#92400 From: "sprlrt" Date: Thu Nov 6, 2008 3:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] More on anatta sprlrt Nama and rupa dhammas arise and fall away instantly and continuously and never one at the time At any given moment (i.e. now) there are at least 8 nama-dhammas together, as in the cakkhu-vinnana vipaka citta and the 7 universal cetasikas that is seeing. All cittas must experience an object, it's its function, and the object of seeing is a rupa dhamma, vanno/visible object, which also arise in a group/kalapa of at least of 8 rupas, the avinibhoga, which includes visible object/vanno. Nama and rupa dhammas are of a different nature, namas have no shape and form and experience objects, rupas last seventeen times longer than nama-dhammas, still an extremely short lifespan and have shape and form and cannot experience anything. And while nama-dhammas blend completely/sampayutta together, making difficult separating the characterist of a single nama-dhamma involved in seeing, rupa dhammas, though arising together in an inseparable group/kalapa, keep separate and distinct/vippayutta their charactericts, allowing nama-dhammas like seeing to experience the rupa that is vanno/visible object without any effort. Alberto #92401 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Nov 6, 2008 5:06 am Subject: Re: Series Survey Quote. scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Regarding: Sujin: "...In reality there are many series of mind-door process cittas which have a pa~n~natti (concept) as object and thus the characteristics of the paramattha dhammas are hidden. One does not know the characteristics of the paramattha dhammas as they really are...when one knows that there are beings, people, or things, there are at such moments mind-door process cittas which have a concept as object." Scott: Can you please mention again how 'door' (dvaara) differs from 'base' (vatthu), and how 'eye door' differs from 'mind door'? I understand that the pasaada ruupa that is eye-base is the 'eye-door' and that bhavanga citta - naama - is the 'mind-door'. I understand that dvaara is where citta and cetasika pass through to meet the object. Sincerely, Scott. #92402 From: "sprlrt" Date: Thu Nov 6, 2008 5:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] More on anatta sprlrt Dear Nina Yes, we take the self/I very seriously, which is one of the main causes we are here in samsara, and a long way from the dhammas, just knowing that I think is a step towards the Path and the dhammas. Alberto PS I'm reading the The Perfections that Lodewijk sent me along with Realities and concepts - thanks very much #92403 From: "connie" Date: Thu Nov 6, 2008 7:20 am Subject: Vism.XVII,311 312 nichiconn see #92391 Path of Purity, pp.705-706: The fixing of the characteristics belonging to ignorance and so on is known as the method of difference. He who sees it rightly as the repeated arising of fresh states, abandons the heresy of eternalism; seeing it wrongly by grasping the different kinds of a state which has fallen into a single continuity as though it had fallen into several continuities, he clings to the heresy of annihilation. Non-occupation is the absence of occupation on the part of ignorance, that it must produce the activities, and on the part of the activities that they must produce consciousness and so on. He who sees it rightly, knowing the absence of a doer, abandons the theory of the self; seeing it wrongly not grasping that, there being no occupation, the cause of ignorance and so on is effected by the order of intrinsic nature, he clings to the heresy of non-action. #92404 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 6, 2008 8:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. nilovg Dear Scott, Op 6-nov-2008, om 14:06 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > Can you please mention again how 'door' (dvaara) differs from > 'base' (vatthu), -------- N: The vatthu is the physical place of origin of citta, and the doorway is the means through which citta experiences an object. ------ > S: and how 'eye door' differs from 'mind door'? I > understand that the pasaada ruupa that is eye-base is the 'eye-door' > and that bhavanga citta - naama - is the 'mind-door'. -------- N: Yes, correct. Only in the case of seeing (and the other sense-door cognitions, hearing etc.) is the same ruupa both base and doorway. As to the other cittas in the eye-door process, the eyesense is still the doorway, but the physical base is the heart-base. The last bhavangacitta before the mind-door process begins is the mind-door. -------- > S: I understand > that dvaara is where citta and cetasika pass through to meet the > object. ------- N: Dvara is not like a door cittas pass through, it is merely a figure denoting that the object comes through that sense, eyesense etc. so that citta can experience it. The sense object impinges on that sense. Adding a passage of Vis.: We read Vis. XIV: 37. 1. Herein, the eye's characteristic is sensitivity of primary elements that is ready for the impact of visible data; or its characteristic is sensitivity of primary elements originated by kamma sourcing from desire to see. Its function is to pick up [an object] among visible data. It is manifested as the footing of eye- consciousness. Its proximate cause is primary elements born of kamma sourcing from desire to see. ------- Tiika: As to the expression desire to see, this refers to seeing in the wrong way, the meaning is craving for visible object. (.....) Ruupesu puggalassa, vi~n~naa.nassa vaa aavi~nchanarasa.m. The picking up (an object) among visible data, by a person or consciousness, is its function *. * N: The eyesense does not strictly speaking select or pick up an object. Because of conditions, citta does, or, in conventional sense a person does. ******* Nina. #92405 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Nov 6, 2008 8:29 am Subject: Re: Buddha recomended Jhana MN107 truth_aerator Hi Scott, >In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Thanks for the reply: > > A: "Sattipatthana help one to lose the personal narrative, drop all > idea of full control or an agent, remove unwholesome qualities based > on what I've said before and enter Jhana." > > Scott: I'm sorry, Alex, but this is senseless. To whom? >What, in your view *is* satipa.t.thaana? Remembering and being mindful of 4 things (kaya,vedana,citta,dhamma) > > A: "I meant superpower mindfulness pregnant with lots of insights." > > Scott: This too, is bordering on massively incomprehensible. What >are you referring to? 'Jhaanic power' is 'superpower mindfulness >pregnant with lots of insights'? I honestly don't think you know >what you are talking about. This doesn't conform to anything I've >read about jhaana. > > A: "It is an excellent way to train the mind to be receptive to the > truths present in every moment and keep it focused on the ultimate. > Satipatthana. With Jhana insights can pop like popcorn." > > Scott: No, sorry, this isn't going anywhere. I am convinced that >the view you represent is not intact at all. > Basic & short answer: Jhana makes your mind ready and capable to see and attain insights that would allow you to stop producing the asavas and become an Arahant. If you don't understand the above short answer then no wonder you didn't understand my post. Best wishes, #92406 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 6, 2008 11:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mindfulness of Death (3) nilovg Dear Han, Op 6-nov-2008, om 0:08 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > I learn a lot from your above comment. I am learning for the first > time about gati, kaala, upadhi, and payoga. I think the example, > you gave above about kaala, is applicable for gati as well. A > person may be born (gati) in a country where there will be war, > unrest and hunger. --------- N: Yes. These four factors can be sampatti, favorable or vipatti, unfavorable. ---------- H: Reflecting on aging as I am subject to aging, have not gone beyond aging, can either entirely abandon or make it weaker the intoxication with youth (yobbana mada). ------ N: This reflecting, I believe, has to go together with awareness of nama and rupa, because such intoxicant is quite strong. Think of what the Sayadaw said: be aware of the rupas of the body. -------- H: But also, I think by reflecting in this way, we are reflecting the universal truth and vipaaka niyaama applicable to all beings and from which no one can get away. This realization of universal truth and vipaaka niyaama can then be combined with the development of understanding as mentioned by you. ------ N: I appreciate your remark, this is very true. Nina. #92407 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 6, 2008 11:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] More on anatta nilovg Dear Alberto, I appreciate your post. I just have an addition about vippayutta. Op 6-nov-2008, om 12:26 heeft sprlrt het volgende geschreven: > And while nama-dhammas blend completely/sampayutta together, making > difficult separating the characterist of a single nama-dhamma involved > in seeing, rupa dhammas, though arising together in an inseparable > group/kalapa, keep separate and distinct/vippayutta their > charactericts, allowing nama-dhammas like seeing to experience the > rupa that is vanno/visible object without any effort. ------- N: Yes, of naama dhammas that arise together it can be said that they are closely connected. Citta and cetasikas arise together at the same physical base, experience the same object and fall away together. They condition one another by way of sampayutta paccaya. As to vippayutta, this is usually said of nama and rupa that condition one another, but never by way of sampayutta. They are not as closely connected as citta and cetasika. Thus, rupa conditions nama by way of vippayutta paccaya, dissociation condition and nama conditions rupa by way of vippayutta condition. Dissociation- condiiton can be prenascent, conascent or post nascent. And we have to rmeember that there are several more conditions playing their part. I gave an example in my Conditions:< When we feel pain we can be reminded that the body-base (bodysense) is rúpa which is dissociated from painful feeling which is nĺma; the body-base conditions the painful feeling by way of prenascent dissociation-condition. When nĺma and rúpa are not distinguished from each other we cling to a “whole” of mind and body, we take them for “mine” or “self” and they seem to last. We keep on thinking of “my sensitive body” and “my painful feeling”. The body-base which is the base for body- consciousness and the accompanying painful feeling, is only an infinitesimal rúpa which arises and falls away. Painful feeling does not last either, it falls away immediately. Thus, when we think of our painful feeling it has gone already. Through satipaěěhĺna one can learn to distinguish the characteristic of nĺma from the characteristic of rúpa, and then we shall be less inclined to think of a self who feels pain. > The rupas arising in a kalapa condition one another by way of conascence. They have, as you say, different characteristics and when conditions are right only one of these can impinge on an appropriate doorway so that citta can experience it. ------- Nina. #92408 From: "Jennelle" Date: Thu Nov 6, 2008 9:34 am Subject: just curious.. jennntom I was just curious if someone could help me. I have some questions that need to be answered. I would like them to be answered by someone who actually practices the religion as opposed to someone just researching it. Can anyone tell me the answers to these questions about Buddhism? What are the main holidays that you participate in? Are there any specific things that one cannot do versus another? How close knit is family? Do women have the same rights as men? Are there certain clothes that you can or are not allowed to wear? What type of prayer do you practice in when doing the Buddhist religion? What is education like for people who study or practice this religion? Is religion practiced a lot in schools? Who do your prayers go to? If there was one religion you had to compare the Islamic religion to which one would be the closest in comparison? What are your traditions that you have in your religion? How has religion shaped or changed who you are in your life? What are your challenges, if any, to practicing this particular religion? #92409 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Nov 6, 2008 6:41 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: No control (its a coping mechanism) kenhowardau Hi Howard, Sarah and all, Apologies, everyone, for my antisocial silence this past week or so. I have, at least, been reading all the posts. Butting in on this conversation, if I may: -------------- Howard: > Sarah, I appreciate your posting this. I suspect that much of what I see in this story - of intentional action & self-training -------------- Hang on, Howard, let's not presume the story is one of "intentional action & self-training." Using the word "intentional" to denote some kind of control over dhammas, I see nothing intentional in this or any other sutta. The same applies to "self-training," if it is taken to mean the training of a permanent - or lasting - being. Conventional language not withstanding, this sutta and every other sutta is about right understanding of conditioned dhammas. Suttas never have an ordinary, run-of-the-mill, meaning. --------------------------- H: > (by a boy, no less!), of the efficacy of kayagata-sati, and of purposefully setting up of auspicious conditions, including maintaining quiet & non-interruption by devas and even by the Buddha while the child was at a critical stage of meditating, emphasizing the need for special, guarded circumstances supporting meditation (and not just at "anytime") is interpreted by you in some fashion different from me. And I'm also sure you knew how I and others would interpret this material -and so, I applaud you for presenting this nonetheless (without comment of your own, in fact)! ---------------------------- We can't expect to Sarah to be holding our hands every time we read a conventionally worded sutta. :-) Each of us has to develop his or her our own right understanding. Ken H #92410 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Nov 6, 2008 7:15 pm Subject: Re: Buddha recomended Jhana MN107 scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Thanks for the reply: A: "[Satipa.t.thaana is] Remembering and being mindful of 4 things (kaya,vedana,citta,dhamma)" Scott: Let me quote from A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas, Kh. Sujin (pp. 316-317): "The word 'satipa.t.thaana' has three meanings: 1. The objects sati is aware of, thus, a paramattha dhamma, either a naama dhamma or a ruupa dhamma. These are classified as the four satipa.t.thaanas. 2. Sati cetasika that arises together with kaamaavacara citta accompanied by pa~n~naa (~naa.na sampayutta), and which is aware of the objects of mindfulness, i.e., the four satipa.t.thaanas. 3. The Path the Sammaasambuddha and the ariyan disciples have developed." A: "Basic & short answer: Jhana makes your mind ready and capable to see and attain insights that would allow you to stop producing the asavas and become an Arahant." Scott: Jhaana is the development of concentration. Do you mean to suggest that, while absorbed in jhaana, one can 'see and attain insights'? A: "If you don't understand the above short answer then no wonder you didn't understand my post." Scott: It might occur, Alex, to one giving a view, that disagreement doesn't necessarily mean lack of understanding. To suggest that disagreement is due to a reader's misunderstanding is only evidence of the high regard one has for a given view. Such a regard is neither here nor there, but to suggest a reader simply doesn't understand is not, in my opinion, a useful discussion tool. A more useful approach would be to back up one's thesis with any well-reasoned argument other than the pedantic and oft resorted to ad hominem. The rote and repetitive referencing of every sutta that mentions jhaana or samatha or samaadhi is not satifactory as a discussion device either, in my opinion. In this case, it is my opinion that the view presented by you regarding jhaana is fragmented, inaccurate, based largely on emotion and dogmatism, founded in false-jhaana and wildly misunderstood sutta passages, and hardly participates in a rational consideration of a complex and deep aspect of consciousness which, as I understand it, the Buddha was at pains to redefine. In fact, the view you represent trivializes and popularizes jhaana to an extent that, to me, diverges greatly from the respect and importance it deserves. The thesis I align myself with is that jhaana, for the ordinary person living the ordinary life, is beyond reach. Its pursuit by ordinary folks seems very much to be a pursuit of an ideal of what 'a buddhist' must do or appear to be doing, and hence, very much related to identity and some odd form of peer pressure. The sutta (MN 107) outlines the need for the development of many other mental factors to a high degree before even considering developing jhaana. Rabid proselyting about jhaana, fervent inciting to jhaana, delighting in the number of retreats attended, all the excitement and craving for jhaana, talk of rich experiences and insights while 'in jhaana' - none of these do a thing to convince me in favour of the modern wrong view regarding jhaana. To the contrary, I find it all to be not jhaana and highly off-putting. Sincerely, Scott. #92411 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 6, 2008 2:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: No control (its a coping mechanism) upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/6/2008 9:41:42 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: -------------- Howard: > Sarah, I appreciate your posting this. I suspect that much of what I see in this story - of intentional action & self-training -------------- Hang on, Howard, let's not presume the story is one of "intentional action & self-training." ------------------------------------------ Howard: I spoke of "What I see in this story." It IS exactly what I see in it. It is my right to see it as I see it. You say that I should "hang on" and say "let's not presume the story is one of 'intentional action & self-training'." You are free to presume or not presume whatever you wish. I merely stated what I see in this story. It is my right to do so - and I don't intend to hang on. ------------------------------------------ Using the word "intentional" to denote some kind of control over dhammas, I see nothing intentional in this or any other sutta. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Your prerogative. ------------------------------------------- The same applies to "self-training," if it is taken to mean the training of a permanent - or lasting - being. ------------------------------------------ Howard: To put it mildly, I'm tiring of having words put in my mouth and my thoughts second-guessed. You say "if it is taken to mean the training of a permanent - or lasting - being." Well, it is not so taken by me. You know darn well that it isn't, and there is no point in your speaking this way if you have a decent regard for facts. It is tiresome, Ken. I don't enjoy it. =============================== With metta, Howard #92412 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Nov 6, 2008 8:38 pm Subject: Re: No control (its a coping mechanism) kenhowardau Hi Howard, ------------ <. . .> H: > You say "if it is taken to mean the training of a permanent - or lasting - being." Well, it is not so taken by me. You know darn well that it isn't, ------------- Here's the way I see it: The big question is, 'How can there be a world without lasting beings?' There is only one answer. Therefore, if any two people disagree on precisely what that answer is then one (or both) of those people must be wrong. One of them must still be thinking in terms of a lasting being. - even though he is trying very hard not to. There's no shame in it. For this reason, I have no problems with being called wrong with regard to the Dhamma. To reiterate: There is only one Middle Way; if there is the slightest disagreement as to what that way is then someone must be wrong. Someone must (unwittingly in our cases) be falling into the trap of either eternity belief or annihilation belief. Ken H PS: There might be a way of discussing Dhamma without saying "there is no self" in every second sentence, but there is I haven't found it yet. #92413 From: han tun Date: Thu Nov 6, 2008 8:46 pm Subject: Mindfulness of Death (4) hantun1 Dear James, Phil, Nina, Sarah, Jon, Howard, Lukas, Before I continue, I would like to reiterate why I am writing these series. Previously, I had no intention to do so. It was only because my good friend James asked me and Nina how we feel about death, and how we consider our own deaths, etc. As such, I am writing *my* own attitude towards old age and death and what I am doing about it. I do not claim that what I am doing is the correct thing. I am not giving advice to anyone, and I am not seeking advice. If someone gives me advice with cetanaa, I will welcome it with gratitude and respect, but I will not change my ways. I have said that the name of the title of the subject [Mindfulness of Death] might be a misnomer, because I do not follow exactly what is in the books with regard to Mindfulness of Death. For example, in Vis. VIII,4, under Mindfulness of Death, it is stated: [One who wants to develop this should go into solitary retreat and exercise attention wisely in this way: ‘Death will take place; the life faculty will be interrupted’, or ‘Death, death’ and so on.] But I do not do that. What I do with regard to Death is in accordance with the Buddha’s teachings in AN 5.57 Upajjhatthana Sutta, [Pa~ncimaani bhikkhave .thaanaani abhi.nha.m paccavekkhitabbaani …] with the emphasis on the Pali word paccavekkhana which means consideration, attention, reflection, contemplation, reviewing. So when I study other suttas as well, with regard to death, I apply paccavekkhana. I apply satipa.t.thaana only to breath meditation. If the application of paccavekkhana without satipa.t.thaana is not useful, so be it. If what I am writing is not in line with the objectives of DSG forum, the Moderators may please tell me so, and I will stop it immediately. Having said that, I will take up another sutta which I like very much. AN 6.19 Maranassati Sutta Mindfulness of Death (1) Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.019.than.html In the sutta, the Buddha said about the benefits of mindfulness of death as follows. The Blessed One said, "Mindfulness of death, when developed and pursued, is of great fruit and great benefit. It gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its final end. Therefore you should develop mindfulness of death." Mara.nassati bhikkhave bhaavitaa bahuliikataa mahapphalaa hoti mahaanisamsaa amatogadhaa amatapariyosaanaa bhaavetha no tumhe bhikkhave mara.nassati. The Buddha then asked the monks how they developed the mindfulness of death. Of the various answers given by the monks, the Buddha said in praise of the following. [But whoever develops mindfulness of death, thinking, 'O, that I might live for the interval that it takes to swallow having chewed up one morsel of food... for the interval that it takes to breathe out after breathing in, or to breathe in after breathing out, that I might attend to the Blessed One's instructions. I would have accomplished a great deal' — they are said to dwell heedfully. They develop mindfulness of death acutely for the sake of ending the effluents.] Han: This should be the correct way to develop the mindfulness of death, namely, to attend to the Buddha’s instructions all the time thinking that the death can come any minute. One should live to attend to the Buddha’s teachings and not for any other reason. I have always in mind this sutta and the Buddha’s instructions contained therein. However, thinking in terms of worldly views, as a puthujjana, I have also another consideration for the sudden death. Many people are afraid of coronary disease which can cause sudden death. But for me I would welcome it. One day I have to die and I want to die of heart attack. In early 1980’s I had a heart attack with the complete blocking of two smaller arteries with permanent damage in the form of scars (infarct). Those days, I was living recklessly and heedlessly. I did not even remember when I had that attack. Now, whenever I take ECG of the heart, the infarcts remain there to be seen. My doctor friends advised me many things – to undergo various investigations, such as cardiac catheterization and Contrast MRI, and depending on the findings to do balloon angioplasty and stenting or bypass surgery. I did not do any of these sorts. I just let my heart run its natural course. It may be correct when they say about certain doctors, i.e., doctors often are the worst patients! Respectfully, Han P.S. James, please tell me when I have said enough and my writings become boring. I will stop. #92414 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Nov 6, 2008 8:59 pm Subject: Knowing is the Ground State: Thai Hard Core Oak! bhikkhu0 Friends: Thai Hard Core Oak: Venerable Luang Pu! The Mind sent Outside is the Cause of Suffering. The Effect of the Mind sent Outside is Suffering. The Mind seeing the Mind is the Path: The Noble Way! The Effect of Mind seeing Mind, is the End of Suffering. No matter how much one thinks, one will not know directly! Only when one stops thinking, will one know directly... Yet, one still depends on thinking, so as to know...!!! When mind is all quiet, one will come to know directly. Whatever one really knows, it is from watching one's own mind! Knowing is the ground state of the empty mind, which is bright, pure, quiet, calm, not fabricating, not searching, not urging, neither possessed nor attracted by anything at all... _________________ He does, yet he doesn't: Do you still have anger? Yes, but I don't pick it up! _________________ The Less the better: Stop Thinking, & Stop Urging! The Poorer one is, the more Happiness one enjoys... Thai King Bhumipol presents a gift to Venerable Dun Atulo Thera. Source: Gifts He Left Behind: The Dhamma Legacy of Ajaan Dune Atulo: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/dune/giftsheleft.html Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) http://What-Buddha-Said.net The Ancient Theravadin Tradition of Elders! #92415 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 6, 2008 10:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: No control (its a coping mechanism) nilovg Dear Ken, Howard and all, hang on :-)) The now upcoming posts on Visuddhimagga and Tiika that will be the last ones of Ch XVII, will be very interesting as to this trap. They deal with the Middle Way. Nina. Op 7-nov-2008, om 5:38 heeft kenhowardau het volgende geschreven: > Someone must (unwittingly in our cases) be > falling into the trap of either eternity belief or annihilation > belief. #92416 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 12:56 am Subject: more on anatta. vippayutta. nilovg Dear Alberto, I was not complete as to sampayutta and vippayutta. In the context of the classification of kusala cittas and akusala cittas these terms are also used. Kusala citta can be associated with pa~n~naa or dissociated from it. Akusala citta rooted in lobha can be associated with wrong view or dissociated from it. Akusala citta rooted in moha is called: associated with doubt or associated with confusion. Nina. #92417 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 1:12 am Subject: More on aanupubbikatha.m (a progressive talk) sarahprocter... Dear Han, (Jon & all), In the Udaana commentary, Sona chapter, #3 "Leper", about Suppabuddha, there are a lot of details on the progressive talk (aanupubbikatha.m), which we've already discussed and referred to. I'd like to quote some more, relevant to our discussions on this topic as I found myself reflecting further on it as I waited for Jon's return last night after his month's work in Fiji (with lots of attachment, of course!): ".....'Anyone capable of perceiving Dhamma (bhabbo dhamma.m vi~n~naatu.m)': anyone capable of attaining Dhamma in the form of the paths and their fruitions, meaning anyone endowed with the potential. 'This occurred (etad ahosi)': this occurred, viz. 'Although this Suppabuddha has been born as such after committing an offence against the Paccekabuddha Tagarasikhi, his potential as regards the paths and their fruitions nonetheless flashes forth within his heart like a golden ring covered by dust; he can easily be made to perceive', for which reason 'This one is, in the present case, one capable of perceivig Dhamma' was said. " 'A progressive talk (aanupubbikatha.m)': a talk (that proceeds) successively such that (talk) on morality is immediately preceded by that on almsgiving, (talk) on heaven is immediately preceded by that on morality, (talk) on the path is immediately preceded by that on heaven; for the Lord, having in the first instance indicated a sweet taste (assaada.m) together with its root-cause, then makes manifest by various means the peril (therein), in order to separate beings therefrom, and then finally indicates, to those whose hearts have been shocked through hearing of that peril(aadiinavasavanena), the absence of the cycle, opening with an explanation of the virtues of renunciation." S: I was interested to know why the section on 'heaven' was included after the sections on almsgiving (daanakatha.m) and morality (siilakatha.m)and this is what the text states: "...Moreover, he talked talk on heaven immediately preceded by that on morality in order to indicate that it is dependent upon such morality that that heaven is obtained. 'Talk on heaven (saggakatha.m)': talk associated with the virtues of heaven such as 'Heaven is a name for that which is desirable, for that which is pleasing, for that which is charming. Permanently here (there is) sporting, permanent the excellences obtained: the devas belonging to the realm of the Four Great Kings acquire heavenly happiness, heavenly excellence, for ninety hundred thousand years, those of the Thirty-three for three ko.tis of years plus sixty hundred thousand years (besides)' and so on, for the mouth fails to suffice when Buddhas talk on heavenly excellence. "And this also is said: 'In countless ways, monks, could I talk talk on heaven' and so forth. Having thus enticed him with talk on heaven together with its root-cause, he next, as though severing the trunk of the elephant he had just decorated, talked of the peril, the degradation, the corruption of sense-desires after the manner of 'Of little sweet taste are sense-desires, of much dukkha, of much despair' more so is the peril herein' (M i 130) and so on with the aim of showing even such heaven to be impermanent, unstable, (and) that yearning and lust ought not to be exercised in that direction. Herein: " 'The peril (aadiinava.m)': the blemish. 