if taken before midday, but these monks found that there were many advantages in taking one meal. The “Visuddhimagga” (Ch II) speaks about the “Duthangas”, ascetical practices a monk can undertake in addition to all the rules he has to observe. One of these is the “one sessioner’s practice”. The monk who has undertaken this eats only in one session and does not sit down again for more food. The “Visuddhimagga” (Ch II, 37) mentions the following benefits of this practice: “He has little affliction and little sickness; he has lightness, strength and a happy life; there is no contravening (rules) about food that is not what is left over from a meal; craving for tastes is eliminated; his life conforms to the (principles of) fewness of wishes, and so on.” All the monks of this group were striving earnestly to observe the monks’ síla and to conform to the principles of fewness of wishes. They trained themselves not to engage in worldly talk but to speak only about Dhamma or else to be silent. The other guests of the hotel praised the discipline of this group of monks and one of them left money to be spend on dåna for them. The waiters of the hotel helped offering the food to the monks with great joy and devotion. Dåna is a wholesome act, an act of generosity. But when we give are our motives always pure? Do we sometimes give with selfish motives? In order to know whether our giving is pure generosity or not we should know more about the moments of consciousness which motivate our giving. We are used to paying attention only to the outward appearance of things. We think of people: of the giver and of the receiver, and of the gift itself, but should we not know more about the moments of consciousness which motivate the giving? This is the only way to know what true generosity is. We should learn more about the different moments of consciousness which arise. If we stay ignorant about them we cannot develop wholesomeness. ***** Nina.