'The degradation (okaara.m)': that which is in its own nature despicable, meaning that which is, in its own nature, base is a thing to be pursued by those other than the best (of folk), not a thing to be pursued by the best (of folk). 'The corruption (sa"nkilesam)': the defiling within sa.msaara of beings by way of these, for which same reason 'Truly, sir, do beings become defiled' was said." S: Having talked about the danger of sense-desires, "severing the trunk of the elephant he had just decorated", the talk continues with the advantages of renunciation and when the listener was receptive, in this case Suppabuddha the leper, the teaching on the Four Noble Truths - 'Dukkha, uprising, cessation (and the) path'. The texts refers to Suppabuddha's "swift completion of vipassanaa, his sharpness of isnsight, his ease of practice, and his rapid superknowledge." The simile of cleaning cloth is given and I like the following elaboration of it: "(Suppabuddha's) heart is to be regarded as the cloth, his heart's being corrupted by the stains of lust and so on as the cloth's being defiled by adventitious stains, the progressive talk as the washboard, faith as the water, his initiation of energy with respect to the heart's cleansing via the faith-method and so on after first moistening it in the stream of faith and then loosening its blemishes by way of mindfulness, concentration and insight as the business of washing the cloth after first successively moistening it with water and then scouring the black specks with cow-dung or lye, suppression of the defilements by means of that initiation of energy as the departure of the black specks in the cloth by means of that business, the ariyan path as the colouring, (whilst) the thorough cleansing, by means of the path, of his heart, in which the defilements have been suppressed, as the shining bright state of the cloth that has been cleaned in that way." S: I'm thinking of the washing of garments by the sides of the rivers in India and other places and how all the factors have to be in place for the stains to be removed. Similarly, not only do we need to hear, but there have to be many other factors in place, particularly the wise attention and consideration, in order for insight to develop and for there to be detachment from what is experienced through the senses at this very moment. Thank you for helping me to reflect a little more on this topic. Metta, Sarah ======= #92418 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 1:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: No control (its a coping mechanism) sarahprocter... Hi Howard & all, --- On Wed, 5/11/08, upasaka@... wrote: S:> Verse 80, translated by Daw Mya Tin: "VI (5)The Story of Samanera Pandita <...> >The Buddha then spoke in verse as follows: >Verse 80. Farmers (lit., makers of irrigation canals ) channel the water; fletchers straighten the arrow; carpenters work the timber; the Wise tame themselves. " ***** ============ ========= ========= ===== H:> Sarah, I appreciate your posting this. I suspect that much of what I see in this story - of intentional action & self-training (by a boy, no less!), of the efficacy of kayagata-sati, and of purposefully setting up of auspicious conditions, including maintaining quiet & non-interruption by devas and even by the Buddha while the child was at a critical stage of meditating, emphasizing the need for special, guarded circumstances supporting meditation (and not just at "anytime") is interpreted by you in some fashion different from me. And I'm also sure you knew how I and others would interpret this material -and so, I applaud you for presenting this nonetheless (without comment of your own, in fact)! .... S: Thanks Howard. Yes, I'd thought of adding some comments of my own, but as you suggest, we're all going to read such stories and accounts according to our understanding of the teachings. There's no point in urging others to read and think as we do. Having said that, of course, I consider any wise reflection such as in the story by young Pandita or by Suppabuddha the leper, to be by accumulations conditioned by those in the past and not by and Self purposely doing anything. There were conditions for him to become an arahat with the highest Patisambhidhas (special attainments) and the Buddha alone understood the 'auspicious conditions' as you put it. The more we appreciate about conditioned dhammas and anatta, the less inclination will there be to read any tale or sutta as being about anything else. Thanks for your feedback. Metta, Sarah ======== #92419 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 2:07 am Subject: Sri Lanka Revisited, Ch 6, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, What is mindfulness, sati? There are many levels of sati. Sati is a sobhana cetasika (beautiful mental factor) that arises with each sobhana citta. When we are generous sati accompanies the kusala citta and it is non-forgetful of kusala. When we observe síla sati accompanies the kusala citta. When there are moments of calm, for example, when we have loving kindness, there is sati so that we are intent on other people’s happiness. Sati of vipassanĺ is of a different level and it has a different object. Sati of vipassanĺ is mindful of realities, it is mindful of one reality at a time which appears now, through one of the six doors. We are usually living in the world of conventional truth. When we, for example, look at a sunset we are quite absorbed in what we perceive, we are lost in the shape and form and in the details of things. We believe that what we perceive really exists. When sati arises we wake up from our dreams. There is, for a short moment, non-forgetfulness of whatever reality appears at that moment, be it kusala or akusala, pleasant or unpleasant. We may believe that we should not think of concepts, but thinking is a reality and sati can be aware of it. Sati arises when there are the right conditions for its arising. Association with the good friend in Dhamma, listening to the Dhamma, considering it thoroughly for oneself and knowing what the object of right understanding is can condition the arising of sati. At the moment of sati there can be a beginning of learning and noticing the characteristics of the different realities which appear. Sati is not an aim in itself, right understanding of realities is the goal. Just sati without the study of realities will not lead to the growth of right understanding. ****** Nina. #92420 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 2:13 am Subject: Series Quote Survey nilovg Dear friends, As to the example of a picture of grapes and real grapes, is there any difference when one touches them and there is the experience of tangible object through the bodysense? Is the element of hardness not the same in both cases? The element of hardness originates from different factors and this is the condition that there are different degrees of hardness and softness. Hardness is a reality which appears through the bodysense, no matter whether there is a picture of grapes or real grapes. However, the grapes in the picture do not have the flavour of real grapes. Real grapes can be recognised because there are different types of rupas (physical phenomena) which arise together. Flavour is one type of rupa, odour is another type of rupa. Cold or heat, softness or hardness, motion or pressure, these are all different types of rupa which arise together and fall away very rapidly and are then succeeded by other rupas. Thus we think of a concept of a thing which does not seem to fall away. In reality the rupas that constitute grapes such as cold or heat, hard ness or softness, or flavour, fall away. Each rupa lasts only as long as seventeen moments of citta, no matter which colour, sound, or other type of rupa it may be. Pa~n~na (wisdom) should consider realities and know them one at a time, it should resolve the whole which is remembered by sa~n~na (mental factor of remembrance or perception) into different elements. Thus it can be known that what one takes for a particular thing are in reality only different paramattha dhammas, each with their own characteristic, which arise and fall away together. When we join them together and have an image of a whole there are mind-door process cittas which have a concept of a whole, gana pa~n~natti, as object. Question: If it is known through the mind-door that there is a pen, is that right or wrong? Sujin: It is not wrong. The object at that moment is a concept which is included in dhammarammana (mind door object). However, pa~n~na should realize the difference between the mind-door process and the eye-door process. When one does not develop pa~n~na one cannot distinguish the sense-door process and the mind-door process from each other and then one believes that there are beings, people and different things. --------- Nina. #92421 From: han tun Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 2:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] More on aanupubbikatha.m (a progressive talk) hantun1 Dear Sarah, I cannot express adequately how much I am grateful to you for giving me the detailed explanation of aanupubbikatha.m (a progressive talk). Sayadaw U Nyanissara also talked about "severing the trunk of the elephant he had just decorated" in his talk on the topic. At first I thought he had invented the story. Now only, I know that it was taken from the Commentary. Thank you very much, Sarah. I also like very much the simile of cleaning cloth. As regards the 'talk on heaven (saggakatha. m)', it reminds me of the carrot and stick. Of the six kathaas, Sagga kathaa, is like a carrot. If you do daana and siila, you will get rebirth in devas realm as a reward or a carrot. Then the stick is shown in the form of aadiinava kathaa. The "severing the trunk of the elephant he had just decorated" is the stick. As I like your post so much, I do not trim it down and the full text is shown below. Respectfully, Han --- On Fri, 11/7/08, sarah abbott wrote: From: sarah abbott Subject: [dsg] More on aanupubbikatha.m (a progressive talk) To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, November 7, 2008, 4:12 PM Dear Han, (Jon & all), In the Udaana commentary, Sona chapter, #3 "Leper", about Suppabuddha, there are a lot of details on the progressive talk (aanupubbikatha. m), which we've already discussed and referred to. I'd like to quote some more, relevant to our discussions on this topic as I found myself reflecting further on it as I waited for Jon's return last night after his month's work in Fiji (with lots of attachment, of course!): ".....'Anyone capable of perceiving Dhamma (bhabbo dhamma.m vi~n~naatu.m) ': anyone capable of attaining Dhamma in the form of the paths and their fruitions, meaning anyone endowed with the potential. 'This occurred (etad ahosi)': this occurred, viz. 'Although this Suppabuddha has been born as such after committing an offence against the Paccekabuddha Tagarasikhi, his potential as regards the paths and their fruitions nonetheless flashes forth within his heart like a golden ring covered by dust; he can easily be made to perceive', for which reason 'This one is, in the present case, one capable of perceivig Dhamma' was said. " 'A progressive talk (aanupubbikatha. m)': a talk (that proceeds) successively such that (talk) on morality is immediately preceded by that on almsgiving, (talk) on heaven is immediately preceded by that on morality, (talk) on the path is immediately preceded by that on heaven; for the Lord, having in the first instance indicated a sweet taste (assaada.m) together with its root-cause, then makes manifest by various means the peril (therein), in order to separate beings therefrom, and then finally indicates, to those whose hearts have been shocked through hearing of that peril(aadiinavasava nena), the absence of the cycle, opening with an explanation of the virtues of renunciation. " S: I was interested to know why the section on 'heaven' was included after the sections on almsgiving (daanakatha. m) and morality (siilakatha. m)and this is what the text states: "...Moreover, he talked talk on heaven immediately preceded by that on morality in order to indicate that it is dependent upon such morality that that heaven is obtained. 'Talk on heaven (saggakatha. m)': talk associated with the virtues of heaven such as 'Heaven is a name for that which is desirable, for that which is pleasing, for that which is charming. Permanently here (there is) sporting, permanent the excellences obtained: the devas belonging to the realm of the Four Great Kings acquire heavenly happiness, heavenly excellence, for ninety hundred thousand years, those of the Thirty-three for three ko.tis of years plus sixty hundred thousand years (besides)' and so on, for the mouth fails to suffice when Buddhas talk on heavenly excellence. "And this also is said: 'In countless ways, monks, could I talk talk on heaven' and so forth. Having thus enticed him with talk on heaven together with its root-cause, he next, as though severing the trunk of the elephant he had just decorated, talked of the peril, the degradation, the corruption of sense-desires after the manner of 'Of little sweet taste are sense-desires, of much dukkha, of much despair' more so is the peril herein' (M i 130) and so on with the aim of showing even such heaven to be impermanent, unstable, (and) that yearning and lust ought not to be exercised in that direction. Herein: " 'The peril (aadiinava.m) ': the blemish. 'The degradation (okaara.m)': that which is in its own nature despicable, meaning that which is, in its own nature, base is a thing to be pursued by those other than the best (of folk), not a thing to be pursued by the best (of folk). 'The corruption (sa"nkilesam) ': the defiling within sa.msaara of beings by way of these, for which same reason 'Truly, sir, do beings become defiled' was said." S: Having talked about the danger of sense-desires, "severing the trunk of the elephant he had just decorated", the talk continues with the advantages of renunciation and when the listener was receptive, in this case Suppabuddha the leper, the teaching on the Four Noble Truths - 'Dukkha, uprising, cessation (and the) path'. The texts refers to Suppabuddha' s "swift completion of vipassanaa, his sharpness of isnsight, his ease of practice, and his rapid superknowledge. " The simile of cleaning cloth is given and I like the following elaboration of it: "(Suppabuddha' s) heart is to be regarded as the cloth, his heart's being corrupted by the stains of lust and so on as the cloth's being defiled by adventitious stains, the progressive talk as the washboard, faith as the water, his initiation of energy with respect to the heart's cleansing via the faith-method and so on after first moistening it in the stream of faith and then loosening its blemishes by way of mindfulness, concentration and insight as the business of washing the cloth after first successively moistening it with water and then scouring the black specks with cow-dung or lye, suppression of the defilements by means of that initiation of energy as the departure of the black specks in the cloth by means of that business, the ariyan path as the colouring, (whilst) the thorough cleansing, by means of the path, of his heart, in which the defilements have been suppressed, as the shining bright state of the cloth that has been cleaned in that way." S: I'm thinking of the washing of garments by the sides of the rivers in India and other places and how all the factors have to be in place for the stains to be removed. Similarly, not only do we need to hear, but there have to be many other factors in place, particularly the wise attention and consideration, in order for insight to develop and for there to be detachment from what is experienced through the senses at this very moment. Thank you for helping me to reflect a little more on this topic. Metta, Sarah ======= #92422 From: "sprlrt" Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 3:20 am Subject: Rupa khandha sprlrt Dear Nina, thanks, you're right, the term vippayutta/dissociated can't relate to rupa dhammas only Many groups/kalapas of rupas arise and fall away together, with the rupa akasa/space delimiting each, and each single kalapa of rupas that arises, both of animate beings and inanimate things, includes the rupa that is vanno/visble object, along with the other seven rupas that constituites the pure octad group, the avinibhoga/inseparable rupas. This group also includes, apart from vanno, other 5 of the 7 visaya rupa, the rupa that can be experienced through one of the 5 sense door, but not the rupa that is sadda/sound, which is produced either by utu/teperature, one of the 8 inseparable rupas, as nonads (8 avinibhoga plus sadda), or by citta (i.e. by nama dhammas) as groups of 10 rupas, decads (8 avinibhoga, sadda plus vaci-vinnati/verbal intimation, a rupa without a specific characteristic/asabhava). Ours is the plane/bhumi of both rupa and nama khandhas, and the rupa khandha perpetuetes itself both by its own properties (utu/temperature and oja/nutrition, two rupas of the 8 inseparable group) and also, in sentient beings, through the 4 nama-khandha (kammaja and cittaja rupa) Groups of rupas which have kamma as samutthana/origination are the ones and the only ones that include, along with the 8 avinibhoga rupas, the jivitindriya rupa, the rupa of life, always. Alberto #92423 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 4:51 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Thanks for the reply: N: "The vatthu is the physical place of origin of citta, and the doorway is the means through which citta experiences an object." Scott: Dvaara designates the fact of the arising of citta which experiences the object? In other words, a term for the confluence of elements which is seeing? N: "Yes, correct. Only in the case of seeing (and the other sense-door cognitions, hearing etc.) is the same ruupa both base and doorway. As to the other cittas in the eye-door process, the eyesense is still the doorway, but the physical base is the heart-base. The last bhavangacitta before the mind-door process begins is the mind-door." Scott: So, as to seeing for example, pasaada-ruupa of the eye is base for certain of the cittas arising in the eye-door process, but not all. Which, of the following, have eye-sense as base, and which have heart-base as physical base: one adverting consciousness, two eye consciousness, two receiving consciousness, three investigating consciousness, and one determining consciousness? Are the apperceptional javannas of the eye-door process based in heart-base? N: "Dvara is not like a door cittas pass through, it is merely a figure denoting that the object comes through that sense, eyesense etc. so that citta can experience it. The sense object impinges on that sense." Scott: Just a way of explaining, then. N: "...Its proximate cause is primary elements born of kamma sourcing from desire to see. Tiika: As to the expression desire to see, this refers to seeing in the wrong way, the meaning is craving for visible object....Ruupesu puggalassa, vi~n~naa.nassa vaa aavi~nchanarasa.m. The picking up (an object) among visible data, by a person or consciousness, is its function *...The eyesense does not strictly speaking select or pick up an object. Because of conditions, citta does, or, in conventional sense a person does." Scott: Can you say how this fits with the fact that moment of seeing is vipaaka? Are these the conditions in this case? And then one says conventionally that a person selects, when in fact what is seen is a result of kamma? Sincerely, Scott. #92424 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 12:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: No control (its a coping mechanism) upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/6/2008 11:39:22 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ------------ <. . .> H: > You say "if it is taken to mean the training of a permanent - or lasting - being." Well, it is not so taken by me. You know darn well that it isn't, ------------- Here's the way I see it: The big question is, 'How can there be a world without lasting beings?' There is only one answer. ---------------------------------------------- Howard I don't know what you are talking about. I believe in no lasting beings. I believe that interrelated dhammas cluster together in distinguishable, ever-changing vortices that go by various names, and so do you, else you wouldn't be conversing with me. I utterly reject the existence of separate, permanent "beings," and, again, you KNOW that I do! --------------------------------------------------- Therefore, if any two people ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Any two WHAT??? ------------------------------------------------ disagree on precisely what that answer is then one (or both) of those people must be wrong. One of them must still be thinking in terms of a lasting being. - even though he is trying very hard not to. There's no shame in it. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: There is some "shame" in having views so fixed that the facts escape one's attention. You set up a straw man and then set him afire. As I said before, I find this tiresome. --------------------------------------------------- For this reason, I have no problems with being called wrong with regard to the Dhamma. To reiterate: There is only one Middle Way; if there is the slightest disagreement as to what that way is then someone must be wrong. Someone must (unwittingly in our cases) be falling into the trap of either eternity belief or annihilation belief. Ken H PS: There might be a way of discussing Dhamma without saying "there is no self" in every second sentence, but there is I haven't found it yet. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: There might be a way of discussing the Dhamma as friends and not confrontationally. I happily see that way engaged in all the time by Nina. I wish you would take a cue from her in this. ============================= With metta, Howard #92425 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 12:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mindfulness of Death (4) upasaka_howard Hi, Han - In a message dated 11/6/2008 11:46:18 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, hantun1@... writes: The Blessed One said, "Mindfulness of death, when developed and pursued, is of great fruit and great benefit. It gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its final end. Therefore you should develop mindfulness of death." ============================== I am very grateful for your series. It is a kindness to us all. Contemplation of death, our own and that of loved ones, puts us face to face with things we are afraid to face: irretrievable loss, our relentless clinging, the unstoppability of change - especially of decay and cessation, and our ultimately aloneness. In the process of such contemplation, if it is our practice to be introspectively aware of body and mind, we can notice the tightening up of both of these as these difficult subjects are considered, and we can learn to let that tension go. The practice of contemplation of death, if engaged in well, can be transformative in a positive way, enabling relinquishment even to the extent, as the Buddha puts it, of providing "a footing in the Deathless." With metta, Howard #92426 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 12:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: No control (its a coping mechanism) upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Ken) - In a message dated 11/7/2008 2:00:11 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear Ken, Howard and all, hang on :-)) ------------------------------------- Howard: LOL! ------------------------------------- The now upcoming posts on Visuddhimagga and Tiika that will be the last ones of Ch XVII, will be very interesting as to this trap. They deal with the Middle Way. -------------------------------------- Howard: Good. :-) ------------------------------------ Nina. ======================= With metta, Howard #92427 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 7:17 am Subject: Re: Series Quote Survey buddhatrue Hi Nina, I don't want to be argumentative; I just want to ask for clarification. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Question: If it is known through the mind-door that there > is a pen, is that right or wrong? > > Sujin: It is not wrong. The object at that moment is a > concept which is included in dhammarammana (mind door object). > However, pa~n~na should realize the difference between the mind- door > process and the eye-door process. When one does not develop pa~n~na > one cannot distinguish the sense-door process and the mind-door > process from each other and then one believes that there are beings, > people and different things. James: I am really confused by this answer. The question was: if it is known through the mind-door that there is a pen, is that right or wrong? In other words, is there a pen? Does it exist? First, the answer is yes and then the answer is no. I don't get it. Does this have something to do with what Ken H. wrote to Howard recently about "lasting beings"? Is this answer saying that impermanent pens exist but lasting pens don't exist, or something along those lines? Do you believe that impermanent beings exist or that no beings of any sort exist? Metta, James ps. If you choose to respond, please keep it simple with minimal Pali for my simple mind. :-) Thanks #92428 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 7:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. nilovg Dear Scott, Op 7-nov-2008, om 13:51 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > ...Its proximate cause is primary elements born of kamma > sourcing from desire to see. Tiika: As to the expression desire to > see, this refers to seeing in the wrong way, the meaning is craving > for visible object....Ruupesu puggalassa, vi~n~naa.nassa vaa > aavi~nchanarasa.m. The picking up (an object) among visible data, by > a person or consciousness, is its function *...The eyesense does not > strictly speaking select or pick up an object. Because of conditions, > citta does, or, in conventional sense a person does." > > Scott: Can you say how this fits with the fact that moment of seeing > is vipaaka? Are these the conditions in this case? And then one says > conventionally that a person selects, when in fact what is seen is a > result of kamma? ------- N: Not what is seen is result of kamma, but the seeing-consciousness itself is the result of kamma. We are born in a sensuous plane, and this is conditioned. We have craving for all sense objects. Kamma produces eyesense so that there are conditions for the arising of seeing. The picking up is just figuratively speaking. It entirely depends on kamma whether seeing sees a pleasant or unpleasant visible object. Nina. #92429 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 7:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: No control (its a coping mechanism) nilovg Hi Howard and Ken, Op 7-nov-2008, om 14:20 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Howard: > There might be a way of discussing the Dhamma as friends and not > confrontationally. I happily see that way engaged in all the time > by Nina. I wish > you would take a cue from her in this. ------- N: But the way you two discuss I saw as bickering between real friends. I was very amused about the way you both talked, had to laugh. I did not take it as disagreeable talk even where you disagree. anyway, I had a good time in the early morning. -------- Nina. #92430 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 7:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mindfulness of Death (4) nilovg Hi Howard, Op 7-nov-2008, om 14:34 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Contemplation of death, our own and that of loved ones, puts us > face to face with > things we are afraid to face: irretrievable loss, our relentless > clinging, the > unstoppability of change - especially of decay and cessation, and our > ultimately aloneness. In the process of such contemplation, if it > is our practice to > be introspectively aware of body and mind --------- N: I like your post. As you say our ultimately aloneness. An important aspect you bring along here. This brings back to me what Kh Sujin said: we are alone, alone in our own world of thinking. Alone when born, alone when seeing, hearing, since there is just one citta that sees or that hears or thinks. One does not share a citta with someone else. Dying-consciousness is also alone: one citta. We do not like the idea of loneliness, but it is the truth. It is helpful to realize that we are also at this moment alone in the ultimate sense. We can understand this only by being aware of nama and rupa. James wanted to know our attitude towards death, and I feel that continue to develop understanding of nama and rupa in as far as I am able to is the way to face death. Listening, understanding a little more each time, and when there are conditions learning to consider and be mindful of what appears now. Nina. #92431 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 2:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: No control (its a coping mechanism) upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Ken) - In a message dated 11/7/2008 10:34:57 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard and Ken, Op 7-nov-2008, om 14:20 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Howard: > There might be a way of discussing the Dhamma as friends and not > confrontationally. I happily see that way engaged in all the time > by Nina. I wish > you would take a cue from her in this. ------- N: But the way you two discuss I saw as bickering between real friends. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Of course we are friends, like two brothers who regularly beat the daylights (I rejected another choice of noun here! LOL!) out of each other! ;-)) Still, easier and lighter is better. :-) ---------------------------------------- I was very amused about the way you both talked, had to laugh. I did not take it as disagreeable talk even where you disagree. anyway, I had a good time in the early morning. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I'm happy for that! -------------------------------------- -------- Nina. ======================== With metta (to you, to Ken, and to all my DSG friends - which excludes none), Howard #92433 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 10:07 am Subject: Re: Buddha recomended Jhana MN107 truth_aerator Dear Scott, > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Thanks for the reply: > > A: "[Satipa.t.thaana is] Remembering and being mindful of 4 things > (kaya,vedana,citta,dhamma)" > > Scott: Let me quote from A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas, Kh. Sujin > (pp. 316-317): > > "The word 'satipa.t.thaana' has three meanings: > > 1. The objects sati is aware of, thus, a paramattha dhamma, either a > naama dhamma or a ruupa dhamma. These are classified as the four > satipa.t.thaanas. > > 2. Sati cetasika that arises together with kaamaavacara citta > accompanied by pa~n~naa (~naa.na sampayutta), and which is aware of > the objects of mindfulness, i.e., the four satipa.t.thaanas. > > 3. The Path the Sammaasambuddha and the ariyan disciples have >developed." Do you have the sutta quotes regarding the above? The suttas are the closest thing we have. There were bad monks even while Buddha was still alive, not to mention 20 split Buddhist schools centuries later. Hhow does the word satipatthana is used in the suttas, Scott? 16 steps of Anapanasati fulfill 4 satipathanas and that is what the Buddha has said! MN118. > A: "Basic & short answer: Jhana makes your mind ready and capable to > see and attain insights that would allow you to stop producing the > asavas and become an Arahant." > > Scott: Jhaana is the development of concentration. and "Jhana IS the path to awakening" - MN36 Please provide me with sutta quotes regarding the above. Why should I believe you who thinks that Jhana for laypeople is impossible "The thesis I align myself with is that jhaana, for the ordinary person living the ordinary life, is beyond reach. " to be not only ADHAMMA but says quite a bit about you and your motivation. In Citta-Samyutta (SN41) Naked Ascetic Kassapa sutta, Citta the HOUSEHOLDER tells that ascetic that he can enter 4 Jhanas at WILL and without difficult! Same in the previous sutta about Nigantha Nataputta questioning Citta. Citta the Householder declares that he can achieve 4 Jhanas easily. >Do you mean to suggest that, while absorbed in jhaana, one can 'see >and attain insights'? At that moment one may be temporary out of Jhana, or one may intuitively see it, but has to start thinking to make sense out of it. > > A: "If you don't understand the above short answer then no wonder you didn't understand my post." > > Scott: It might occur, Alex, to one giving a view, As you notice, I use a lot of Sutta quotes. > A more useful approach would be to back up one's thesis with any > well-reasoned argument That is why we had 20+ Early Buddhist Schools even prior to fully formed Mahayana. Logic by itself ISN'T and authority on Buddhism. Buddhist suttas and more important - PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE confirming the suttas are. " a certain teacher goes by logic, arguing logically brings out a teaching by himself beaten out. In the teaching of a logical teacher, some arguments may be true and others may not be true. Sandaka, a wise man should reflect. This teacher goes by logic. He preaches what he has beaten out by logical conclusion. His arguments may be authentic or not, I should know and turn away from that holy life as unsatisfactory. Sandaka, this is the third holy life, the Blessed One who knows and sees, is perfect and rightfully enlightened has declared as unsatisfactory and should not be lived. The wise man if possible does not live and even if he lives is not convinced, that it is merit.. " http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/076-sandaka-e1.htm RE: Traditions "Again, Sandaka, a certain teacher goes by hearsay and takes it as the truth. To a teacher who goes by hearsay, the tradition becomes the truth. He may have heard it correctly or may not have heard it correctly. It becomes the truth to him, the truth may be something else. Sandaka, a wise man should reflect. This teacher goes by hearsay. He preaches what has reached him by tradition and hearsay. What he has heard may be the truth or not. I, should know and turn away from that holy life as unsatisfactory. Sandaka, this is the second holy life, the Blessed One who knows, sees, is perfect and rightfully enlightened has declared as unsatisfactory and should not be lived. The wise man if possible does not live and even if he lives is not convinced, that it is merit.. " http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/076-sandaka-e1.htm > > In this case, it is my opinion that the view presented by you > regarding jhaana is fragmented, inaccurate, based largely on emotion > and dogmatism, founded in false-jhaana and wildly misunderstood sutta > passages, and hardly participates in a rational consideration of a > complex and deep aspect of consciousness which, as I understand it, > the Buddha was at pains to redefine. In fact, the view you represent > trivializes and popularizes jhaana to an extent that, to me, diverges > greatly from the respect and importance it deserves. > >The thesis I align myself with is that jhaana, for the ordinary >person living the ordinary life, is beyond reach. For ordinary folks, sure. But Buddhist aspirants desiring (in a wholesome way) the freedom from fetters, may achieve Jhana. Remember the case of Citta the Householder as an example. ========== In MN64 he has said that it is *impossible* to break 5 lower and 5 upper fetters without Jhana (and insight after it). =------------------- Ananda, this is the path and method, to overcome the lower bonds of the sensual world. It is not possible that one could, knowing and seeing overcome the lower bonds of the sensual world without coming to this path and method. 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.. " http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/064-maha-malunkhyaputta-e1.htm === Best wishes, #92434 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 11:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Quote Survey nilovg Hi James, Op 7 nov-2008, om 16:17 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > Question: If it is known through the mind-door that > there > > is a pen, is that right or wrong? > > > > Sujin: It is not wrong. The object at that moment is a > > concept which is included in dhammarammana (mind door object). > > However, pa~n~na should realize the difference between the mind- > door > > process and the eye-door process. When one does not develop > pa~n~na > > one cannot distinguish the sense-door process and the mind-door > > process from each other and then one believes that there are > beings, > > people and different things. > > James: I am really confused by this answer. The question was: if it > is known through the mind-door that there is a pen, is that right or > wrong? In other words, is there a pen? Does it exist? First, the > answer is yes and then the answer is no. I don't get it. ------- N: It is not wrong to think of concepts like a pen, or a person for that matter. There are conditions for thinking in such ways. BUt we may be thinking with unwise attention or with wise attention. Some people may think that they should only pay attention to ultimate realities and not to concepts and that is not the right way. It is good to learn to distinguish between the different doorways, such as eyedoor and mind-door. Through the eyedoor you do not see a person, but only colour. On account of what you see there is defining and thinking and this is citta cognizing ideas and concepts through the mind-door. Through the development of insight the difference can be known and then there will be less absorption in concepts, one will become detached from the idea that people and beings really exist. Whereas in reality what we take for people are only different namas and rupas that arise and then fall away completely. Gradually we shall understand a little more the meaning of anatta. ------- Nina. #92435 From: "szmicio" Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 1:04 pm Subject: Re: Series Quote Survey szmicio Dear Nina You always remind us what is important. I am really gratefull to you. (all your last series) > ------- > N: It is not wrong to think of concepts like a pen, or a person for > that matter. There are conditions for thinking in such ways. BUt we > may be thinking with unwise attention or with wise attention. > Some people may think that they should only pay attention to ultimate > realities and not to concepts and that is not the right way. > It is good to learn to distinguish between the different doorways, > such as eyedoor and mind-door. Through the eyedoor you do not see a > person, but only colour. On account of what you see there is defining > and thinking and this is citta cognizing ideas and concepts through > the mind-door. Through the development of insight the difference can > be known and then there will be less absorption in concepts, one will > become detached from the idea that people and beings really exist. > Whereas in reality what we take for people are only different namas > and rupas that arise and then fall away completely. Gradually we > shall understand a little more the meaning of anatta. L: But if there is no detachment now? if there is no understanding, just concepts now? No nama, no rupa? Best wishes Lukas #92436 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 2:35 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: No control (its a coping mechanism) kenhowardau Hi Nina and Howard, I am reminded of a post from our wise friend Phil. He explained how, when he considered himself to be a student of K Sujin, he was annoyed by people who criticised her in an impolite manner. Now, however, when he considers himself to be an opponent of K S's teaching, those same people no longer annoy him, and their criticisms seem fair and polite. To his mind it is now the K S students who are rude and offensive. (Well, some of us, anyway!) :-) The gist of Phil's message was to take our own approval or disapproval of other people's behaviour with a grain of salt - it can't be trusted. :-) Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Howard and Ken, > Op 7-nov-2008, om 14:20 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > > > Howard: > > There might be a way of discussing the Dhamma as friends and not > > confrontationally. I happily see that way engaged in all the time > > by Nina. I wish > > you would take a cue from her in this. > ------- > N: But the way you two discuss I saw as bickering between real > friends. I was very amused about the way you both talked, had to > laugh. I did not take it as disagreeable talk even where you > disagree. anyway, I had a good time in the early morning. > > -------- > Nina. > #92437 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 4:22 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Series Quote Survey buddhatrue Hi Nina, Thank you for your answer, which doesn't use any Pali whatsoever! :- ) I have some follow up comments: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > > Op 7 nov-2008, om 16:17 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > ------- > N: It is not wrong to think of concepts like a pen, or a person for > that matter. There are conditions for thinking in such ways. James: When someone sees various color through the eye door and the mind assembles those colors into the concept of "pen", it is implicit in that concept that the "pen" actually exists. It is part of the concept. So, if that isn't wrong as you state, then the pen actually exists. BUt we > may be thinking with unwise attention or with wise attention. > Some people may think that they should only pay attention to ultimate > realities and not to concepts and that is not the right way. James: What is then the right way? You are being vague. It seems you are saying that wise attention means just seeing colors and no pen. Is that what you mean? > It is good to learn to distinguish between the different doorways, > such as eyedoor and mind-door. Through the eyedoor you do not see a > person, but only colour. James: Well, technically yes but I don't see what that has to do with it. The eyes are limited, touch is limited, hearing is limited, taste is limited, etc.. The mind puts the input from these limited senses together to create a picture of the world. What I want to know is do you believe it is a true picture or a false picture? On account of what you see there is defining > and thinking and this is citta cognizing ideas and concepts through > the mind-door. Through the development of insight the difference can > be known and then there will be less absorption in concepts, one will > become detached from the idea that people and beings really exist. James: This description sounds like some sort of technique. All I want you to answer is: does the pen exist; does it both exist and not exist; or does it not exist at all? > Whereas in reality what we take for people are only different namas > and rupas that arise and then fall away completely. James: What does that mean "what we take for peope"? Do you mean lasting people? Solid people? Permanent people? Indivisible people? I am still not following you. Gradually we > shall understand a little more the meaning of anatta. > ------- > Nina. > Metta, James #92438 From: han tun Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 4:42 pm Subject: Re: Mindfulness of Death (4) hantun1 Dear Howard, > > Han: The Blessed One said, "Mindfulness of death, when developed and pursued, is of great fruit and great benefit. It gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its final end. Therefore you should develop mindfulness of death." > Howard: I am very grateful for your series. It is a kindness to us all. Contemplation of death, our own and that of loved ones, puts us face to face with things we are afraid to face: irretrievable loss, our relentless clinging, the unstoppability of change - especially of decay and cessation, and our ultimately aloneness. In the process of such contemplation, if it is our practice to be introspectively aware of body and mind, we can notice the tightening up of both of these as these difficult subjects are considered, and we can learn to let that tension go. The practice of contemplation of death, if engaged in well, can be transformative in a positive way, enabling relinquishment even to the extent, as the Buddha puts it, of providing "a footing in the Deathless." Han: Very well said, Howard, I really appreciate your comments. Your prose is also excellent with the best choice of English words. I wish I were able to write like you. Yes, we can and we should learn, through the practice of contemplation of death, to relinquish the clinging to ourselves and our loved ones, and gain a footing in the Deathless. Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #92439 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 1:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mindfulness of Death (4) upasaka_howard Hi, Han - In a message dated 11/7/2008 7:42:58 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, hantun1@... writes: Yes, we can and we should learn, through the practice of contemplation of death, to relinquish the clinging to ourselves and our loved ones, and gain a footing in the Deathless. Thank you very much. =========================== Thank you, Sir. You are a truly gentle man whom I much admire and for whom I hold great fondness. With metta, Howard #92440 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 7:46 pm Subject: Re: Buddha recomended Jhana MN107 scottduncan2 Dear Alex, According to Kh. Sujin, as I noted: "The word 'satipa.t.thaana' has three meanings: 1. The objects sati is aware of, thus, a paramattha dhamma, either a naama dhamma or a ruupa dhamma. These are classified as the four satipa.t.thaanas. 2. Sati cetasika that arises together with kaamaavacara citta accompanied by pa~n~naa (~naa.na sampayutta), and which is aware of the objects of mindfulness, i.e., the four satipa.t.thaanas. 3. The Path the Sammaasambuddha and the ariyan disciples have developed." Scott: MN 10 Mahaasatipa.t.thaanasutta.m: "Bhikkhus, this is the direct path for the purification of beings, for the surmounting of sorrow and lamentation, for the disappearance of pain and grief, for the attainment of the true way, for the realisation of Nibbaana - namely the four foundations of mindfulness. "What are the four? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu abides contemplating the body as a body (kaaye kaayaanupassii), ardent (aataapii), fully aware (sampajaano), and mindful (satimaa), having put away covetousness and grief for the world. He abides contemplating feelings as feelings, ardent, fully aware, and mindful, having put away covetousness and grief for the world. He abides contemplating mind as mind, ardent, fully aware, and mindful, having put away covetousness and grief for the world. He abides contemplating mind-objects as mind-objects, ardent, fully aware, and mindful, having put away covetousness and grief for the world." Scott: Note the Paa.li for fully aware and mindful - 'sampajaano satim.' These refer respectively to pa~n~naa and sati. It is through the function of these two mental factors that satipa.t.thaana occurs. Consider Vibha"nga, The Second Book of the Abhidhamma Pi.taka (pp. 252-253), clarifies the meaning of the various terms found in the sutta: "'Contemplating' means: Therein what is contemplation? That which is wisdom, understanding, investigation, research, truth investigation, discernment, differentiation, erudition, proficiency, subtlety, analysis, consideration, breadth, sagacity, guidance, insight, awareness, goad, wisdom, controlling faculty of wisdom, power of wisdom, sword of wisdom, tower of wisdom, light of wisdom, lustre of wisdom, splendour of wisdom, jewel of wisdom, absence of dullness, truth investigation, right view. This is called contemplation. Of this contemplation he is possesed, well possessed, attained, well attained, endowed, well endowed, furnished. Therefore this is called 'contemplating.'" "Anupassiiti. Tattha katamaa anupassanaa? Yaa pa~n~naa pajaananaa…pe… amoho dhammavicayo sammaadi.t.thi â€" aya.m vuccati 'anupassanaa'. Imaaya anupassanaaya upeto hoti samupeto upaagato samupaagato upapanno sampanno samannaagato. Tena vuccati 'anupassii'." "'Dwells' means: Assumes the four postures, exists, protects, keeps going, maintains, turns about, dwells. Therefore this is called 'dwells.'" "Viharatiiti. Iriyati vattati paaleti yapeti yaapeti carati viharati. Tena vuccati 'viharatii'." "'Ardent' means: Therein what is ardour? That which is the arousing of mental energy, toiling, endeavour, aspiring, effort, zeal, perseverance, vigour, stability, unfaltering endeavour, not relinquishing wish, not relinquishing the task, firm hold of the task, energy, controlling faculty of energy, power of energy, right effort. This is called ardour. Of this ardour he is possessed, well possessed, attained, well attained, endowed, well endowed, furnished. Therefore this is 'ardent.'" Aataapiiti. Tattha katamo aataapo [katama.m aataapa.m (sabbattha)]? Yo cetasiko viiriyaarambho…pe… sammaavaayaamo â€" aya.m vuccati 'aataapo'. Iminaa aataapena upeto hoti samupeto upaagato samupaagato upapanno sampanno samannaagato. Tena vuccati 'aataapii'." "'Aware' means: Therein what is awareness? That which is wisdom, understanding...absence of dullness, truth investigation, right view. This is called awareness...Therefore this is called 'aware.'" "Sampajaanoti . Tattha katama.m sampaja~n~na.m? Yaa pa~n~naa pajaananaa…pe… amoho dhammavicayo sammaadi.t.thi â€" ida.m vuccati 'sampaja~n~na.m. Iminaa sampaja~n~nena upeto hoti samupeto upaagato samupaagato upapanno sampanno samannaagato. Tena vuccati 'sampajaano'." "'Mindful' means: Therein what is mindfulness? That which is mindfulness, constant mindfulness, recollection, mindfulness, act of remembering, bearing in mind, non-superficiality, non-forgetfulness, mindfulness, controlling faculty of mindfulness, power of mindfulness, right mindfulness. This is called mindfulness...Therefore this is called 'mindful.'" "Satimaati. Tattha katamaa sati? Yaa sati anussati…pe… sammaasati â€" aya.m vuccati 'sati'. Imaaya satiyaa upeto hoti samupeto upaagato samupaagato upapanno sampanno samannaagato. Tena vuccati 'satimaa'." Scott: Satipa.t.thaana as defined by Kh. Sujin, is shown to be as defined in the Abhidhamma. A consideration of the Paa.li from the sutta, in comparison with that in Vibha"nga, shows that these texts are in agreement. One can see how it is by the 'work' of both sati and pa~n~naa - two kusala cetasikas which arise with citta, have the same object as citta, and fall away with citta - that satipa.t.thaana proceeds. Sincerely, Scott. #92441 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 7:48 pm Subject: Re: Buddha recomended Jhana MN107 scottduncan2 Sorry, this should be: "Scott: Note the Paa.li for fully aware and mindful - 'sampajaano *'satimaa.'* These refer respectively to pa~n~naa and sati. It is through the function of these two mental factors that satipa.t.thaana occurs." S. #92442 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Nov 7, 2008 9:04 pm Subject: The Cream Quintessence! bhikkhu0 Friends: The 3 Kinds of Sublime Quintessence: The cream of Teachings are The 4 Noble Truths & the 37 producers of Enlightenment. The cream of Recipients are The Noble Disciples capable of understanding & praxis . The cream of Holy Lives is that lived while developing the Noble 8-fold Path. .... Source: Path of Discrimination: Patisambhidamagga by Sariputta... http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=133494 True Dhamma is the Cream Quintessence! Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) ... #92443 From: han tun Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 12:31 am Subject: Mindfulness of Death (5) hantun1 Dear James, Phil, Nina, Sarah, Jon, Howard, Lukas, In Chapter V of A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma, Four Types of Kamma are mentioned. One of the four types is By Order of Ripening. In this type there are again four kinds of kamma. (i) weighty kamma (ii) death-proximate kamma (iii) habitual kamma (iv) reserve kamma. I am interested in death-proximate kamma and habitual kamma. Let me quote the text from the book. ------------------------------ Death-proximate (aasanna) kamma is a potent kamma remembered or done shortly before death, that is, immediately prior to the last javana process. If a person of bad character remembers a good deed he has done, or performs a good deed just before dying, he may receive a fortunate rebirth; and conversely, if a good person dwells on an evil deed done earlier, or performs an evil deed just before dying, he may undergo an unhappy rebirth. For this reason in Buddhist countries it is customary to remind a dying person of his good deeds or to urge him to arouse good thoughts during the last moments of his life. Habitual (aaci.n.na) kamma is a deed that one habitually performs, either good or bad. In the absence of weighty kamma and a potent death-proximate kamma, this type of kamma generally assumes the rebirth-generative function. ------------------------------ Han: During the first few years of my Dhamma study and practice, one of my concerns was how to make sure that I have a good aasanna kamma for a fortunate rebirth. I looked for more information in the literature. I found the following article: Buddhist Reflections on Death, by V.F. Gunaratna http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/gunaratna/wheel102.html In chapter VI of the article I found the following passages. ------------------------------ The idea of getting a dying man to offer cloth (Pamsukula) to the Sangha or the idea of chanting sacred texts to him is in order to help him to obtain a good terminal thought for himself by way of asańńa kamma or death-proximate Kamma, but the powerful force of inveterate habit can supervene and in spite of the chantings by the most pious monks available, the memory of bad deeds repeatedly performed may surge up to his consciousness and become the terminal thought. The reverse can also occur. If the last few acts and thoughts of a person about to die are powerfully bad, however good he had been earlier, then his terminal thought may be so powerfully bad that it may prevent the habitually good thought from surging up to his consciousness, as is said to have happened in the case of Queen Mallika, the wife of King Pasenadi of Kosala. She lived a life full of good deeds but at the dying moment what came to her mind was the thought of a solitary bad deed done. As a result she was born in a state of misery where she suffered, but it was only for seven days. The effects of the good Kamma were suspended only temporarily. and another paragraph: Let us now examine the unduly dreaded dying moment which marks the end of man's present existence, only to commence another. The physical condition of any dying man is so weak that the volitional control by the mind at the dying moment lacks the power to choose its own thoughts. This being so, the memory of some powerfully impressive and important event of the dying man's present existence (or his past existence) will force itself upon the threshold of his mind, the forcible entry of which thought he is powerless to resist. This thought which is known as the maranasańńa-javana thought and precedes the cuti-citta or terminal thought, can be one of three types. ------------------------------ Han: After reading the article, it was clear that there was no guarantee for the arising of good death-proximate kamma, even though my wife and children may be chanting parittas at my bed-side and reminding me of the good deeds I have done. I may not hear them at the last moment. Or, I may not be able to resist the forcible entry of evil thoughts as described by V.F. Gunaratna. So, what shall I do? If I intensify my doing the good deeds for the remaining duration of my life to further strengthen the good habitual kamma, will the strong good habitual kamma be able to over-rule the aasanna kamma and assume the rebirth-generative function? I have consulted on this point with my Dhamma friends. No one could assure me. This continued to be a big concern for me for some more years. Now, at long last, I am liberated from this concern. I do not worry anymore for something which I have no control. I do not care anymore about good death-proximate kamma or bad death-proximate kamma. I will strengthen my good habitual kamma by doing meritorious deeds all the time to the extent possible, but without any expectations. It may or may not come to my rescue at the final moment. I do not care. I do not care anything anymore. Now I can sleep peacefully! Respectfully, Han #92444 From: "sprlrt" Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 1:16 am Subject: Re: Rupa khandha sprlrt Kamma are nama-dhammas of the past that, apart from conditioning the arising of other present and future nama-dhammas (vipaka cittas), produce present and future rupas also, pasada rupas are 5 of these and they arise and fall away in groups/kalapas of ten rupas, decads, eye-sense for instance is composed of the 8 inseparable rupas, jivitindriya/life plus cakkhupasada/eye-sense, and pasada rupas, unlike visaya rupas, can only be experienced through the mind door, bhavangupacchedda, a non-vithi citta (which doesn't arise and fall in a specific order/process), though the visiible object/vanno rupa that arises together in that decad can. It can all sound confusing and complicate, I think it would help trying to think of a group/kalapa of rupas in terms of separate charachtertics (visiblility, solidity etc.) of a single unit rather than in terms of separate subatomic particles making up an atom. We take what the mind door processes 'see' as what was actually seen through the eye-sense/cakkhupasada by the seeing consciousness/cakkhuvinnana and the other cittas of the single eye door process on which the many and later mind door processes are based, but this it's simply not true. This is not to say that we should't see objects and people. When there are the conditions (and conditions are dhammas, both nama and rupa) for this to happen, we 'see' objects or people. We can just accept this as evidence that objects and people is what is actually 'out there' or 'in here' or we can take it with a grain of salt and try developing conditions (nama-dhammas, sati & panna) which would start to see the characteristic, one at a time, of what is actually being seen, before objects and people are 'seen', long after (relatively speaking) the actual experience, when the rupas have gone already, completely, and have been replaced and more than once by new ones, so similar to the previous, yet different. Alberto #92445 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 3:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] just curious.. sarahprocter... Dear Jennelle, Welcome to DSG! Please tell us a little about your background and interest in Buddhism too. I don't really know how to answer your questions. I don't consider Buddhism to be a 'religion' in that there is nothing to be believed in or followed blindly or because anyone tells one to. The most important aspect is the development of awareness and understanding in one's life at this very moment. So whether there are particular holidays, whether the family is close knit or not, whatever clothes one is wearing or whatever education one has, there are realities now, such as seeing, hearing, thinking, likes and dislikes that can be directly known. It doesn't matter whether one is called a Buddhist or anything else, these realities can still be known. As to what things are done, this just depends on inclinations, interests and many different causes and conditions. Again, instead of thinking so much about the 'outer appearance' or 'situation', gradually there can be more understanding of the 'inner' realities, such as what is truly experienced at this moment while we talk. This is the way that gradually the understanding can grow that there is no Self, no Me, no person in control, just different experiences from moment to moment. As for your last question on 'challenges', this is the best one, I think! The main challenges are the growth of good qualities, beginning with right understanding so that eventually the bad qualities, in particular, the roots of ignorance, attachment and aversion can be completely eradicated. Let me know if you have further questions or wish to raise any particular one again. The questions which help us understand life at this moment, rather than those we just ask out of curiosity are the best! Metta (loving kindness), Sarah ======= --- On Fri, 7/11/08, Jennelle wrote: >I was just curious if someone could help me. I have some questions that need to be answered. I would like them to be answered by someone who actually practices the religion as opposed to someone just researching it. Can anyone tell me the answers to these questions about Buddhism? What are the main holidays that you participate in? Are there any specific things that one cannot do versus another? How close knit is family? <...> #92446 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 6:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Losing everything, passing away, 'just like now!' sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, Thanks for your comments and questions on this topic: --- On Wed, 5/11/08, szmicio wrote: ------------ --------- --------- --------- -- >L: All is according to Dhamma, but I usually think about that is my body which dies. How can you deal with it? No personality at all, but what about thinking about blood and such staff. Always when I think about dying I have languor. .... S: There can be wise or unwise reflection on death, of course. Usually, it's unwise because it's thinking about 'dear me', 'my body', 'my dear ones', even 'my blood'. When we understand more about cittas (moments of consciousness) now, it's easier to appreciate the death at each moment. What we thought about a moment ago or experienced in any way a moment ago has gone never to return. So, at moments of thinking about 'this body' or anything else, it's just a moment of thinking that's now gone, 'dead', never to return again. At the end of this life, again it's just another moment - the cittas continue on in succession. Understanding is accompanied by calm and lightness, no languor at all. .... L:>Recently I wake up in the middle of night with strong pain in my body. I thought about my liver. ... S: Again, in terms of the realities, there are very fleeting moments of bodily experience, followed by many mind-door processes, thinking about the story of what has been experienced. In reality, there's no body, no liver - just fleeting namas and rupas. This doesn't mean one shouldn't think of 'liver' - we think of whatever there are conditions to think about. It means that at such times, there can be awareness and a growth in understanding too. These are mere conditioned dhammas, not belonging to any self. .... > S: ... "Paramattha dhammas are the same for all people". Just moments of seeing, hearing, thinking and so on. No beings or people - just various namas and rupas arising and falling away. ------------ --------- --------- -- >L: Today I stoped for a moment and noticed that not is real, just thinking. But there is no understanding nama as nama, rupa as rupa. .... S: It grows. Now you're considering (wisely) about thinking as a nama, different from the concept that's thought about, different from the rupas that we take for a body. Understanding more and more about different realities appearing now, such as seeing and visible object, hearing and sound, is the way that nama is understood as nama, rupa as rupa. The understanding of namas and rupas has to begin to grow in dailylife. .... >S: We think about possessions, about our house, our family and so on, but it's only thinking. As you say, birth and death of citta at every moment. ... >L: But why we are so involved in those dream?? Even when we know there is something wrong with it, we still cling to it. ... S: Ignorance and strongly accumulated attachment as you point out. Yes, there can be moments of wise appreciation that it is just a dream and yet such brief kusala (wholesome) moments are then followed by lobha (attachment) again. This is why it's a long path and takes a lot of patience, courage and perseverence. I'd be happy to continue this chat if you have any further comments to make. Metta, Sarah ============ #92447 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 6:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha recomended Jhana MN107 sarahprocter... Dear Scott (& Alex), --- On Wed, 5/11/08, Scott wrote: Scott:> Regarding MN 107, Ga.nakamoggallaanas utta.m >A: "...It is simply impossible for the above to mean anything BUT development. " Scott:> Yes, I agree that the sutta does refer to development. It is not, however, when one reads the whole text, simply a global instruction for everyone to do jhaana. When the Buddha explains to Ga.naka Moggalaana the accountant the 'gradual training, gradual practice, and gradual progress' (anupubbasikkhaa anupubbakiriyaa anupubbapa.tipadaa) , he seems to be discussing this in relation to the monk. He places the development of samaadhi - of concentration - after other the development elements has obtained. The whole context of the sutta ought to be understood to refer to the special circumstance of the monk. ... Sarah: Yes, I thought Alex had quoted rather selectively and was glad you responded. Also, which kind of monk? Which kind of accumulations? ... Scott: >These terms, in the Paa.li (PTS PED), consist of: "A.nu (adj.) small, minute, atomic, subtle..." "Pubba2 (adj.) previous, former, before..." "Sikkhaa (f.)...1. study, training, discipline.. ." ... Sarah: Just a comment here - I take ***anu +pubba + sikkhaa*** to refer to anu - following, as in anussati (recollections, lit. following sati) pubba - former, one's turn anupubba - following one's turn, successive, gradual anupubbasikkhaa - gradual, successive training ... Metta, Sarah ============ #92448 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 6:55 am Subject: Re: Buddha recomended Jhana MN107 scottduncan2 Dear Alex, I wanted to complete the addition of the Paa.li for the sutta: Scott: MN 10 Mahaasatipa.t.thaanasutta.m: "Bhikkhus, this is the direct path for the purification of beings, for the surmounting of sorrow and lamentation, for the disappearance of pain and grief, for the attainment of the true way, for the realisation of Nibbaana - namely the four foundations of mindfulness. "What are the four? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu abides contemplating the body as a body (kaaye kaayaanupassii), ardent (aataapii), fully aware (sampajaano), and mindful (satimaa), having put away covetousness and grief for the world. He abides contemplating feelings as feelings, ardent, fully aware, and mindful (vedanaasu vedanaanupassii viharati aataapii sampajaano satimaa), having put away covetousness and grief for the world. He abides contemplating mind as mind, ardent, fully aware, and mindful (citte cittaanupassii viharati aataapii sampajaano satimaa), having put away covetousness and grief for the world. He abides contemplating mind-objects as mind-objects, ardent, fully aware, and mindful (dhammesu dhammaanupassii viharati aataapii sampajaano satimaa), having put away covetousness and grief for the world." Scott: I'm noting that 'mind' is 'citte cittanupassii'. The locative form of 'citta' is used, as far as I can tell - citte. (Nina might feel free to correct here.) Warder (p.114) defines the locative case as that which: "...expresses the place where, the time when, or the situation in which an action takes place..." 'Cittanupassii' is a compound (PTS PED): "Anupassin...(adj.) [fr. anupassati] viewing, observing, realising..." "Anupassati [anu + passati] to look at, contemplate, observe..." Hence here it would seem that the Paa.li indicates that citta is the centre or site of the activity of 'contemplating'. And 'contemplating', as shown earlier, refers to pa~n~naa. So the sutta shows what 'satipa.t.thaana' is by referring to citta which, conascent with pa~n~naa and sati, has as object, the elements noted in the sutta in the locative case (kaaye, vedanaasu, citte, dhammesu). A consideration of a sutta must, in my opinion, deal with the Paa.li. Paa.li experts please correct so as to assist Alex and I. Sincerely, Scott. #92449 From: "szmicio" Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 7:02 am Subject: Re: Losing everything, passing away, 'just like now!' szmicio Dear Sarah, I think about bhavanga cittas now. It reminds me that thinking cant arise at moments of bhavanga. No personality at all. Thank you for your response. You should know it helps me very very much. So there is no body, no Lukas. That's good that is the way I think all the time. It's according to my personal experience. It always was, but now I have wise friends. No me who makes something , who makes bhavana. If there are conditions for right friendship there is always bhavana. If not, no bhavana. I think nama is like a stick, nothing special in it, but we usually find ourselves important. We think about our mother and father, but there is just nama dhatu, with its own characteristic. But those ideas about ourselves are realy strong. Very very strong. Please Sarah can you say something more about nama and rupa now? Best wishes Lukas #92450 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 7:06 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddha recomended Jhana MN107 scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Regarding: Sarah: "Yes, I thought Alex had quoted rather selectively and was glad you responded. Also, which kind of monk? Which kind of accumulations?" Scott: Exactly. I don't know about you, but, for me, that samaadhi can be developed in theory, and that this ('jhaana') was developed prior to the Buddha, and understood properly by the Buddha is never the question. The important question is whether or not one can simply assume that this is capable of development by anyone and in any situation. 'Jhaana' is, as I see it, very much misunderstood nowadays. Sarah: "Just a comment here - I take ***anu +pubba + sikkhaa*** to refer to anu - following, as in anussati (recollections, lit. following sati) pubba - former, one's turn anupubba - following one's turn, successive, gradual anupubbasikkhaa - gradual, successive training" Scott: Thanks for this clarification. Why not look into my penultimate post in the series and check my attempts at Paa.li scholarship? Sincerely, Scott. #92451 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 7:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Quote Survey nilovg Hi James, Op 8-nov-2008, om 1:22 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > N: It is not wrong to think of concepts like a pen, or a person > for > > that matter. There are conditions for thinking in such ways. > > James: When someone sees various color through the eye door and the > mind assembles those colors into the concept of "pen", it is > implicit in that concept that the "pen" actually exists. It is part > of the concept. So, if that isn't wrong as you state, then the pen > actually exists. -------- N: At the moment of thinking there may be the belief that the pen exists, that a person exists. But existence, what is all about? It is philosophy, being engaged with ontological questions: what is the truth, what exists, what not. Then many doubts arise. It makes life very heavy and complicated. I know this so well, before I learnt the Dhamma. But through the Dhamma we learn that the contents of thinking are not all that important, but rather, the citta that thinks, citta, an inward reality. We used to live only in the world of thinking, and never paid attention to citta that sees, citta that hears or experiences tangible object. Then we learn that there are different moments of experience through different doorways. There can be the experience of hardness without thinking, just the world of tangible object. Thinking of a pen or a person, it does not matter. But is the citta kusala or akusala? One may think with generosity of a pen: I shall give it away. Or of a person: I shall help that person. That is what I mean by wise attention. At such a moment there is no attachment, no aversion, no ignorance. --------- > > BUt we > > may be thinking with unwise attention or with wise attention. > > Some people may think that they should only pay attention to > ultimate > > realities and not to concepts and that is not the right way. > > James: What is then the right way? You are being vague. It seems > you are saying that wise attention means just seeing colors and no > pen. Is that what you mean? ------- N: No, not at all. When beginning to understand that seeing is one moment, and thinking of the pen is another moment, one begins to understand what it means that there are six worlds. There can be just a little detachment from the idea: I think thus I am, like Descartes. ------- > > > It is good to learn to distinguish between the different > doorways, > > such as eyedoor and mind-door. Through the eyedoor you do not see > a > > person, but only colour. > > James: Well, technically yes but I don't see what that has to do > with it. The eyes are limited, touch is limited, hearing is > limited, taste is limited, etc.. The mind puts the input from these > limited senses together to create a picture of the world. What I > want to know is do you believe it is a true picture or a false > picture? ------- N: Remembrance, a mental factor arising with each citta, puts all six worlds together, and then we have the false remembrance of self, instead of the right remembrance of non-self. But correct understanding that many impressions are remembered so that we form up the idea of person can lead to a lessening of clinging to self. A true picture? It seems so true but it is an illusion. It seems that that person stays, but in fact all rupas and all namas arise and then fall away. -------- > > J: can > > be known and then there will be less absorption in concepts, one > will > > become detached from the idea that people and beings really exist. > > James: This description sounds like some sort of technique. All I > want you to answer is: does the pen exist; does it both exist and > not exist; or does it not exist at all? ------- N: No, not a technique but the development of understanding. After a while we care less about such questions. What kind of citta thinks at this moment while being engaged with such questions? It is not helpful to ask: does the pen exist; does it both exist and not exist; or does it not exist at all? We can read about this in the Brahmajala sutta. Eternalism and annihilation belief. -------- > > J: > Whereas in reality what we take for people are only different > namas > > and rupas that arise and then fall away completely. > > James: What does that mean "what we take for people"? Do you mean > lasting people? Solid people? Permanent people? Indivisible > people? I am still not following you. -------- N: What we take for people are citta, mental factors arising with citta and rupa, not lasting for a moment. Impermanent and anatta. Thinking in the right way as the Buddha taught will lead to less attachment, aversion, ignorance and this means a better world. All misery in the world comes from attachment, aversion, ignorance, as we read in the suttas. What is the source of akusala and kusala? Citta. Should we not learn more about citta? -------- Nina. > #92452 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 7:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Quote Survey nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 7-nov-2008, om 22:04 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > > Whereas in reality what we take for people are only different namas > > and rupas that arise and then fall away completely. Gradually we > > shall understand a little more the meaning of anatta. > > L: But if there is no detachment now? if there is no understanding, > just concepts now? No nama, no rupa? ------- N: It is good to know that we have accumulated ignorance and wrong view for aeons. But hearing the Dhamma today can be a condition to have more understanding of citta, cetasika and rupa that are not concepts. And if it seems that there are just concepts there is still a reality: citta that thinks, wisely or unwisely. Listening to the Dhamma even for thirty years or more is not a long time, we need many lifetimes of listening. Think of our past! That is why Sarah wrote about patience and perseverance. Nina. #92453 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 3:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Quote Survey upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and James) - Nina, as I see it you come very close to the mark in the following, but just miss. Where I see you as missing the mark is in being ensnared by thinking and theory despite your saying "But existence, what is all about? It is philosophy, being engaged with ontological questions: what is the truth, what exists, what not. Then many doubts arise. It makes life very heavy and complicated. I know this so well, before I learnt the Dhamma. But through the Dhamma we learn that the contents of thinking are not all that important, but rather, the citta that thinks, citta, an inward reality." Reality is right here & right now in the midst of radical impermanence, not pounced upon and cut to pieces by conceptual characterization - not thought of, but as is. We should not "learn more about citta," but should wordlessly and nonconceptually SEE! With metta, Howard P. S. Your post follows at the end, Nina, without inserted comments by me. /Entrances to holiness are everywhere. The possibility of ascent is all the time, even at unlikely times and through unlikely places. There is no place without the Presence/ (From Mishkan T'filah, the new Reform prayerbook) _________________________________________________________________________ In a message dated 11/8/2008 10:40:59 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi James, Op 8-nov-2008, om 1:22 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > N: It is not wrong to think of concepts like a pen, or a person > for > > that matter. There are conditions for thinking in such ways. > > James: When someone sees various color through the eye door and the > mind assembles those colors into the concept of "pen", it is > implicit in that concept that the "pen" actually exists. It is part > of the concept. So, if that isn't wrong as you state, then the pen > actually exists. -------- N: At the moment of thinking there may be the belief that the pen exists, that a person exists. But existence, what is all about? It is philosophy, being engaged with ontological questions: what is the truth, what exists, what not. Then many doubts arise. It makes life very heavy and complicated. I know this so well, before I learnt the Dhamma. But through the Dhamma we learn that the contents of thinking are not all that important, but rather, the citta that thinks, citta, an inward reality. We used to live only in the world of thinking, and never paid attention to citta that sees, citta that hears or experiences tangible object. Then we learn that there are different moments of experience through different doorways. There can be the experience of hardness without thinking, just the world of tangible object. Thinking of a pen or a person, it does not matter. But is the citta kusala or akusala? One may think with generosity of a pen: I shall give it away. Or of a person: I shall help that person. That is what I mean by wise attention. At such a moment there is no attachment, no aversion, no ignorance. --------- > > BUt we > > may be thinking with unwise attention or with wise attention. > > Some people may think that they should only pay attention to > ultimate > > realities and not to concepts and that is not the right way. > > James: What is then the right way? You are being vague. It seems > you are saying that wise attention means just seeing colors and no > pen. Is that what you mean? ------- N: No, not at all. When beginning to understand that seeing is one moment, and thinking of the pen is another moment, one begins to understand what it means that there are six worlds. There can be just a little detachment from the idea: I think thus I am, like Descartes. ------- > > > It is good to learn to distinguish between the different > doorways, > > such as eyedoor and mind-door. Through the eyedoor you do not see > a > > person, but only colour. > > James: Well, technically yes but I don't see what that has to do > with it. The eyes are limited, touch is limited, hearing is > limited, taste is limited, etc.. The mind puts the input from these > limited senses together to create a picture of the world. What I > want to know is do you believe it is a true picture or a false > picture? ------- N: Remembrance, a mental factor arising with each citta, puts all six worlds together, and then we have the false remembrance of self, instead of the right remembrance of non-self. But correct understanding that many impressions are remembered so that we form up the idea of person can lead to a lessening of clinging to self. A true picture? It seems so true but it is an illusion. It seems that that person stays, but in fact all rupas and all namas arise and then fall away. -------- > > J: can > > be known and then there will be less absorption in concepts, one > will > > become detached from the idea that people and beings really exist. > > James: This description sounds like some sort of technique. All I > want you to answer is: does the pen exist; does it both exist and > not exist; or does it not exist at all? ------- N: No, not a technique but the development of understanding. After a while we care less about such questions. What kind of citta thinks at this moment while being engaged with such questions? It is not helpful to ask: does the pen exist; does it both exist and not exist; or does it not exist at all? We can read about this in the Brahmajala sutta. Eternalism and annihilation belief. -------- > > J: > Whereas in reality what we take for people are only different > namas > > and rupas that arise and then fall away completely. > > James: What does that mean "what we take for people"? Do you mean > lasting people? Solid people? Permanent people? Indivisible > people? I am still not following you. -------- N: What we take for people are citta, mental factors arising with citta and rupa, not lasting for a moment. Impermanent and anatta. Thinking in the right way as the Buddha taught will lead to less attachment, aversion, ignorance and this means a better world. All misery in the world comes from attachment, aversion, ignorance, as we read in the suttas. What is the source of akusala and kusala? Citta. Should we not learn more about citta? -------- Nina. #92454 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 4:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Quote Survey TGrand458@... Hi Nina and Howard In a message dated 11/8/2008 9:17:22 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: But through the Dhamma we learn that the contents of thinking are not all that important, but rather, the citta that thinks, citta, an inward reality." ..................................................................... TG: The above is atrocious IMO. There is such a stench of gross attachment to this dhamma theory...it just comes through over and over in the writings I see on it. The above isn't close to the mark, it isn't even on the same planet as "the mark." An (important) "inward reality"? Wow...if that isn't something to mentally grab a hold of, I don't know what is. Let's see what is perhaps the most "ontological" description the Buddha attempted about this "inward reality" to contrast -- “However one might ponder It -- (form, feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness) And carefully investigate it, It appears but hollow and void When one views it carefully. Such is this continuum, This illusion, beguiler of fools It is taught to be a murderer; Here no substance can be found.” (The Buddha . . . circa 600 BC. . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 1, pg. 953) “…whatever kind of form...whatever kind of feeling…whatever kind of perception…whatever kind of volitional formations…whatever kind of consciousness there is, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near: a bhikkhu (Buddhist monk) inspects it, ponders it, and carefully investigates it, and it would appear to him to be void, hollow, insubstantial. For what substance could there be in form… feeling…perception…volitional formations…consciousness?” (The Buddha . . . CDB, vol. 1, pg. 952 -- 953) The Buddha here is not talking about "the contents of thinking," he is talking about the aggregates. TG #92455 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 4:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Quote Survey TGrand458@... Hi Howard (and Nina) In a message dated 11/8/2008 9:17:22 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: Reality is right here & right now in the midst of radical impermanence, not pounced upon and cut to pieces by conceptual characterization - not thought of, but as is. We should not "learn more about citta," but should wordlessly and nonconceptually SEE! .................................................................... TG: Howard, it was not 100% clear to me if the above was your writing or not. Anyway, I'll comment on it... First of all, I don't know what "radical impermanence" is vs "regular impermanence." For me, the term "radical" would mean something different or beyond; and might mislead others in thinking there is another type of impermanence. I think I understand your meaning that -- all things are impermanent at all times -- but that's what I think by the single term "impermanence." Regarding..."we should not learn more about citta." Actually, I disagree. I think we should learn all there is to know about citta....and properly conclude that -- it is conditioned, hollow, empty, void, coreless, insubstantial, like a mirage, like a conjurer's trick, impermanent, afflictive, nonself, dependent, relative, evanescent, a disease, a boil, a dart, something to detach from, something to relinquish, something to escape, something to turn away from, something to transcend. This driving propensity to see and focus, focus, focus on dhammas as ultimate realities with their own characteristics is such a drastic move in the wrong direction, I'm doubtful those adherents will ever be able to recover. It is CONDITIONALITY that needs to be seen (through insight), NOT the inadvertent delusion based view of "separate realities." When conditionality is seen properly, ONLY THEN, will cittas and the rest properly be seen for what it really is....as the Buddha's words above describe. The elements are merely the means through which we can gain insight of conditionality, D.O., to see that nothing has its own basis and nothing is worth being attached to. It is after this learning is complete...THEN the mind can -- "wordlessly and nonconceptually SEE!" TG #92456 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 5:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Quote Survey upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 11/8/2008 12:39:17 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: Hi Howard (and Nina) In a message dated 11/8/2008 9:17:22 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: Reality is right here & right now in the midst of radical impermanence, not pounced upon and cut to pieces by conceptual characterization - not thought of, but as is. We should not "learn more about citta," but should wordlessly and nonconceptually SEE! .................................................................... TG: Howard, it was not 100% clear to me if the above was your writing or not. Anyway, I'll comment on it... First of all, I don't know what "radical impermanence" is vs "regular impermanence." For me, the term "radical" would mean something different or beyond; and might mislead others in thinking there is another type of impermanence. I think I understand your meaning that -- all things are impermanent at all times -- but that's what I think by the single term "impermanence." -------------------------------------------- Howard: The term 'impermanence' is a general one meaning only "not lasting forever." By 'radical impermanence' I refer to constant change, so that, at bottom, there is nothing remaining "as is" for any time at all, which really says that there are no true "things" to be found anywhere, at any time. In a way, this lies at the heart of emptiness. This cannot, IMO, be properly characterized or conceptualized, but only directly seen. --------------------------------------------- Regarding..."we should not learn more about citta." Actually, I disagree. I think we should learn all there is to know about citta....and properly conclude that -- it is conditioned, hollow, empty, void, coreless, insubstantial, like a mirage, like a conjurer's trick, impermanent, afflictive, nonself, dependent, relative, evanescent, a disease, a boil, a dart, something to detach from, something to relinquish, something to escape, something to turn away from, something to transcend. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: The learning that Nina refers to is "learning about." It is book learning, conceptual learning, and, IMO, not only inadequate, but a pitfall if taken as anything more than a shaky pointer. I stand by what I said. -------------------------------------------------- This driving propensity to see and focus, focus, focus on dhammas as ultimate realities with their own characteristics is such a drastic move in the wrong direction, I'm doubtful those adherents will ever be able to recover. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: What you're speaking of here is just "thinking about," and meditation that tries to "catch" things is based on substantialist, mental meandering. What is needed is to just calm the mind and look. Reality is right there for the seeing, and it can be seen provided we really look with a mind that has been made clear, calm, and with preconceptions cast aside. The Buddha never inculcated a catechism, but reported on his findings and showed how we can bring about the conditions needed for us to see the very same reality he reported on. "Ehipassiko," he said. ----------------------------------------------------- It is CONDITIONALITY that needs to be seen (through insight), NOT the inadvertent delusion based view of "separate realities." ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I agree. But it is the actual, equanimous looking that tells the tale. ----------------------------------------------------- When conditionality is seen properly, ONLY THEN, will cittas and the rest properly be seen for what it really is....as the Buddha's words above describe. The elements are merely the means through which we can gain insight of conditionality, D.O., to see that nothing has its own basis and nothing is worth being attached to. It is after this learning is complete...THEN the mind can -- "wordlessly and nonconceptually SEE!" ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I'm not clear on what you're saying. WHAT sort of learning is it you refer to here? ---------------------------------------------------- TG ============================ With metta, Howard #92457 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 10:34 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Series Quote Survey scottduncan2 Dear TG, (Howard, Nina), Regarding: TG: The above is atrocious IMO. There is such a stench of gross attachment to this dhamma theory...it just comes through over and over in the writings I see on it. The above isn't close to the mark, it isn't even on the same planet as 'the mark.' An (important) 'inward reality'? Wow...if that isn't something to mentally grab a hold of, I don't know what is. Let's see what is perhaps the most 'ontological' description the Buddha attempted about this 'inward reality' to contrast --" Scott: Here's the whole passage, for context, not just the cool parts with voidness in them: "Form is like a lump of foam, Feeling like a water bubble; Perception like a mirage, Volitions like a plantain trunk, And consciousness like an illusion, So explained the Kinsman of the Sun. Phe.napi.n.duupama.m ruupa.m, vedanaa bubbu.luupamaa Mariicikuupamaa sa~n~naa, sa"nkhaaraa kadaluupamaa; Maayuupama~nca vi~n~naa.ma.m, desitaadiccabandhunaa. "However one might ponder it -- And carefully investigate it, It appears but hollow and void When one views it carefully. Yathaa yathaa nijjhaayati, yoniso upaparikkhati; Rittaka.m tucchaka.m hoti, yo na.m passati yoniso. "With reference to this body The One of Broad Wisdom has taught That with the abandoning of three things One sees form discarded. Ima~nca kaaya.m aarabbha, bhuuripa~n~nena desita.m; Pahaana.m ti.n.na.m dhammaana.m, ruupa.m passatha cha.d.ditaᚃ.m "When vitality, heat, and consciousness Depart from this physical body, Then it lies there cast away: Food for others, without volition. Aayu usmaa ca vi~n~naa.na.m, yadaa kaaya.m jahantima.m; Apaviddho tadaa seti, parabhatta.m acetana.m. "Such is this continuum, This illusion, beguiler of fools It is taught to be a murderer; Here no substance can be found. Etaadisaaya.m santaano, maayaaya.m baalalaapinii; Vadhako esa akkhaato, saaro ettha na vijjati. "A bhikkhu with energy aroused Should look upon the aggregates thus, Whether by day or at night, Comprehending, ever mindful. Eva.m khandhe avekkheyya, bhikkhu aaraddhaviiriyo; Divaa vaa yadi vaa ratti.m, sampajaano pa.tissato. "He should discard all fetters And make a refuge for himself; Let him fare with head ablaze, Yearning for the imperishable state." Jaheyya sabbasa.myoga.m, kareyya sara.nattano; Careyyaadittasiisova, patthaya.m accuta.m pada''nti. tatiya.m Scott: One can see in the text that reference is made to the following realities: Form (ruupa.m), feeling (vedanaa), perception (sa~n~naa), volitions (sa"nkhaaraa), and consciousness (vi~n~naa.ma.m). The 'voidness view' continually fails to deal with similes in an abstract way, choosing, rather, to concretise the simile and turn it into an equation; 'form is like a lump of foam' becomes 'form is a lump of foam'. While such a turn makes for great surrealist poetry ('The butterflies of your eyes'), it fails here. TG: "The Buddha here is not talking about "the contents of thinking," he is talking about the aggregates." Scott: In what sense are you meaning 'aggregate'? There are constituents of an aggregate. The Paa.li above shows the locative form of khandha - 'khandhe avekkheyya'. Now, I'm not sure of this so perhaps Nina can be so kind as to correct me if I'm wrong, but for now this suggest that the khandas are the 'place' where the action of 'avekkhheyya' and 'sampajaano pa.tissato' occurs. In other words, realities with characteristic, separate, distinguishable functions that are void of self. From the PTS PED: "Avekkhati [...The regular Paa.li form however is apekkhati...] to look at, to consider, to see..." "Apekkhati 1...to desire, long for, look for...to consider, refer to, look at..." Scott: And with the phrase 'sampajaano pa.tissato' we see that the considering is in reference to the process of satipa.a.thaana - wherein sati and pa~n~naa - differentiatable and separate conditioned realities functioning in relation to other differentiatable and separate conditioned realities as objects in a 'continuity of states' (dhammasantati). Sincerely, Scott. #92458 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 5:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Quote Survey TGrand458@... Hi Howard The learning is the "putting together' of information to the extent necessary that allows for knowledge of conditionality... which is required before "just seeing" has any meaning or impact...in compelling the mind to detach from all. TG In a message dated 11/8/2008 11:14:01 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: When conditionality is seen properly, ONLY THEN, will cittas and the rest properly be seen for what it really is....as the Buddha's words above describe. The elements are merely the means through which we can gain insight of conditionality, D.O., to see that nothing has its own basis and nothing is worth being attached to. It is after this learning is complete...THEN the mind can -- "wordlessly and nonconceptually SEE!" ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I'm not clear on what you're saying. WHAT sort of learning is it you refer to here? #92459 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 5:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Quote Survey TGrand458@... Hi Scott Scott: The 'voidness view' continually fails to deal with similes in an abstract way, choosing, rather, to concretise the simile and turn it into an equation; 'form is like a lump of foam' becomes 'form is a lump of foam'. While such a turn makes for great surrealist poetry ('The butterflies of your eyes'), it fails here. TG: You're above makes no sense. You're entire post had no relevance to what I posted or the Buddha's quote. The entire context of the Sutta changes nothing but just continues to reinforce what I am saying the Sutta says...which are quotes from the Sutta. In fact, what you seem to be saying above is absolutely the opposite of the truth. I am not saying something like -- "volitions are a plantian trunk." Its a ludicrous assertion. No...they are LIKE a plantian truck as they are "coreless, insubstantial," etc. ... as the Buddha clearly comments for us. The Buddha provides his own commentary here...and you seem to reject it. Sorry that quotes of the actual Buddha don't fit with many of your commentarial based views. But don't blame me for correctly quoting the Suttas. TG #92460 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 11:19 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Series Quote Survey scottduncan2 Dear TG, Hopefully you can also address the other aspects of the arguments I've provided for you. Dealing with the rhetorical reply first, if you wish, then: Me: "The 'voidness view' continually fails to deal with similes in an abstract way, choosing, rather, to concretise the simile and turn it into an equation; 'form is like a lump of foam' becomes 'form is a lump of foam'. While such a turn makes for great surrealist poetry ('The butterflies of your eyes'), it fails here." TG: "You're above makes no sense. You're entire post had no relevance to what I posted or the Buddha's quote. The entire context of the Sutta changes nothing but just continues to reinforce what I am saying the Sutta says...which are quotes from the Sutta." Scott: The voidness view you represent takes one characteristic of conditioned dhammas and proceeds to misunderstand and over-generalise it. Conditioned dhammas are 'void of self'. This is the meaning. A staunch insistence that what one believes a sutta to mean is what it means is merely repetition, it is not discussion, as I think I've mentioned to you. I've noticed that those who are most vociferous when it comes to a sutta-only stance not only fail, in my opinion, to discuss suttas, but continually only post certain portions of certain suttas in a narrow and skewed fashion to support narrow views. The sutta is forced to conform to the view and the view is said to conform to the sutta. TG: "In fact, what you seem to be saying above is absolutely the opposite of the truth. I am not saying something like -- 'volitions are a plantain trunk.' Its a ludicrous assertion. No...they are LIKE a plantain truck as they are 'coreless, insubstantial,' etc...." Scott: Thank you for clarifying. We agree then, regarding the proper manner in which to understand a simile. We are back to the misunderstanding of 'coreless' and 'insubstantial' the view represents. The Insubstantialist View misunderstands 'voidness' to mean 'devoid of characteristic' and 'devoid of distinctness', while preferring the concrete view that 'voidness' means 'there are no distinguishable, distinct, and separate realities arising and falling away due to conditions'. Sincerely, Scott. #92461 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 8:27 am Subject: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before TGrand458@... Abhidhama...the Final Frontier...these are the voyages of the starship, "Abhidhamma"...its ongoing mission....to explore strange new concepts, to seek out new meanings and interpretations, to boldly go where no Sutta has gone before....la laaaaa....la la la la laaaaaaa...........la la laaaaaa.....la la la la laaaaa..........Laaaa la la la la la la laaaaaaa.....laaaaaaa...la la laaaaa... la la la laaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Captain Sarah: "Captains log, stardate, 11-30-08, we are on patrol is quadrant DSG, Commodore Nina of Starbase KS has informed us there are rumors of an invasion of the Suttamites. We are keeping focused on 'seeing them for what they really are.'" Captain Sarah: "First Officer Mr. Scott, what do your sensors show"? First Officer Mr. Scott: "Captain, if I have translated the readings properly, it looks like there may be a dozen different logical things they are showing me, but we can be certain of one thing..." Captain Sarah: "What's that Mr. Scott"? First Officer Mr. Scott: "That what ever I come up with, will be ultimately real and loaded with its own characteristics." Captain Sarah: "Good to have you 'on-board' Mr. Scott." First Officer Mr. Scott: "Captain, just a moment... yes, I'm picking up new realities, heading 3, 7, 43." Captain Sarah: "That's likely the Suttamite invasion point. Lieutenant Ken H., change course to mark 3, 7, 43." Lieutenant Ken H: "Aye aye Captain .... argh, the Suttamites are the scourge of the universe, argh." Captain Sarah: "Lieutenant Ken H, that will be enough of that. If I wanted commentary, I'd consult the Sammohavinodani." Captain Sarah: "Mr. Scott, anything new on those realities you were picking up"? First Officer Mr. Scott: "They're a blurry haze Captain. They don't seem to register as 'ultimate realities' or as 'non-existants.' The readings seem to show a continuum of insubstantial apparitions. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE." Captain Sarah: "Settle down Mr. Scott. Those readings are being distorted by the Suttamites. Yes, that's their 'signature characteristic' and why they are so dangerous. They distort the reality that we so clearly and definitively know and cherish. First Officer Scott: "Then if that's the case, they are coming our way at warp speed." Lieutenant Ken H: "Those bastards...they're always 'warping' something." Captain Sarah: "Again with the commentary Mr. Ken H."? First Officer Mr. Scott: "Captain, we've got to do something...something very real..." Captain Sarah: "Of course... Arm the 'own characteristic' torpedoes Mr. Ken H." Lieutenant Ken H: "'Own characteristic' torpedoes armed Captain." Captain Sarah: "Fire torpedoes." First Officer Mr. Scott: "Captain, the sensors show the 'own characteristic' torpedoes went right through the Suttamites and didn't touch them at all. Captain Sarah: "Damn! The Suttamites must have developed a 'conditional relativity shield.' Mr Ken H, fire the 'ultimate reality phasers'... Let's see their conditionality dodge that!" First Officer Mr. Scott: "Captain, no effect. When we try to fire the 'ultimate reality phasers,' the Suttamites appear to cloak themselves in a 'fluctuating void' and our sensors can't pick up any realities to fire at." First Officer Mr. Scott: "Captain, sensors show that the Suttamites are arming their weapons tubes with Plantian trunks and conjurer's tricks." Captain Sarah: "Holy Moly. Raise the 'commentary shields' and reverse course, put all the other realities we can into the engines...but keep those commentary shield's raised!" Lieutenant Ken H: Captain, what's the danger?" Captain Sarah: "Those weapons will tear the 'reality' right out from under us. We got to escape their effect or we'll have nothing left to cling to." First Officer Mr. Scott: "Captain, we're entering home base quadrant DSG." Captain Sarah: "Oh yes, I can smell the sweet smell of realities." Its been a tough day. Beam these dhammas over to the rec center so I can go soak these namas and rupas in a hot tube. Lieutenant Ken H: "Captain, hot tubs don't exist because they are only concept." Captain Sarah: "Mr. Scott, throw Ken H in the brig and let him see if that exists or not. hehehehe." And so ends another exciting episode of -- "To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before" #92462 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 9:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before upasaka_howard DSG Star Fleet Command Priority Alert An abuse of the so-called Vulcan mind-meld technique has enabled the Suttamite outlaw, T.G. ("Gene") Roddenberry, known to some by the cryptic "Master 4GE," to gain access to the inner workings of a core DSG Star Fleet group known as the KSABHI. As a result of this abuse, the KSABHI, outraged at the permissive attitude displayed at the helm, now threatens DSG Star Fleet Command with the Wrath of Khun. To protect DSG Star Fleet Command from a devastating attack-from-within by the KSABHI, DSG Star Fleet Command hereby issues an all-quadrant bulletin calling for the arrest of the Suttamite criminal, Master 4GE, and his immediate commitment to the DSG Star Fleet Commentarial Retraining Center on Rigel 4. No reward for the apprehension of the criminal, Master 4GE, is offered, as, of course, like all concepts, he does not really exist. #92463 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 2:42 pm Subject: Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before scottduncan2 Dear TG, Nerditiously Brilliant!!! Sincerely, Scott. #92464 From: "colette" Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 7:35 pm Subject: Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before ksheri3 "We got all the thrills That money can buy. Well we keep gettin' richer but we can't get our picture on the cover of the rollin' stone" who else DR. HOOK AND THE MEDICINE SHOW. Splendid script TG! Did you once consider working for Mad Magazine? Those Suttamites just reminded me of the Midnight Special show, in the 60s, where I actually saw Dr. Hook and the Medicine show do the song Marrie Lavvaugh. Thanx for brightening up my dismall day! toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > > Abhidhama...the Final Frontier...these are the voyages of the starship, > "Abhidhamma"...its ongoing mission....to explore strange new concepts, to seek > out new meanings and interpretations, to boldly go where no Sutta has gone > before....la laaaaa....la la la la laaaaaaa...........la la laaaaaa.....la la la > la laaaaa..........Laaaa la la la la la la laaaaaaa.....laaaaaaa...la la > laaaaa... la la la laaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa <....> #92465 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 9:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before sarahprocter... Hi TG, Just back from a beach mission and my co-pilot Jon just came to see what I was chuckling over.... Very witty indeed - a sure winner for U.P. - 'zany' in due course:-)) Over and Out for now... Capt Sarah p.s Good response too from the AOL Search Agent Upasika. Convenient not having to offer a reward for capture during these tough times-). ============== #92466 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 9:34 pm Subject: Sri Lanka Revisited, Ch 6, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, We hear sounds all day long; some are soft, some are loud, but most of the time there is ignorance of realities. When there are conditions for sati it can be aware of the characteristic of sound, a reality appearing through the ears. At that moment we do not think of the quality of the sound or its source. When sound appears, there must also be hearing, a reality that experiences sound, at the same time. We may wonder how realities can be known one at a time. Each citta and thus also the citta with sati can experience only one object at a time. The characteristic of hearing may appear to sati. Sati may be mindful of hearing so that there can be more understanding of that characteristic. At another moment, not at the same time, the characteristic of sound may appear to sati and then there will be more understanding of it. Each moment of “study” with mindfulness is extremely short. The reality which is there as object of study appears and then it is gone, it is like a flash of lightning. There is no rule as to the object sati is mindful of, there is no self who can direct sati to a particular object. We know in theory that the characteristic of sound is quite different from the characteristic of hearing. We know that rúpa does not know anything and that nĺma experiences an object. However, the difference be-tween nĺma and rúpa can be directly known through mindfulness and study of their different characteristics when they appear. That is why one needs courage to be mindful of realities over and over again. Only at the first stage of insight knowledge (vipassanĺ ńĺůa) the difference between nĺma and rúpa is clearly known. If the difference between these two kinds of realities has not been realized yet their true nature cannot be known, they cannot be known as impermanent and not self. ******* Nina. #92467 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 9:38 pm Subject: Series Survey Quote nilovg Dear friends, The Atthasalini (II, Book II, Part II, 400) explains about being unguarded as to the "controlling faculties", the indriyas. Here the indriyas of eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind are referred to. We read: "Grasps the general appearance i.e., grasps by way of lusting desire a sign such as is of the male, or female, pleasant, etc, and which is the basis of corruption." When we cling to the general appearance of male or female, it shows that the object is not a paramattha dhamma. When we know that we see a man or woman, we don't just know the reality which appears through the eyes, but we have an image (nimitta), a concept on account of what appears through the eyes. The image of the general appearance of a man or woman is the foundation of defilements. Through the power of desire (chanda raga) we take that image for something attractive. When we like a concept such as a belt, it shows that the belt is an attractive image. One is attached to it, one is ruled by desire. If the belt is not beautiful, if it is not an attractive nimitta (image), one does not like it. On account of colours which appear through the eyes, there can be different nimittas, attractive or unattractive. We read further on in the Atthasalini: Grasps the details (anuvyanjana), "i.e. takes the various modes of hands and feet, of smiling, laughing, speaking, looking straight ahead, looking askance, which have earned the name of "details", they manifest, reveal the defilements. ------------ Nina. #92468 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 9:06 pm Subject: The 7 Wings & Links to ... bhikkhu0 Friends: What are the 7 Links to Awakening: Awareness is a link to Awakening (sati-sambojjhanga). Investigation of the states is a link to Awakening (vicaya-sambojjhanga). Energy is a link to Awakening (viriya-sambojjhanga). Joy is a link to Awakening (pÄŤti-sambojjhanga). Tranquillity is a link to Awakening (passaddhi-sambojjhanga). Concentration is a link to Awakening (samādhi-sambojjhanga). Equanimity is a link to Awakening (upekkhā-sambojjhanga). These are the seven links leading to final Enlightenment... Whose minds are well-developed in the factors of self-awakening, who delight in non-clinging, relinquishing all grasping, mind being radiant & beaming, fermentations all stilled: They, even in this world, are Unbound here! ... Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) .... #92469 From: Westend Buddhist Centre Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 7:26 am Subject: Go Ahead and Rain as Long as You Wish westendbuddhist November 8, 2008 ‘‘Channā me kuáš­ikā sukhā nivātā, vassa deva yathāsukhaᚃ; Cittaᚃ me susamāhitaᚃ vimuttaᚃ, ātāpÄŤ viharāmi vassa devā’’ti. My kuti (hut) is well-roofed, Safe and comfortable! My mind is well-concentrated And set free. Dwelling with diligence I spend my days in peace. Go ahead and rain, Oh dear Rain God, As long as you wish!  Comments:  None can have control Over the things happening in this physical world: Rain will rain And wind will blow. If one wants not to be affected By problems of heavy rain and wind, Or, what's happening in this world, Then s/he needs to secure within By restraining one's sense doors And composing the mind.  Therefore, the skillful person, With steady and composed mind Filled with joy and happiness, Never lets his/her mind be disturbed.  Once one stops hanging on To the things which are hanging onto one, There can be no conflict in life at all. Once one stops reacting And learns responding To what’s happening around the physical world, S/he can surely remain stable, independent And undisturbed: No more problems and pains in life.  Have a nice and wonderful day filled with joy and happiness !  - Bhikkhu Saranapala - ... #92470 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 10:51 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Series Quote Survey buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > Op 8-nov-2008, om 1:22 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > > > N: It is not wrong to think of concepts like a pen, or a person > > for > > > that matter. There are conditions for thinking in such ways. > > > > James: When someone sees various color through the eye door and the > > mind assembles those colors into the concept of "pen", it is > > implicit in that concept that the "pen" actually exists. It is part > > of the concept. So, if that isn't wrong as you state, then the pen > > actually exists. > -------- > N: At the moment of thinking there may be the belief that the pen > exists, that a person exists. > But existence, what is all about? It is philosophy, being engaged > with ontological questions: what is the truth, what exists, what not. > Then many doubts arise. It makes life very heavy and complicated. James: Well, this is a very odd response. It seems hypocritical that you would tell me that existence is a moot point when the main focus of your writings is existence! As I see it, you define anatta as the non-existence of conventional reality: that nothing exists apart from namas and rupas. Now, when I really try to pin down an answer as to what that means, you tell me that it is a moot point and it only makes life more complicated. Well, okay. I'm not sure how to respond to that. So, are you saying that existence is not important? So it's okay if I choose to believe that people exist? Have I misunderstood your position in regards to anatta? Metta, James #92471 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 11:06 pm Subject: Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before buddhatrue Hey TG, LOL! Brilliant parody! I just kept laughing and laughing through the whole thing. Just when I thought it couldn't get any funnier, it does! LOL! My favorite part is Captain Sarah in the hot tub soaking up those namas and rupas! :-)))))))))) Metta, James #92472 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 11:31 pm Subject: Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before kenhowardau Hi Trekkies, I must be the only person on planet earth who (as far as he can remember) has never watched an episode of Star Trek. But I think I can follow TG's parody: The crew of the starship Abhidhamma resist, for one more day, the relentless Mahayana invasion. For one more day the teaching of paramattha dhammas is saved from being replaced by the teaching of 'a sea of being.' And the teaching of 'no self' is saved from being replaced by the teaching of 'no own being.' I liked it. But the series does have an unhappy ending, doesn't it? According to the ancient script the Abhidhamma is eventually vaporised, and the true Dhamma disappears from the known universe. (Woops, I hope I haven't spoiled it for anyone.) :-) Ken H #92473 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 8, 2008 11:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before sarahprocter... Hey James & TG, --- On Sun, 9/11/08, buddhatrue wrote: > My favorite part is Captain Sarah in the hot tub soaking up those namas and rupas! :-)))))))))) ... S: Yes, I love that part too - most appropriate....just my idea of bliss!:-)))))) No doubt about it, when TG is in good humour, he has us nailed:-) Metta, Sarah p.s looking f/w to reading it out loud with Jon later when we read the day's posts. ========= #92474 From: han tun Date: Sun Nov 9, 2008 12:18 am Subject: Re: Go Ahead and Rain as Long as You Wish hantun1 Bhante Saranapala, ‘‘Channā me kuáš­ikā sukhā nivātā, vassa deva yathāsukhaᚃ; Cittaᚃ me susamāhitaᚃ vimuttaᚃ, ātāpÄŤ viharāmi vassa devā’’ti. My kuti (hut) is well-roofed, Safe and comfortable! My mind is well-concentrated And set free. Dwelling with diligence I spend my days in peace. Go ahead and rain, Oh dear Rain God, As long as you wish! ------------------------------ Han: Is the verse your own composition? If it is from Sn 1.2 Dhaniya Sutta, it is different from the text. Dhaniya the cattleman: "The rice is cooked, my milking done. I live with my people along the banks of the Mahi; my hut is roofed, my fire lit: so if you want, rain-god, go ahead & rain." The Buddha: "Free from anger, my stubbornness gone, I live for one night along the banks of the Mahi; my hut's roof is open, my fire out: so if you want, rain-god, go ahead & rain." Respectfully, Han #92475 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 9, 2008 12:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Quote Survey nilovg Hi James, Op 9-nov-2008, om 7:51 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > N: At the moment of thinking there may be the belief that the pen > > exists, that a person exists. > > But existence, what is all about? It is philosophy, being engaged > > with ontological questions: what is the truth, what exists, what > not. > > Then many doubts arise. It makes life very heavy and complicated. > > James: Well, this is a very odd response. It seems hypocritical > that you would tell me that existence is a moot point when the main > focus of your writings is existence! As I see it, you define anatta > as the non-existence of conventional reality: that nothing exists > apart from namas and rupas. Now, when I really try to pin down an > answer as to what that means, you tell me that it is a moot point > and it only makes life more complicated. Well, okay. I'm not sure > how to respond to that. > > So, are you saying that existence is not important? So it's okay if > I choose to believe that people exist? Have I misunderstood your > position in regards to anatta? --------- N: Yes, you misunderstood. I did not expect that you would find my answer satisfactory. I find the appraoch of existence or non- existence and even the word existence rather abstract. That is why I cannot give a straight answer to your questions. I prefer a practical approach: what type of citta arises right now? Kusala or akusala? What type of citta asks such questions on existence and non-existence? It is useful to know as background info what are stories and concepts and what are realities, nama and rupa, that can be directly experienced when they appear. But then, in my life, I do not go around when seeing a pen, asking myself: does it exist or not. Or seeing a person: does he exist or not. Rather I would like to know what seeing is, and what type of citta thinks: kusala or akusala? To me that is practical: cultivating more kusala and understanding of different moments in my life. ------ Nina. #92476 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 9, 2008 1:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Quote Survey nilovg Hi Howard, Op 8-nov-2008, om 17:16 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > We should not "learn more about citta," but should > wordlessly and nonconceptually SEE! ------- N: Learn more: I mean on all levels. The Abhidhamma is a great help to learn different types of citta, we have to know that first. Then, this can be verified when cittas occur, and they can be 'studied' with mindfulness and understanding, so that understanding grows and can become insight, developing unto lokuttara pa~n~naa, but this in the course of a long, long time. Nina. #92477 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Nov 9, 2008 12:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before upasaka_howard Salute to DSG Star Fleet Command Leader Sarah - May the farce be with you! (Uh, oh! Yoda in different universe, be.) With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/9/2008 12:08:12 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: p.s Good response too from the AOL Search Agent Upasika. Convenient not having to offer a reward for capture during these tough times-). #92478 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Nov 9, 2008 12:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Scott, and James, and especially TG) - In a message dated 11/9/2008 2:31:56 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Trekkies, I must be the only person on planet earth who (as far as he can remember) has never watched an episode of Star Trek. But I think I can follow TG's parody: The crew of the starship Abhidhamma resist, for one more day, the relentless Mahayana invasion. For one more day the teaching of paramattha dhammas is saved from being replaced by the teaching of 'a sea of being.' And the teaching of 'no self' is saved from being replaced by the teaching of 'no own being.' I liked it. But the series does have an unhappy ending, doesn't it? According to the ancient script the Abhidhamma is eventually vaporised, and the true Dhamma disappears from the known universe. (Woops, I hope I haven't spoiled it for anyone.) :-) Ken H ============================= Ken, if you can get hold of DVD's or even VCR tapes of old Star Trek episodes, especially from early in the TV series, I think you might love it. The characterization, plot, themes, psychological insights and philosophical/religious issues dealt with make it an unusual and simply superb series. And, yes, TG, your wonderful parody sure does deserve a place of honor in U. P.!! Brilliant work!! :-) With metta, Howard #92479 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Nov 9, 2008 5:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before TGrand458@... Hi All I'm relieved that most seemed to enjoy it. ;-) Thanks for the nice comments. Now, Scott, as far as being a Nerd goes...can you possibly imagine, from the eyes of "outsiders," a more 'Nerdier' group than a bunch of folks who spend huge portions of their lives debating fine points in ancient Buddhist texts. LOL TG #92480 From: "Scott" Date: Sun Nov 9, 2008 10:42 am Subject: [dsg] Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before scottduncan2 Dear TG, Regarding: TG: "Now, Scott, as far as being a Nerd goes...can you possibly imagine, from the eyes of 'outsiders,' a more 'Nerdier' group than a bunch of folks who spend huge portions of their lives debating fine points in ancient Buddhist texts." Scott: Nope. The Nerdiest. It's great, eh? Sincerely, Scott. #92481 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Nov 9, 2008 6:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before TGrand458@... Hi Scott In a message dated 11/9/2008 11:45:56 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: Scott: Nope. The Nerdiest. It's great, eh? ........................................................... TG: Only us Nerds know that we really aren't Nerds. LOL Because 'Nerd' is just concept and isn't real? Better fact-check that with Ken H for me. LOL Or perhaps we are in a Nerd worm-hole and don't gain the perspective to see it. ;-) TG OUT #92482 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Nov 9, 2008 1:53 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before kenhowardau Hi TG (and Scott), --------------- <. . .> TG: > LOL Because 'Nerd' is just concept and isn't real? Better fact- check that with Ken H for me. --------------- It depends on who is talking. When an ordinary person is talking about a nerd then it's just a concept. It is an idea - of a certain kind of persisting being. In the suttas, however, it is a different matter. If there is a reference in the suttas to "nerd" then it must be understood as referring to the five khandhas. (So in that case "nerd" is definitely not a concept!). I'm not sure which exact combination of namas and rupas it would be, though. My guess is a nerd would be javana-citta with lobha-cetasika (among others) when they arise together take a particularly dull, boring, uncool, scientific fact as their arammana (object). Just like now? :-) Ken H #92483 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Nov 9, 2008 9:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and TG & Scott) - In a message dated 11/9/2008 4:53:35 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi TG (and Scott), --------------- <. . .> TG: > LOL Because 'Nerd' is just concept and isn't real? Better fact- check that with Ken H for me. --------------- It depends on who is talking. When an ordinary person is talking about a nerd then it's just a concept. It is an idea - of a certain kind of persisting being. In the suttas, however, it is a different matter. If there is a reference in the suttas to "nerd" then it must be understood as referring to the five khandhas. (So in that case "nerd" is definitely not a concept!). I'm not sure which exact combination of namas and rupas it would be, though. My guess is a nerd would be javana-citta with lobha-cetasika (among others) when they arise together take a particularly dull, boring, uncool, scientific fact as their arammana (object). Just like now? :-) Ken H =============================== Of course you are continuing here the tongue-in-cheek tenor of this thread, Ken. But I would take this opportunity (perhaps *pounce* on this opportunity? LOLOL!) to note that in "I'm not sure which exact combination of namas and rupas it would be, though," it might not be inappropriate to replace 'combination' by 'aggregation', at least as I understand 'aggregation'. :-) With metta, Howard P. S. This is just an offhand remark I made here, Ken. I'm not looking to dredge up what has already consumed far more pixels and bandwidth than necessary! ;-) #92484 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Nov 9, 2008 4:03 pm Subject: Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > . . . > Ken, if you can get hold of DVD's or even VCR tapes of old Star Trek > episodes, especially from early in the TV series, I think you might love it. The > characterization, plot, themes, psychological insights and > philosophical/religious issues dealt with make it an unusual and simply superb series. Hi Howard, Thanks for the tip, I probably would like it. I've liked most of the science fiction *comedies* I've seen - Red Dwarf was a favourite - and so these not-to-be-taken-too-seriously sci-fi dramas would probably suit me too. (Dr Who was another favourite.) However, I also like to be the odd man out. For example I would love to have been the only person never to have eaten at a McDonald's. But I had a Big Mac once back in 1987. Curses! I haven't seen an episode of Star Trek (as far as I can recall) and I'm also about the only person never to have seen The Matrix. Lots of people have told me to see The Matrix, and I've been hoping to catch it on TV, but that hasn't happened yet. Either way I'm happy! :-) Ken H #92485 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Nov 9, 2008 5:05 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before buddhatrue Hi Ken H., I was having a discussion with Nina on this subject but I don't feel as if I am getting a clear understanding. I would like to ask for some clarification on something you write here: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > It depends on who is talking. When an ordinary person is talking > about a nerd then it's just a concept. It is an idea - of a certain > kind of persisting being. In the suttas, however, it is a different > matter. If there is a reference in the suttas to "nerd" then it must > be understood as referring to the five khandhas. (So in that > case "nerd" is definitely not a concept!). I'm not sure which exact > combination of namas and rupas it would be, though. James: It seems that you have two definitions for "person" (in this case a nerdy person :-): wordly image of person, and Dhamma image of person. The worldly image of a person sees the person as a persisting being (I would assume persisting in soul/mind/spirit as everyone knows the body dies), and the Dhamma image of a person is the five khandas in various states of flux. The first image is a concept while the second image is a reality. Have I summarized your position accurately? (If so, I have some more follow-up questions). Metta, James #92486 From: han tun Date: Sun Nov 9, 2008 5:07 pm Subject: Mindfulness of Death (6) hantun1 Dear James, Phil, Nina, Sarah, Jon, Howard, Lukas, Earlier, Howard wrote: [This is true. But that very point makes one concerned with the effect that one's own passing would have on those remaining. As I know the grief I would have for my wife should she be gone, I likewise know the grief she would have for me. So long as we are worldlings or even lesser ariyans, along with love comes attachment, and grief is the price we pay for that, a price I am willing to pay, for to not love out of fear of grief is to already lose.] Han: I like very much what Howard has written. ------------------------------ But why are we grief-stricken when we lose our loved ones? One answer could be that we consider our loved ones as *ours* - my wife, my son, my daughter, etc. In Burma there was a monk who told his followers not to cry when their loved ones died, saying that we all must die one day, and all conditioned things are impermanent, and so on. One day the monk was crying at a funeral. When the followers asked him why he was crying, he replied, “Oh! She was my mother.” ------------------------------ That sense of belonging as *ours* was also the main theme in the following sutta: SN 35.101 Na Tumhaka Sutta: Not Yours Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.101.than.html ["Suppose a person were to gather or burn or do as he likes with the grass, twigs, branches, and leaves here in Jeta's Grove. Would the thought occur to you, 'It's us that this person is gathering, burning, or doing with as he likes'?" "No, lord. Why is that? Because those things are not our self nor do they pertain to our self." "In the same way, monks, the eye is not yours: let go of it. Your letting go of it will be for your long-term happiness and benefit... The ear... The nose... The tongue... The body... The intellect is not yours: let go of it. Your letting go of it will be for your long-term happiness and benefit... Whatever arises in dependence on intellect-contact, experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither-pleasure-nor-pain, that too is not yours: let go of it. Your letting go of it will be for your long-term happiness and benefit."] Han: If we can consider that our loved ones are not *ours* really, and can let them go, our grief will be very much reduced. ------------------------------ The Buddha said in Dhammapada Verse 62 that if a person himself is not his own how can sons and wealth be his? 62. Puttaa matthi dhana matthi iti baalo viha~n~nati. Attaa hi attano natthi kuto puttaa kuto dhana.m? 62."I have sons, I have wealth"; with this (feeling of attachment) the fool is afflicted. Indeed, he himself is not his own, how can sons and wealth be his? ------------------------------ And there is yet another sutta which is relevant. [On one occasion Gandhabhaka the headman of Uruvelakappa said to the Blessed One, "It would be good, lord, if the Blessed One would teach me the origination and ending of stress." The Blessed One said: "Now what do you think, headman: Are there any people in Uruvelakappa who, if they were murdered or imprisoned or fined or censured, would cause sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair to arise in you?" "Yes, lord, there are people in Uruvelakappa who, if they were murdered or imprisoned or fined or censured, would cause sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair to arise in me." "And are there any people in Uruvelakappa who, if they were murdered or imprisoned or fined or censured, would cause no sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair to arise in you?" "Yes, lord, there are people in Uruvelakappa who, if they were murdered or imprisoned or fined or censured, would cause no sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair to arise in me." "Now what is the cause, what is the reason, why the murder, imprisonment, fining, or censure of some of the people in Uruvelakappa would cause you sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair, whereas the murder imprisonment, fining, or censure of others would cause you no sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair?" "Those people in Uruvelakappa whose murder, imprisonment, fining, or censure would cause me sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair are those for whom I feel desire and passion. Those people in Uruvelakappa whose murder, imprisonment, fining, or censure would cause me no sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair are those for whom I feel no desire or passion."] Han: And the Buddha summarized as follows: ["Thus, headman, by this line of reasoning it may be realized how stress, when arising, arises: All of it has desire as its root, has desire as its cause — for desire is the cause of stress."] SN 42.11 Gandhabhaka (Bhadraka) Sutta: To Gandhabhaka (Bhadraka) Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn42/sn42.011.than.html Han: The Buddha said, “All of it has desire as its root, has desire as its cause; for desire is the cause of stress. (sabbam tam chanda muulakam chanda nidaanam, chando hi muulam dukkhassaa). If we can have less desire and passion for our loved ones, we will have less sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair concerning with them. ------------------------------ Han: I have mentioned above why we are grief-stricken when we lose our loved ones, and what the Buddha has taught us how to lessen our sorrow and grief. Now, if you ask me whether I can do what the Buddha has taught? I will have to lower my head and reply, “No, sir, I cannot still do it. I am still very much attached to my family.” Here, I will echo Howard’s words [So long as we are worldlings or even lesser ariyans, along with love comes attachment, and grief is the price we pay for that, a price I am willing to pay, for to not love out of fear of grief is to already lose.] Respectfully, Han #92487 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Nov 9, 2008 5:29 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before kenhowardau Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: . . . > But I would take this opportunity (perhaps *pounce* on this > opportunity? LOLOL!) to note that in "I'm not sure which exact combination of namas > and rupas it would be, though," it might not be inappropriate to replace > 'combination' by 'aggregation', at least as I understand 'aggregation'. :-) > > With metta, > Howard > > P. S. This is just an offhand remark I made here, Ken. I'm not looking to > dredge up what has already consumed far more pixels and bandwidth than > necessary! ;-) Too late, I'm onto it! :-) My "combination" was of nothing more than the namas and rupas that arise in a *single* fleeting moment. I see no need for any other kind of combination or "aggregation." Your type of combination (as I understand it) is of namas and rupas that exist (or have existed) over the course of time and that are related to each other in a way that makes each sentient being distinct from every other. As I was saying, I see no need for such a concept. The conditions that make one so-called sentient being distinct from every other are all present in each single moment - albeit in latent form. Take my example of a citta conventionally known as "nerd Ken H" (javana-citta with lobha etc.) It might contain the latent conditions for dosa with the concept "longboard" as object to arise soon after it. Another identical set of citta and cetasikas conventionally known as "nerd Brian" might contain the latent conditions for adosa with the concept "penguin" as object to arise soon after it. What I am saying is there is no need to think in terms of "a complex web of interrelated namas and rupas." Just the few, present, namas and rupas contain all the information required to explain everything. Ken H #92488 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Nov 9, 2008 5:52 pm Subject: Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before kenhowardau Hi James, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: . . . > It seems that you have two definitions for "person" (in this > case a nerdy person :-): wordly image of person, and Dhamma image > of person. The worldly image of a person sees the person as a > persisting being (I would assume persisting in soul/mind/spirit as > everyone knows the body dies), and the Dhamma image of a person is > the five khandas in various states of flux. The first image is a > concept while the second image is a reality. Have I summarized your > position accurately? (If so, I have some more follow-up questions). > > Yes, I think that is pretty much the way I see it. One small correction might be that the second definition of person is a 'truth' or a 'fact' rather than a 'reality.' I think we should reserve the word 'reality' for an individual nama or rupa rather than for a combination (or co-arising) of namas and rupas. One other thing: Where you said "persisting in soul/mind/spirit as everyone knows the body dies" I would have said "persisting for any length of time longer than one moment (of nama or rupa)." Looking forward to any follow up questions. Ken H #92489 From: Westend Buddhist Centre Date: Sun Nov 9, 2008 9:33 pm Subject: Every Problem has a Cause: Does One See it? westendbuddhist  November 10, 2008  The Supremely Enlightened Buddha Said:  Yadā have pātubhavanti dhammā, Ātāpino jhāyato brāhmaṇassa; Athassa kaṅkhā vapayanti sabbā, Yato pajānāti sahetudhamma’’nti When all phenomena become clear To a Brahmin dwelling diligently With a calmly jhanic mind, Then all his doubts vanish From the moment s/he begins to see Every phenomenon has a cause.  Comment:  Without necessary causes and conditions Phenomena or things cannot arise. Without seeing these causes and conditions One cannot be free From shackles and knots in life.  Every problem has a necessary cause. Every pain has a necessary cause. The question though is: Does one see it?  What is seen, one does not see as it really is. What one sees, it is not properly seen. Thus, not seeing properly One’s life becomes baffled more and more As one journeys through the cycle of life.  Then, to see properly One needs to put full energy Into the present moment diligently With a fully absorbed and calmed mind. This has to be done As if a meditative monk Who de-conditions the conditioned life.  Shutting down the senses And calming the mind, When one sees, With wisdom eye, That everything has a necessary condition, One’s all struggles in life Will begin to disappear Creating a life Free from pains and anxieties.  - Bhikkhu Saranapala - .... #92490 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Nov 9, 2008 11:51 pm Subject: Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before buddhatrue Hi Ken H. Thank you for your reply. Here are my follow-up questions: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi James, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" > wrote: > Yes, I think that is pretty much the way I see it. One small > correction might be that the second definition of person is a 'truth' > or a 'fact' rather than a 'reality.' I think we should reserve the > word 'reality' for an individual nama or rupa rather than for a > combination (or co-arising) of namas and rupas. > > One other thing: Where you said "persisting in soul/mind/spirit as > everyone knows the body dies" I would have said "persisting for any > length of time longer than one moment (of nama or rupa)." James: Okay, since you believe in the "Radically Impermanent Person" defined exclusively in terms of the five khandas (to borrow a phrase from Howard), do you believe that "people" exist? In other words, is there a Nina and Lodewjick? Or does the radical impermanence of the five khandas somehow negate the existence of a "person"? In your view, does radical impermanence blur or negate the existence of separate persons? Additionally, does radical impermanence blur or negate the differences between a person and, say, and apple- or between a person and a picture of a person? Metta, James #92491 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:09 am Subject: Sri Lanka Revisited, Ch 6, no 6. nilovg Dear friends, When the first stage of insight-knowledge arises pańńa realizes the difference between nĺma and rúpa through the mind-door. Cittas that experience objects arise in a series or process of cittas. There are processes of cittas that experience an object through one of the sense-doors and processes of cittas that experience an object through the mind-door. For example, visible object is experienced by cittas arising in the eye-door process and after that visible object is experienced by cittas arising in a mind-door process. When seeing arises, it seems to last, at least for a while. It may seem that there is seeing without interruption. In reality visible object, after it has been experienced through the eye-door, is experienced through the mind-door. It seems that seeing is immediately followed by hearing but in reality there must have been many processes of citta in between. However, we do not notice this, cittas arise and fall away very quickly. Rúpas that are sense objects such as visible object or sound, can be experienced through their corresponding sense- door and through the mind-door, and nĺma, such as seeing or hearing, can be experienced only through the mind-door. Thus, through the mind- door both nĺma and rúpa can be experienced. When the difference between nĺma and rúpa is realized by pańńĺ, it is realized during a mind-door process. At those moments it is also known what a mind-door process is. At this moment we know it in theory, but at the moment of insight-knowledge it is directly known. At such moments there is no self, no world, and nĺma and rúpa clearly appear one at a time through the mind-door. It is useful to know about the stages of insight-knowledge, otherwise we may erroneously believe that stages of insight have arisen already. Pańńĺ is bound to be weak in the beginning. There may sometimes be awareness of a rúpa and sometimes of a nĺma, but we should not take our weak knowledge for the first stage of insight- knowledge. There is likely to be an idea of self who is mindful. Is it already clearly known what the mind-door is? It is beneficial to know what one does not know yet. ****** Nina. #92492 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:13 am Subject: Series Survey Quote. nilovg Dear friends, Question: If we don't cling to concepts, I fear that we don't know that this is a pen. Sujin: That is not so. We should know realities in accordance with the truth. What appears through the eyes falls away and then there are mind-door process cittas, which arise afterwards and know a concept. Pa~n~na (wisdom) should know realities as they are. It should know what is visible object which appears through the eye-door. It should know that the experience of visible object is different from the moment that citta knows a concept. Thus we can become detached from the idea that visible object which appears are beings, people, or things; we can become detached from that which is the foundation of clinging. We should understand that when it is known that there is a man, a woman, beings, or different people, the object is an image or concept known through the mind-door. When we develop satipatthana we should know, in order to be able to realize the arising and falling away of nama and rupa, the characteristics of the realities just as they naturally appear. It should be known that paramattha dhammas are not concepts. One should continue to develop pa~n~na when realities appear through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense, and mind-door. ******** Nina. #92493 From: "sprlrt" Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:13 am Subject: [dsg] Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before sprlrt Very funny TG. Now will you please sit down and open the Dhammasangani, page 47392, thank you :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > > Hi All > > > I'm relieved that most seemed to enjoy it. ;-) #92494 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:16 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 311, 312 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 311, 312. Intro: In the previous section it was explained that by rightly seeing the continuity that occurs through the linking of cause and fruit one abandons the annihilation view. By wrongly seeing identity in the non-interruption of this continuity one clings to the eternity view. In the following section (311) it is demonstrated that by rightly seeing the arising of each new dhamma with its own characteristic one abandons the eternity belief. By not seeing continuity, one clings to the annihilation view. In section 312 it is explained that by rightly seeing that there are only realities occurring according to conditions one understands that there is no self, no creator, and by wrong understanding one clings to the moral inefficiency of action, akiriya di.t.thi. ------------ Text Vis. 311. (b) The defining of the individual characteristic of ignorance, etc., is called the 'method of diversity'. -------- N: One sees that the cause and the fruit in the Dependent Origination have each a different characteristic (sabhaava lakkha.na), as the Tiika explains. ------------ Text Vis. : One who sees this rightly abandons the eternity view by seeing the arising of each new state. And one who sees it wrongly clings to the annihilation view by apprehending individual diversity in the events in a single continuity as though it were a broken continuity. --------- N: When someone sees the Dependent Origination wrongly he only sees diversity, without continuity. He does not see that there is a continuity as a cause produces its fruit. He believes that another person is dead, and another person is born, and therefore, by taking that a different being is destroyed and a different being has arisen, without any connection, he clings to the annihilation view, as the Tiika explains. ------------- Text Vis. 312. (c) The absence of interestedness on the part of ignorance, such as 'Formations must be made to occur by me', or on the part of formations, such as 'Consciousness must be made to occur by us', and so on, is called the 'method of uninterestedness'. One who sees this rightly abandons the self view by understanding the absence of a maker. -------- N: Thus, in not clinging to an idea of a self who causes the occurrence of kamma formations, kusala or akusala kamma, is the method of uninterestedness, or inactivity, abyaapaara. P. Maung translates abyaapaara as ‘the method of non-occupation’. In the ‘Dispeller of Delusion” (p. 243) this is translated as the method of inactivity. The Tiika explains that when seeing the method of inactivity rightly one understands that there are only dhammmas (dhammamattaa), who are inactive (niriiha), without a soul (nijjiiva). ------- Text Vis.: One who sees it wrongly clings to the moral-inefficacy-of- action view, because he does not perceive that the causative function of ignorance, etc., is established as a law by their respective individual essences. --------------- N: The cause or condition for what is conditioned is an established fact, as the Tiika explains. The characteristics of cause and fruit are fixed, niyama, they cannot be altered. If one fails to see this rightly, one clings to the moral-inefficacy- of-action view, akiriyadi.t.thi. That is the view that there are no good or bad actions that produce results. ------- Conclusion: The text states repeatedly : when this is rightly seen, when this is wrongly seen. Right understanding prevents going into the extremes of eternalism or annihilism. There is a connection, a continuity in the cycle of birth and death, but this should not be misinterpreted as there being the same person who travels from the past to the present life. When one fails to see continuity in cause and fruit, one will cling to the annihilation belief. One believes that the dying-consciousness is not succeeded by the rebirth- consciousness in the next life. As the Tiika states: there are mere dhammas, not a person who makes formations occur. But, this does not mean that there are no kusala dhammas and akusala dhammas that will produce their appropriate results accordingly. If someone believes in the moral inefficiency of action he will not be inclined to perform kusala, listen to the Dhamma and develop understanding. Not a self or a person is doing so, but mere dhammas, and these arise because of the appropriate conditions. --------------- Nina. #92495 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before nilovg Dear Alberto, please, would you give the page no in English? I am very keen! Nina. Op 10-nov-2008, om 9:13 heeft sprlrt het volgende geschreven: > Very funny TG. Now will you please sit down and open the > Dhammasangani, page 47392, thank you :-) #92496 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: inner aayatanas, was: Series Quote Survey nilovg Hi TG. Op 8-nov-2008, om 18:00 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > But through the > Dhamma we learn that the contents of thinking are not all that > important, > but > rather, the citta that thinks, citta, an inward reality." > > ..................................................................... > > TG: The above is atrocious IMO. There is such a stench of gross > attachment to this dhamma theory...it just comes through over and > over in the writings > I see on it. The above isn't close to the mark, it isn't even on > the same > planet as "the mark." > > > An (important) "inward reality"? Wow...if that isn't something to > mentally > grab a hold of, I don't know what is. Let's see what is perhaps the > most > "ontological" description the Buddha attempted about this "inward > reality" to > contrast -- ---------- There are six inner aayatanas (sense-fields) and six outer aayatanas. The senses and all cittas are inner aayatanas. The sense objects and dhammas are outer aayatanas. The citta that thinks is not the same as the citta that sees, different bases, different doorways, different objects. Citta lasts shorter than a flash of lightning. What is impermanent is not self, it is beyond control. If we study citta more poperly, you see that there is no danger to take it for an inward soul. No stench of gross attachment. Open the Dhammasangani and study citta, and do be reminded that it is all about daily life, and to be verified in daily life, right now. Without citta nothing would appear, no experience of colour, sound, no thinking about concepts such as that Star track (I know nothing about, never bothered to see it). We are so absorbed in what we experience, in the outer objects, and also in stories, concepts, that we forget to find out more about the citta that cognizes different objects. Take a funny story one laughs about, it is daily life, isn't it? What type of citta motivates laughing? Kusala or akusala? Should we not 'study' this? The Buddha reminded a comedian that he and his listeners would go to the "Hell of Laughter". This instills a sense of urgency, life is short and we better not delay learning about nama and rupa. Do not forget to learn more about the different cittas that experience then this object, then that object. It is so tempting to get lost in stories on account of the objects experienced one at a time. Sorry, I cannot go into your other points, but I am grateful Scott continues the dialogue. Urgent work for me to finish at the moment. ****** Nina. #92497 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 2:19 am Subject: Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before kenhowardau Hi James, --------- James: Okay, since you believe in the "Radically Impermanent Person" defined exclusively in terms of the five khandas (to borrow a phrase from Howard), do you believe that "people" exist? In other words, is there a Nina and Lodewjick? --------- There are only the five khandhas. In none of them is there a self, or person. Therefore I don't believe that people exist. Nor do I believe that people do not exist. There are no people, so how could people do, or not do, anything? It's the same as asking, do you believe flying purple elephants can swim? --------------------------- J: > Or does the radical impermanence of the five khandas somehow negate the existence of a "person"? --------------------------- I noticed Howard and TG using the term radical impermanence, but it went over my head. ------------------------------------ J: > In your view, does radical impermanence blur or negate the existence of separate persons? ------------------------------------ The teaching of conditionality makes the idea of people and conventional objects redundant. They are no longer necessary for making sense of the world. All that is necessary is knowledge of conditioned dhammas. ------------------------------------------ JL: > Additionally, does radical impermanence blur or negate the differences between a person and, say, and apple- or between a person and a picture of a person? ------------------------------------------- There are no people and no apples in ultimate reality. Therefore, it makes no sense to say they are either different or identical to each other (or both or neither). When we have the concept of a person or an apple in mind it is good to remember the Dhamma and to know that, really, all we are seeing or touching are the sense rupas - visible object, tangible object etc. Ken H #92498 From: "sprlrt" Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 2:53 am Subject: Re: Rupa khandha sprlrt Groups/kalapas that include pasada rupas (eye, ears, nose, tongue and body) are solely the product of kamma, a nama dhamma (cetana/intention/volition cetasika) part of sankhara khandha, that has arisen, accumulated, and then fallen away, in all past javana cittas both in sense door process and in the far more numerous processes trhough the sixth door, the mind. Vipaka cittas like cakkhu vinnana are also arising with kamma as key condition for their arising. The self shouldn't be the picture at all, but of course is there all the time and right in the foreground, 'I'm seeing...', 'I'm hearing ....' etc. All this has a (pali) name, ditthi/wrong views. 3 in particular play an important role, natthika, ahetuka and akiriya, which Nina reviewed in her comments to Vism. XIV - 164 and Tika: "There are three kinds of wrong view which are very dangerous, they are unwholesome courses of action, akusala kamma patha through the mind, and these are capable of causing an unhappy rebirth. They are the following three views: 1) There is no result of kamma (natthika-ditthi) 2) There are no causes (in happening, ahetuka-ditthi) 3) There is no such thing as kamma ( akiriya-ditthi) When one does not see kamma as cause one does not see its result either, and when one does not see the result of kamma, one does not see kamma as cause either. As to the view that there are no causes (ahetuka-di.t.thi), this is the view that there is no cause for the depravity and purity of beings, that one is bent by fate, chance and nature. If one is firmly convinced about these three views they are unwholesome courses of action through the mind, and they lead to the commitment of many other kinds of evil deeds. One may not see the benefit of kusala such as generosity or siila, and one may not see the danger of killing, stealing and other evil deeds. So long as one has not become a sotaapanna, there is still the latent tendency of wrong view. Wrong view should be eradicated first, before the other defilements can be eradicated. So long as there is wrong interpretation of realities, one does not see defilements as conditioned dhammas, one takes them for self. They can only be eradicated by pańńaa which sees them as they are." #92499 From: "han_whee" Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 2:51 am Subject: DEVOTEES CHANTING TOGETHER WITH MONKS han_whee Is there any strict Vinaya rule which prohibit lay devotees chanting together with monks ? I just took up chanting. With Metta Hanwhee #92500 From: "reverendaggacitto" Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 4:30 am Subject: DEVOTEES CHANTING WITH MONKS reverendagga... Hi Hanwee! I am SURE you have NOTHING to worry about! There is no such prohibition! Have fun! Om Namah Dhamma Gotama! bhikkhu/reverend aggacitto #92501 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 11:40 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Mindfulness of Death (5) nilovg Dear Han, I like this post. When relatives help a dying person it is their kusala citta, and also for the dying person it is good to have an opportunity for appreciation. He may have kusala cittas, but, as you say, we do not know about the moment just before the dying citta. Conditioned by former kamma. These days I reflect on kusala for oneself, kusala for others and kusala just for the sake of Dhamma. The last one is best: kusala is kusala and no need to have thoughts about oneself or others. I also like your last post. We are not anaagaamis, and thus we cry because of loss. But even those cittas can be known as conditioned namas, beyond control. At the moment of understanding the citta is kusala, and there is no sadness. There are many different moments. Also at the moment of seeing there is no sadness, seeing is another citta, vipaakacitta. In this way one may take the sadness as less important. It will help to cope. A citta with sadness is only one among many. Nina. Op 8-nov-2008, om 9:31 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > I do not care anymore about good death-proximate kamma or bad death- > proximate kamma. I will strengthen my good habitual kamma by doing > meritorious deeds all the time to the extent possible, but without > any expectations. It may or may not come to my rescue at the final > moment. I do not care. I do not care anything anymore. Now I can > sleep peacefully! #92502 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 11:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa khandha nilovg Dear Alberto, Op 8-nov-2008, om 10:16 heeft sprlrt het volgende geschreven: > eye-sense for instance is composed of the 8 inseparable rupas, > jivitindriya/life plus cakkhupasada/eye-sense, and pasada rupas, > unlike visaya rupas, can only be experienced through the mind door, > bhavangupacchedda, a non-vithi citta (which doesn't arise and fall in > a specific order/process), though the visiible object/vanno rupa that > arises together in that decad can. ------- N: I try to think this one out. I think that the visible object present as one of the inseparables in eyesense is not an object that is seen. Only visible object that impinges on eyesense is seen. The aayatanas associate at that moment so that there is a condition for seeing. Nina. #92503 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa khandha nilovg Dear Alberto, Op 10-nov-2008, om 11:53 heeft sprlrt het volgende geschreven: > Vipaka cittas like cakkhu > vinnana are also arising with kamma as key condition for their > arising. The self shouldn't be the picture at all, but of course is > there all the time and right in the foreground, 'I'm seeing...', 'I'm > hearing ....' etc. ------ N: I like what you stress about the self being in the foreground all the time. As to kamma arising with cakkhuvi~n~naa.na, this is sahajata kamma paccaya, not asynchronous kamma-condition, kamma working from a different time. The latter has fallen away and can produce vipaka later on. But the cetanaa cetasika arising together with seeing is also called kamma, but another type, it is conascent with the vipaakacitta. I would not call the latter a keycondition. Former kamma is an important condition, but there are also eyesense and visible object, and also the eye-door adverting consciousness that preceded it and conditions it by way of contiguity condition. NIna. #92504 From: han tun Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 3:04 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Mindfulness of Death (5) hantun1 Dear Nina, Thank you very much for your kind feed-back. > Nina: I like this post. When relatives help a dying person it is their kusala citta, and also for the dying person it is good to have an opportunity for appreciation. He may have kusala cittas, but, as you say, we do not know about the moment just before the dying citta. Conditioned by former kamma. These days I reflect on kusala for oneself, kusala for others and kusala just for the sake of Dhamma. The last one is best: kusala is kusala and no need to have thoughts about oneself or others. I also like your last post. We are not anaagaamis, and thus we cry because of loss. But even those cittas can be known as conditioned namas, beyond control. At the moment of understanding the citta is kusala, and there is no sadness. There are many different moments. Also at the moment of seeing there is no sadness, seeing is another citta, vipaakacitta. In this way one may take the sadness as less important. It will help to cope. A citta with sadness is only one among many. Han: I like your comments, Nina. The only problem with me is that I cannot keep up with the “naama and ruupa now” all the time, and cannot follow the strict anattaa doctrine that you are following. So if someone suggests to me the same thing repeatedly I become defensive and reject the kind advice. Therefore, you will have to forgive me if I am sometimes rebellious. As a matter of fact, I used to talk like you are talking (although not so accurately or consistently) to my Burmese friends before I joined the Dhamma Discussion Groups on the Internet. Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #92505 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 1:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: inner aayatanas, was: Series Quote Survey TGrand458@... Hi Nina In a message dated 11/10/2008 1:59:55 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, _vangorko@..._ (mailto:vangorko@...) writes: Open the Dhammasangani and study citta, and do be reminded that it is all about daily life, and to be verified in daily life, right now. TG: I've read Dhammasangani, At least half through, I've read Atthasalini, The whole thing too. I've read Vibhanga also I can check that done. and Sammohavinodani was a whole lot of fun Visuddhimagga's been read many times through And Manual of Abhi Got the treatment too. I started Abhi studies, with "Abhidhamma in Daily Life," Read three times in a row That's three times -- thrice! But fortunately afterward, I didn't use the knife. ;-) There's a lot of gold, to be found in these there books. But to believe in 'ultimate realities,' I'd have to be a schnook Now I know you're very busy, Please go off on your way, And may your many Namas Have a happy day. #92506 From: "connie" Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 8:10 pm Subject: Sangiiti Sutta Corner: Threes (24-27) nichiconn Dear Friends, following on from #92040 Threes (19-23) (cy: #92215, #92354, #92387) - CSCD <antler) PED: [Vedic anta; Gothic andeis = Old High German. anti = English end; cp. also Latin antiae forehead (:English antler), and the prep. anti opposite, antika near=Latin ante; Greek anti, anta opposite; Gothic, Anglosaxon and; German ant-; originally the opposite (i.e. what stands against or faces the starting-point)] 1. end, finish, goal; 2. limit, border; 3. side; 4. opposite side, opposite, counterpart; pl. parts, contrasts, extremes; thus also used as "constituent, principle" (in tayo ...or does it belong to anta2 in this meaning?). Anta2: 1. having an end, belonging to the end; only in negative ananta endless, infinite, boundless. Rhys Davids: limits; Walshe: ends This is an obscure category, for sure. If it were not for "ending of own body" as the third, "ending" would seem to be the interpretation closest to what we are used to expect from the suttas. Walshe sees this as the ending of the three views ("ending of personality (view)" etc., not as a reference to the ending of personality). Rhys Davids notes: 1. sakkayo: the five aggregates (body and mind) of grasping' comy; and 2. The discontinuance, extinction (nibbana) of both.' comy. As I hear it, it is something like the way we set up resistance to ideas, so that the overall idea is that there are those that resist the idea of own body, there are those that resist the idea of the arising of own body, and there are those that resist the idea of the ending (extinction) of own body. The importance to Buddhists is that all three require point of view and that therefore resistance indicates (is a sign of) holding on to a view and should be got rid of. We do not hold the idea of "own body" or "personality", but we do not hold the idea of "there is no own body," etc. CSCD < Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 8:33 pm Subject: A Question regarding the declining of .. jessicamui Dear Friends, I often heard that it was said/predicted by the Buddha that the purity of the Dhamma, the triple gems would become declined and corrupted after so many years of his entering into the Parinibanna. And eventually, the Dhamma that was "disclosed" by the Sakayamuni Buddha will become extinct in this world one day. Does anyone know in which sutta that the Buddha said so, or something closest to it ? Thank you in advance for your help ! Metta, Jessica. #92508 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 9:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: inner aayatanas, was: Series Quote Survey nilovg Hi TG, Op 11-nov-2008, om 3:49 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > Visuddhimagga's been read > many times through -------- N: Thanks for your post. I liked to hear all you have read. I am delighted to discuss and study with you, for example, Vis. XIV, 81 etc. about citta, that is if you are inclined to do so. But this week I shall be busy proofreading, many hours, and thus I may delay responses. Nina. #92509 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 8:46 pm Subject: Seeing the Past shaping the Present! bhikkhu0 Friends: The Divine Eye of an Awakened One: At Savatthi the Blessed Buddha said this: Bhikkhus, imagine there were two houses and a man with good eyes was standing there between them, and he saw people going in and coming out, and even passing back and forth between them. Exactly so, do I with the purified divine eye surpassing the human, see beings passing away and reappearing, high or low, fine or ugly, fortunate and unfortunate! Therefore do I understand how beings pass on according to their actions thus: These worthy beings, who were well-behaved in body, speech, and mind, not revilers of Noble Ones, right in their views, acting according to these right views, at the breakup of the body, after death, have reappeared in a blissful and pleasurable destination, even in one of the divine worlds... Or they have reappeared here again among good human beings... But these worthy beings, who were ill-behaved in body, speech, and mind, revilers of Noble Ones, wrong in their views, acting according to these wrong views, at the breakup of the body, right after death, have re-emerged in the realm of ghosts or among animals or in a state of deprivation, or lost a painful destination, even in the many hells... For more about the Divine Eye: The Dibba-Cakkhu see: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Seing_the_Past.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Suprahuman_Force_V.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/b_f/dibba_cakkhu.htm Source: The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha. III 178-9 MN 130 DevadĹŤta Sutta: The Divine Messengers http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=25072X http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/index.html Seeing the Past shaping the Present! Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) ... #92510 From: han tun Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 10:16 pm Subject: Mindfulness of Death (7) hantun1 Dear James, Phil, Nina, Sarah, Jon, Howard, Lukas, This is the final installment. I am wrapping up my presentation quoting the Visuddhimagga. In Visuddhimagga, eight ways of recollecting death are mentioned. (1) as having the appearance of a murderer (vadhaka paccupa.t.thaanato), (2) as the ruin of success (sampatti vipattito), (3) by comparison (upasa.mhara.nato), (4) as to sharing the body with many (kaaya bahu saadhaara.nato), (5) as to the frailty of life (aayu dubbalato), (6) as signless (animittato), (7) as to the limitedness of the extent (addhaana paricchedato), (8) as to shortness of the moment (kha.na parittato). Out of the above eight, I am contemplating on Nos. (1), (3), (5), and (8). It is not that I am taking Visuddhimagga as a shopping list and ticking off the items I like best. I have been contemplating on these four even before I read the Visuddhimagga. It is possible that these ideas were instilled in me by the Burmese Sayadaws through their dhamma talks. Burmese Sayadaws like Visuddhimagga and they often quote it in their discourses. Next, I must thank my good friend James for presenting this topic in series, which prompted me to read the Visuddhimagga, which I have kept unread for many years. I will be very brief in my today’s presentation as James had already presented the serials in details. ------------------------------ (1) as having the appearance of a murderer (vadhaka paccupa.t.thaanato), Vsm says that death, which comes along with birth, is like a murderer with poised sword. And like the murderer who applies the sword to the neck, it carries off life and never returns to bring it back. That is why it should be recollected as ‘having the appearance of a murderer’. It gives the example of budding toadstools that always come up lifting dust on their tops, in the same way beings are born, along with ageing and death. I like this example of toadstools very much. The death is inevitable for what is born. Let alone the death which is the final separation in one’s life. Even the temporary separation with the loved ones is painful. My eldest daughter lives in America. When I visited her I was happy only on the day I arrived there. Starting from the next day, I started to count how many more days were left before I had to part with my daughter again. The meeting and parting again was more painful than not seeing her altogether. It is like peeling off a scab from the wound before it is completely healed. It will make it bleed again. The separation is like a small death, which is to be repeated with each visit to my daughter. That was why I did not go to America since 1986. ------------------------------ (3) by comparison (upasa.mhara.nato), Vsm says that death should be recollected by comparison in seven ways: (i) with those of great fame [yasa mahattato]; (ii) with those of great merit [pu~n~na mahattato]; (iii) with those of great strength [thaama mahattato]; (iv) with those of great supernormal power [iddhi mahattato]; (v) with those of great understanding [pa~n~naa mahattato]; (vi) with paccekabuddhas [paccekabuddhato]; and (vii) with fully enlightened Buddhas [sammaasambuddhato]. One should contemplate that when all these persons who are possessed of such great fame, etc., came one and all to death, what can be said of those like oneself? Or, in other words, one should contemplate by comparing oneself with others in the light of the universality of death, thinking ‘Death will come to me even as it did to those distinguished beings’. I am doing such contemplation by comparison, and I have described it, when I quoted the passages from DN 16 Mahaaparinibbaana Sutta, in Mindfulness of Death (2), ------------------------------ (5) as to the frailty of life (aayu dubbalato), Vsm says that the life of being is bound up (i) with breathing [assaasa passaasa]; (ii) with the postures [iriyaapatha]; (iii) with cold and heat [siita u.nha]; (iv) with the primary elements [mahaabhuuta]; and (v) with nutriment [aahaara]. Life occurs only when the in-breaths and out-breaths occur evenly. Life occurs only when the four postures are found occurring evenly. Life occurs only when cold and heat are found occurring evenly. Life occurs only when the four primary elements are found occurring evenly. Life occurs only when one gets physical nutriments at the proper time. So one can see that the life can easily be disturbed by these factors and as such the life is very frail. In this connection, I would like to point out that in Burma, the traditional practitioners attach high priority to the evenness of the four primary elements. Their diagnosis and treatment depends on the assessment of the evenness or otherwise of the four primary elements. ------------------------------ (8) as to shortness of the moment (kha.na parittato). Vsm says that in the ultimate sense the life-moment of living beings is extremely short, being only as much as the occurrence of a single conscious moment. Just a chariot wheel, when it is rolling, rolls, that is, touches the ground, only on one point of the circumference of its tyres, and, when it is at rest, rests only on one point, so too, the life of living beings lasts only for a single conscious moment. When that consciousness has ceased, the being is said to have ceased. Accordingly, it is said that: (i) in a past conscious moment, he did live, not he does live, not he will live. (ii) in a future conscious moment, not he did live, not he does live, he will live. (iii) in the present conscious moment, not he did live, he does live, not he will live. Han: In the ultimate sense, there should not be any difference between the arising and falling away of, say, eye-consciousness, and the arising and falling away of cuti citta? If we are not afraid of the arising and passing away of eye-consciousness, we should not be afraid of the arising and falling away of cuti citta. This being so, we should be able to face the death with courage, awareness, and understanding. ------------------------------ I have come to the END. I thank you all for giving me your time and attention. Respectfully, Han #92511 From: "sprlrt" Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 11:47 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Rupa khandha sprlrt Dear Nina N: I try to think this one out. I think that the visible object present as one of the inseparables in eyesense is not an object that is seen. Only visible object that impinges on eyesense is seen. A: I agree, the eye cannot see itself, I was thinking of an external visible object/vanno rupas of cakkhu/eye decads impinging on one's (internal) cakkhu-pasada/eye-sense, though the size of the sensitive part of an eye is 'smaller than a louse head' (Vis.), but I assume that the visible object/vanno rupas of kaya/body decads would impinge on the cakkhu-pasada/eye-sense easily. I seem to remember a passage in Khun Sujin's Phisical phenomena that mention this aspect, but can't find it right now. Alberto #92512 From: "sprlrt" Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 11:50 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Rupa khandha sprlrt Dear Nina N: As to kamma arising with cakkhuvi~n~naa.na, A: I meant to say cakkhuvi~n~naa.na arising because of past kamma, sorry Alberto #92513 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 2:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mindfulness of Death (7) nilovg Dear Han, Op 11-nov-2008, om 7:16 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Han: In the ultimate sense, there should not be any difference > between the arising and falling away of, say, eye-consciousness, > and the arising and falling away of cuti citta? If we are not > afraid of the arising and passing away of eye-consciousness, we > should not be afraid of the arising and falling away of cuti citta. > This being so, we should be able to face the death with courage, > awareness, and understanding. ------ N: Very good you posted this part. You said you cannot keep up all the time with nama and rupa now, but who can? It all depends on the arising of sati and pa~n~naa, and it is natural that this does not occur often. But when there is a moment of understanding of nama and rupa, this understanding is not lost, it is accumulated, so that there will be another moment of understanding in the future. That is the way it goes. Thank you very much for this series, I greatly appreciate it. Nina. #92514 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 2:59 am Subject: Sri Lanka Revisited, Ch 6, no 7. nilovg Dear friends, The Buddha exhorted us to contemplate the impermanence of conditioned realities. Contemplation of impermanence is not merely thinking about impermanence, it is the direct knowledge of the arising and falling away of a nĺma or rúpa that appears, one at a time. We should realize our ignorance of realities which appear one at a time. We know, for example, that pain does not last, that it falls away. But do we know the realities which are there when we have pain? There are different nĺmas and rúpas when we feel pain. The rúpa that is hardness may appear, or the nĺma that is bodily painful feeling, or the nĺma that is mental unpleasant feeling and that accompanies dosa-múla-citta (citta rooted in aversion). We are ignorant of the different nĺmas and rúpas that arise and fall away when we have pain, we usually think of an idea or concept of pain, we take it for “my pain”. There must be a precise understanding of the difference between nĺma and rúpa before their arising and falling away can be realized. The direct understanding of impermanence is a later stage of insight- knowledge and this stage cannot arise before the first stage of insight-knowledge: the knowledge of the difference between the characteristic of nĺma and the characteristic of rúpa. What is the task of pańńĺ and in which way does it know realities? Someone asked what pańńĺ knows when flavour appears. Flavour may be salty or sweet, there are many different kinds of flavour. When we are eating pudding or herring, we think of their flavours with like or dislike, we are absorbed in concepts and at such moments there is an idea of some “thing” in the flavour, we do not know the true nature of flavour. When there is mindfulness of the characteristic of flavour, pańńĺ can know it as only a reality appearing through the tongue, as only a kind of rúpa, no “thing” in it. At that moment the flavour is still salty or sweet, it has not changed into a “neutral” flavour, but pańńĺ does not think about the flavour, it knows its true nature. Flavour is tasted through the tongue and after that we may define what kind of flavour it is, but defining the flavour and thinking about it is not pańńĺ. It is the task of pańńĺ to know its true nature, no matter what kind of flavour it is. ****** Nina. #92515 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 3:08 am Subject: Re: Mindfulness of Death (7) buddhatrue Hi Han, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > ------------------------------ > > I have come to the END. > I thank you all for giving me your time and attention. > Thank you for such a wonderful and worthwhile series! Little did I know that when I asked for your input that you would provide such a great series! I like yours better than the one I did because yours comes from the heart, and mine just came from a book :-). I keep thinking of what the Buddha said that mindfulness of death gives one a foothold in the deathless. That does show how powerful it is. Anyway, thanks again! Metta, James #92516 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 3:09 am Subject: Series Survey Quote nilovg Dear friends, When we think of concepts in daily life the characteristics of the paramattha dhammas which are experienced through the six doors are hidden. Thus realities are not known as they are. One does not know that what appears through the eyes is not a being, person, or self. It is only colour which appears when it impinges on the eyesense. When will pa~n~na become keener so that it will know the truth when there is seeing? When the truth is known we will let go of the idea that there is a self, that there are beings or people. One will be able to distinguish between the object which is a paramattha dhamma and the object which is a concept and one will have right understanding of the realities which appear through the six doors. ---------- The characteristics of paramattha dhammas are hidden because of ignorance, avijja, which does not know the difference between paramattha dhammas and concepts, pa~n~nattis. Therefore one is not able to realize the realities which appear through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind-door as not a being, a person, or self. If we study citta, cetasika (mental factors), and rupa in more and more detail the intellectual understanding of the Dhamma will develop. This understanding is accumulated and thus conditions are developed for the arising of sati which can be directly aware of the characteristics of paramattha dhammas. Thus there can be more detachment from the outward appearance (nimitta) and the details (anuvyanjana) which are forms of pa~n~natti. ----- Nina #92517 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 10, 2008 11:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/10/2008 10:31:08 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, Thanks for the tip, I probably would like it. I've liked most of the science fiction *comedies* I've seen - Red Dwarf was a favourite - and so these not-to-be-taken-too-seriously sci-fi dramas would probably suit me too. (Dr Who was another favourite.) However, I also like to be the odd man out. For example I would love to have been the only person never to have eaten at a McDonald's. But I had a Big Mac once back in 1987. Curses! I haven't seen an episode of Star Trek (as far as I can recall) and I'm also about the only person never to have seen The Matrix. Lots of people have told me to see The Matrix, and I've been hoping to catch it on TV, but that hasn't happened yet. Either way I'm happy! :-) Ken H ============================ Well, I guess you must know what wanting to be "special" (even via omission) is an instance of ... hmm? LOLOL! (Hey, have you tried being a barefoot surfer? ;-) With special metta ;-), Howard #92518 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Losing everything, passing away, 'just like now!' sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- On Sat, 8/11/08, szmicio wrote: >I think about bhavanga cittas now. It reminds me that thinking cant arise at moments of bhavanga. No personality at all. ... S: yes, very true ...like in deep sleep, where's the personality? Actually, only ever one citta at a time. The ideas we have of personality are just that - ideas. ... >Thank you for your response. You should know it helps me very very much. .... S: It's helpful for me to discuss the dhamma with you and other friends too. You sometimes we refer to difficult times and we can see that in spite of all sorts of fantasies to the contrary, the only refuge is the Dhamma. There are always going to be the various worldly conditions in life - gain and loss, pleasure and pain, praise and blame, fame and disrepute - but our susceptibility to them depends on the understanding at the present moment of the reality, the true refuge. ... L:> So there is no body, no Lukas. That's good that is the way I think all the time. It's according to my personal experience. It always was, but now I have wise friends. No me who makes something , who makes bhavana. ... S: Yes, exactly. My reactions too. I often feel this with what you write. ... L: >If there are conditions for right friendship there is always bhavana. If not, no bhavana. .... S: I like this because I think you are pointing to the deeper meaning of 'right friendship' which in an ultimate sense refers to panna and the association with true Dhamma. ... L:> I think nama is like a stick, nothing special in it, but we usually find ourselves important. We think about our mother and father, but there is just nama dhatu, with its own characteristic. But those ideas about ourselves are realy strong. Very very strong. >Please Sarah can you say something more about nama and rupa now? ... S: I think you say it all very well. As you suggest, namas or rupas - nothing special at all, just conditioned dhammas arising and falling away. (Of course, we're not referring to nibbana). Without such namas and rupas, there wouldn't be the ideas about ourselves or other people, of course, but the projections and ideas are just concepts. And just as we cling so much (or rather, there is so much clinging) to gain, happiness, praise and so on, so it is for all. No one (or rather, no nama) likes to suffer mentally or physically. We can see in our lives how understanding leads to greater rather than less kindness and other worthy qualities, appreciating the value of kusala and seeing the harm of akusala, such as when we're just concerned about ourselves and our own happiness and so on. Let's keep these notes brief and continue sharing our responses. I'll look forward to your next ones, Lukas. Thanks for the opportunity to consider with you. Metta, Sarah ======= #92519 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:44 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Survey Quote jonoabb Hi Howard > Howard: > It isn't a corollary, Jon, though I believe it also is true, but to a > lesser extent. (That's why I said that it's MORE the opposite. I try to choose > my words carefully, though I often fail in that.) I think you do a fine job of choosing words, Howard, and I do appreciate the care with which you write. > I don't recall coming across anything like this in the teachings > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Even if that is so, that does NOT imply that it is false. There also are > no remarks in the "texts" about Jonathan Abbott posting on DSG circa 2008. There's an important difference between the 2 statements, though. One statement (the suggested connection between speech and wrong view) concerns the development of the path, while the other (the fact of Jon's posting to the list) doesn't. I've always taken it as given that when it comes to the development of the path the teachings are exhaustive. Do you see it otherwise? > (there's that bumper sticker phrase again ;-)) > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes, carrying as message that you seem to think is an answer to every > idea that you don't care for. Not at all. The message is simply, if it can't be found in some guise in the teachings, does it have relevance to the development of the path? And if it's suggested that it does, then on what basis do we evaluate the truth or otherwise of the statement/view? > P. S. I will say this, Jon: In MN 19, the Buddha taught "Whatever a monk > keeps pursuing with his thinking & pondering, that becomes the inclination of > his awareness." Now, thinking is largely internal speech, and speech is > externalized thinking. They are inseparable. Well yes indeed, speech is externalised thinking. So doesn't that mean that it's the thinking that's the problem, rather than the speech? If the thinking is straightened out, the speech will follow accordingly. Jon #92520 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa khandha sarahprocter... Dear Alberto, I enjoy your posts - like challenging jigsaw puzzles:-) Here's a part I stumbled over in #92422 to Nina: --- On Fri, 7/11/08, sprlrt wrote: >Ours is the plane/bhumi of both rupa and nama khandhas, and the rupa khandha perpetuetes itself both by its own properties (utu/temperature and oja/nutrition, two rupas of the 8 inseparable group) and also, in sentient beings, through the 4 nama-khandha (kammaja and cittaja rupa) ... S: In sentient beings, there are 4 causes of rupas - utu, oja, kamma and citta. In inanimate objects, the rupas are only conditioned by utu (temperature). Is this what you are saying or is there something more that I'm missing? Thanks for the rest of your great series. I notice that Nina has also picked up one or two points helpfully. Metta, Sarah ====== #92521 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:48 am Subject: Re: Suttas in which the Buddha held back the deep teaching? jonoabb Hi Alex > It would add a LOT of contradiction if you implied that Jhana is > unneccesery as in MN36 the Buddha has stated that Jhana IS the path > to Awakening. Would you mind quoting the passage in question so that I can take a look? Thanks. Jon #92522 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:47 am Subject: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" jonoabb Hi Howard > Not sure which part of the sutta you have in mind here. I don't > recognise any of it as being close to anything said on DSG. Are you > sure this is not another of those over-generalisations? ;-)) > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: > There is no Lodewijk, no Nina, no persons at all! Draw your own > conclusions as to similarity. (Oh, and don't forget the Buddha's criticisms of "no > father, no mother" etc. > ------------------------------------------- I was asking for the part of the sutta you had in mind when you said it showed "a variety of wrong view that I think some DSG members may be vulnerable to". If your answer to that is the Buddha's criticisms of "no father, no mother", as being similar to the view "No Lodewijk, no Nina", then I think you are misunderstanding one or other of the two. The view of "no father, no mother" is not an expression of the ultimacy of dhammas, but is to do with cause and effect, kamma and vipaka. The statement "No Lodewijk, no Nina", is a way of expressing the idea that in the ultimate sense, in truth and reality, what is taken for a person are only dhammas/the 5 khandhas. > With metta, > Howard (the illusion you insanely converse with) ;-)), ;-)) To my understanding, the enlightened person also thinks in terms of people and things, but does so without any wrong view as to what is what. However, as those of us here still have a lot of accumulated wrong view regarding people and things, I think "illusion" is a fair enough description. But I don't believe there's anything "insane" about seeing the world in terms of people and things while at the same time understanding the teachings to be saying that in truth and reality the world is otherwise. Jon #92523 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:48 am Subject: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" jonoabb Hi Alex > 5 Khandas are the material which craving, conceit and delusion > wrongly considers as I, me, mine and adds idea/designation of self. I agree with this (as I understand it). The 5 khandhas are what are taken for self by wrong view. And similarly, the 5 khandhas are what are seen as not-self by developed panna. > 5 Khandas by themselves do NOT form a self view because if that was > the case the Buddha would have a self view, since Khandas did exist > that other wanderers called "Master Gotama, Buddha, Tathagata etc". You've lost me here. If you are saying that there is not always wrong view of the 5 khandhas as self, then I agree. > For the Buddha there wasn't the "Buddha", not because there weren't 5 > aggregates, but because there weren't craving, conceit > & "delusionary" views. Yes, if wrong view has been eradicated (as for the sotapanna) then there is no longer any view of "self". To my understanding, however, the idea of "person" still occurs, but without any wrong view as to what are dhammas/the 5 khandhas (and what are not). Jon #92524 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] More on aanupubbikatha.m (a progressive talk) sarahprocter... Dear Han, --- On Fri, 7/11/08, han tun wrote: From: han tun >I cannot express adequately how much I am grateful to you for giving me the detailed explanation of aanupubbikatha. m (a progressive talk). Sayadaw U Nyanissara also talked about "severing the trunk of the elephant he had just decorated" in his talk on the topic. At first I thought he had invented the story. Now only, I know that it was taken from the Commentary. Thank you very much, Sarah. ... S: Thank you too for introducing the topic so well and encouraging me to reflect further on it. That's interesting that the Sayadaw referred to this same simile which impressed me too. ... >I also like very much the simile of cleaning cloth. As regards the 'talk on heaven (saggakatha. m)', it reminds me of the carrot and stick. Of the six kathaas, Sagga kathaa, is like a carrot. If you do daana and siila, you will get rebirth in devas realm as a reward or a carrot. Then the stick is shown in the form of aadiinava kathaa. The "severing the trunk of the elephant he had just decorated" is the stick. .... S: Yes, that's a very good way of putting it. The peril or danger is shown in all the sense pleasures we cling to. Again, this is why the only true refuge is in the Dhamma, the Four Noble Truths. However much we cling to and try to find some other refuge, the truth is that there's no escape from samsara except through the following of the 8-fold Path, with right understanding as leader. And of course, this right understanding can only ever be at this moment now, of a nama or rupa. This is true peace at such a moment. Like everyone else, I've also greatly appreciating your series on Death with both your personal reflections and quotes. Thank you very much. Please extend it anytime you have the inclination or reflections to do so for all our benefit. Metta, Sarah ============ #92525 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa khandha nilovg Dear Alberto, Op 11-nov-2008, om 8:47 heeft sprlrt het volgende geschreven: > I assume > that the visible object/vanno rupas of kaya/body decads would impinge > on the cakkhu-pasada/eye-sense easily. -------- N: In conventional sense, we think: we look at our hand and colour impinges. But this may also be confusing, trying to define: this visible object, namely, of the hand. Any colour, that impinges on eyesense can be the object. If we try to figure out which one, it is thinking not seeing. We may look at the trees and define colour, but there is also background colour, lots of colours. But it is best not to think which colour, or the colour present in which group. Then theory can become confusing. Sarah took up a point I was thinking about also and wanted to mention: I know what you mean: rupas are replaced so long as there are conditions, namely kamma, citta, temperature nutrition, and in the case of dead matter only temperature. But someone who read 'perpetuate' may only see continuity and tend to eternalism, as the Vis. text recently posted states so clearly. He may not see diversity in the arising of each new dhamma. Also, the rupas of dead matter are not produced by nutrition, only by temperature. ------- Nina. #92526 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:23 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Regarding: N: Not what is seen is result of kamma, but the seeing-consciousness itself is the result of kamma. We are born in a sensuous plane, and this is conditioned. We have craving for all sense objects. Kamma produces eyesense so that there are conditions for the arising of seeing. The picking up is just figuratively speaking. It entirely depends on kamma whether seeing sees a pleasant or unpleasant visible object." Scott: Okay - check this, please. Seeing-consciousness, and the other four sense-consciousnesses, are the result of kamma. Kamma produces the pasada-ruupa that is eye-sense, at birth I presume. After this, kamma is but one of the conditions that furthers the arising of this particular ruupa. As to the pleasantness or unpleasantness of the object, I recall stumbling all over this with Larry long ago. Visible object - ruupa - cannot be, in and of itself, pleasant or unpleasant, can it? Isn't this valuation a function of naama? Let's say I see something I take to be very pleasant. Where is it, in the experience of seeing, that the pleasant experience inheres? At what level of organisation would this occur? At the level of paramattha dhammas? At a conceptual level? Sincerely, Scott. #92527 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 1:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/11/2008 8:48:42 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, jonabbott@... writes: To my understanding, the enlightened person also thinks in terms of people and things, but does so without any wrong view as to what is what. ---------------------------------------- Howard: For me, there is nothing more to people and things than namas & rupas, though I also balk at even considering them as individual "realities." However, as those of us here still have a lot of accumulated wrong view regarding people and things, I think "illusion" is a fair enough description. But I don't believe there's anything "insane" about seeing the world in terms of people and things while at the same time understanding the teachings to be saying that in truth and reality the world is otherwise. ------------------------------------------ Howard: Hmm, okay. ;-)) ======================== With metta, Howard #92528 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 1:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Survey Quote upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/11/2008 8:49:05 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Howard > Howard: > It isn't a corollary, Jon, though I believe it also is true, but to a > lesser extent. (That's why I said that it's MORE the opposite. I try to choose > my words carefully, though I often fail in that.) I think you do a fine job of choosing words, Howard, and I do appreciate the care with which you write. > I don't recall coming across anything like this in the teachings > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Even if that is so, that does NOT imply that it is false. There also are > no remarks in the "texts" about Jonathan Abbott posting on DSG circa 2008. There's an important difference between the 2 statements, though. One statement (the suggested connection between speech and wrong view) concerns the development of the path, while the other (the fact of Jon's posting to the list) doesn't. I've always taken it as given that when it comes to the development of the path the teachings are exhaustive. Do you see it otherwise? ----------------------------------------- Howard: Exhaustive? Perhaps not. But all that is required - absolutely! -------------------------------------- > (there's that bumper sticker phrase again ;-)) > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes, carrying as message that you seem to think is an answer to every > idea that you don't care for. Not at all. The message is simply, if it can't be found in some guise in the teachings, does it have relevance to the development of the path? And if it's suggested that it does, then on what basis do we evaluate the truth or otherwise of the statement/view? > P. S. I will say this, Jon: In MN 19, the Buddha taught "Whatever a monk > keeps pursuing with his thinking & pondering, that becomes the inclination of > his awareness." Now, thinking is largely internal speech, and speech is > externalized thinking. They are inseparable. Well yes indeed, speech is externalised thinking. So doesn't that mean that it's the thinking that's the problem, rather than the speech? If the thinking is straightened out, the speech will follow accordingly. ------------------------------------------- Howard: For me, they are clearly mutually conditioning. In fact, to a large extent, thinking IS inetrnalized speech. ----------------------------------------- Jon ======================== With metta, Howard #92529 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. nilovg Dear Scott, Op 11-nov-2008, om 15:23 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > Seeing-consciousness, and the other > four sense-consciousnesses, are the result of kamma. Kamma produces > the pasada-ruupa that is eye-sense, at birth I presume. ------ N: Not in the case of humans: only three decads, of bodysense, heartbase and sex. Later on the eye-decad. ------- > After this, > kamma is but one of the conditions that furthers the arising of this > particular ruupa. > > As to the pleasantness or unpleasantness of the object, I recall > stumbling all over this with Larry long ago. Visible object - ruupa - > cannot be, in and of itself, pleasant or unpleasant, can it? ------ N: Sorry, yes. When seeing is the result of kusala kamma, it sees a pleasant object, when it is the result of akusala kamma, it sees an unpleasant object. Many posts about this subject (see also Vis. and Tiika, XIV). Very clear in the Dispeller of Delusion. It all depends on kamma, not on evaluation. But seeing is so fast, we cannot find out whether it was a pleasant or unpleasant object. We are thinking afterwards about it and then the thinking is often darkened by ignorance. Better not think too much. Let us know more about seeing. It is only vipaaka. The thinking is kusala or akusala. ------- Nina. #92530 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:48 am Subject: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" scottduncan2 Dear Howard and Jon, Regarding: J: "To my understanding, the enlightened person also thinks in terms of people and things, but does so without any wrong view as to what is what...However, as those of us here still have a lot of accumulated wrong view regarding people and things, I think 'illusion' is a fair enough description. But I don't believe there's anything 'insane' about seeing the world in terms of people and things while at the same time understanding the teachings to be saying that in truth and reality the world is otherwise." Scott: I was reading a sutta yesterday, while discussing something with Phil. Consider SN 5, 2 Somaasutta.m. The bhikkhuni Somaa was speaking with Maara, who was telling her that women couldn't become arahats. She said: "What does womanhood matter at all When the mind is concentrated well, When knowledge flows on steadily As one sees correctly into Dhamma. Itthibhaavo ki.m kayiraa, cittamhi susamaahite; ~Naa.namhi vattamaanamhi, sammaa dhamma.m vipassato "One to whom it might occur, 'I'm a woman' or 'I'm a man' Or 'I'm anything at all' - Is fit for Maara's address." Yassa nuuna siyaa eva.m, itthaaha.m purisoti vaa; Ki~nci vaa pana a~n~nasmi, ta.m maaro vattumarahatii''ti. Scott: As regards thoughts of 'man' or 'woman' or 'anything at all', Bh. Bodhi paraphrases the commentary as: Note 338: "Spk says one entertains such thoughts on account of craving, conceit, and views (ta.nhaamaanadi.t.thivasena )." Ki~nci vaa pana a~n~nasmiiti a~n~na.m vaa ki~nci 'aha.m asmii''ti ta.nhaamaanadi.t.thivasena yassa siyaa... Sincerely, Scott. #92531 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 7:08 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Thanks for the reply. Regarding: N: "Not in the case of humans: only three decads, of bodysense, heartbase and sex. Later on the eye-decad." Scott: Okay, thanks. N: "Sorry, yes. When seeing is the result of kusala kamma, it sees a pleasant object, when it is the result of akusala kamma, it sees an unpleasant object." Scott: No need to be sorry! If it's 'yes', it's 'yes'. N: "Many posts about this subject (see also Vis. and Tiika, XIV). Very clear in the Dispeller of Delusion. It all depends on kamma, not on evaluation." Scott: 'Evaluation' becomes the problem then, when one tries to think about whether this or that visible object is pleasant or unpleasant. I've read these, and will again, but here I find I seem to bounce off the texts (and assume this to be a function of ignorance). N: "But seeing is so fast, we cannot find out whether it was a pleasant or unpleasant object. We are thinking afterwards about it and then the thinking is often darkened by ignorance. Better not think too much. Let us know more about seeing. It is only vipaaka. The thinking is kusala or akusala." Scott: Yes, 'seeing is so fast.' In knowing about seeing - that is, when pa~n~naa functions in relation to the seen - is this pleasant versus unpleasant valuation known as well? Sincerely, Scott. #92532 From: "sprlrt" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 8:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa khandha sprlrt Dear Sarah S: In inanimate objects, the rupas are only conditioned by utu (temperature). Is this what you are saying or is there something more that I'm missing? A: I was taking into account plants also, and oja/nutriment should be essential for mantaining this form of inanimate rupa (just pure octads of the 8 inseparables) as well as for mantaining the life in sentient beings, though I can't give you any text reference supporting this. Alberto #92533 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 4:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" TGrand458@... Hi Howard, Jon In a message dated 11/11/2008 7:26:53 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, _upasaka@..._ (mailto:upasaka@...) writes: Howard: For me, there is nothing more to people and things than namas & rupas, though I also balk at even considering them as individual "realities." ....................................................... TG: I would like the above sentence fine if it said "nama and rupa" instead of namas and rupas. The latter expression gives the impression of the discrete entities that I know Howard does not agree with. Yet adopting the plural expression, that so many of the members use, does give that impression. To say "nama and rupa" merely indicates "a distinguishable classification" of phenomena....not discrete separate phenomena's. ....................................................... However, as those of us here still have a lot of accumulated wrong view regarding people and things, I think "illusion" is a fair enough description. But I don't believe there's anything "insane" about seeing the world in terms of people and things while at the same time understanding the teachings to be saying that in truth and reality the world is otherwise. .................................................... TG: Otherwise indeed. "How ever it may be conceived, the fact is ever other than that. " -- Buddha This also applies to nama and rupa conceptual frameworks. Detachment is the thing needed to achieve. TG #92534 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 4:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" TGrand458@... Hi Scott, Howard, Jon, All Scott's post: "One to whom it might occur, 'I'm a woman' or 'I'm a man' Or 'I'm anything at all' - Is fit for Maara's address." Yassa nuuna siyaa eva.m, itthaaha.m purisoti vaa; Ki~nci vaa pana a~n~nasmi, ta.m maaro vattumarahatii''ti. Scott: As regards thoughts of 'man' or 'woman' or 'anything at all', Bh. Bodhi paraphrases the commentary as: Note 338: "Spk says one entertains such thoughts on account of craving, conceit, and views (ta.nhaamaanadi.t.thivasena )." .............................. TG: I would point at that the "anything at all" includes "namas" and "rupas." TG OUT #92535 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 9:30 am Subject: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" scottduncan2 Dear TG, Regarding: TG: "I would like the above sentence fine if it said 'nama and rupa' instead of namas and rupas. The latter expression gives the impression of the discrete entities that I know Howard does not agree with. Yet adopting the plural expression, that so many of the members use, does give that impression. To say 'nama and rupa' merely indicates 'a distinguishable classification' of phenomena....not discrete separate phenomena's." Scott: If I may, the view accepts a distinction between naama and ruupa but does not accept further distinctions within each class. How then, can one say that there is seeing versus hearing, for example? How can one say that there is visible object versus audible object? Sincerely, Scott. #92536 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 9:39 am Subject: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" scottduncan2 Dear TG, Regarding: TG: I would point at that the "anything at all" includes 'namas' and 'rupas.'" Scott: Pet peeves aside, yes. Craving, conceit, and views (ta.nhaamaanadi.t.thivasena) can have naamas and ruupas as object. Sincerely, Scott. #92537 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 4:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" TGrand458@... Hi Scott Just the way you said it below was fine! There is seeing, there is hearing...great! There are namas that hear, there are namas that see....not so great. You might as well just say there is a "person" that sees. The way namas and rupas get used is just a reduction and deferment of the same type of delusion IMO. TG OUT In a message dated 11/11/2008 10:31:42 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: Scott: If I may, the view accepts a distinction between naama and ruupa but does not accept further distinctions within each class. How then, can one say that there is seeing versus hearing, for example? How can one say that there is visible object versus audible object? Sincerely, Scott. #92538 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 9:41 am Subject: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" truth_aerator Hi Jon, >--- "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > > Alex: > > 5 Khandas are the material which craving, conceit and delusion > wrongly considers as I, me, mine and adds idea/designation of >self. > Jon: > I agree with this (as I understand it). The 5 khandhas are what >are taken for self by wrong view. > > And similarly, the 5 khandhas are what are seen as not-self by > developed panna. > >Alex: > Khandas by themselves do NOT form a self view because if that was >the case the Buddha would have a self view, since Khandas did exist >that other wanderers called "Master Gotama, Buddha, Tathagata etc". > Jon: > You've lost me here. If you are saying that there is not always > wrong view of the 5 khandhas as self, then I agree. You have understood correctly. 5 aggregates by themselves are not cause of wrong view, it is wrong view that incorrectly takes 5 aggregates for Self. Through panna and all that, 5 aggregates are correctly seen as not-self. Best wishes, #92539 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 9:56 am Subject: Re: Suttas in which the Buddha held back the deep teaching? truth_aerator Hi Jon, > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > > > It would add a LOT of contradiction if you implied that Jhana is > > unneccesery as in MN36 the Buddha has stated that Jhana IS the path > > to Awakening. > > Would you mind quoting the passage in question so that I can take a > look? Thanks. > > Jon > "I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana... the second jhana... the third... the fourth... the dimension of the infinitude of space... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of nothingness. I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.036.than.html Even "pannavimutti" Arahant IS Jhana attainer. [Udayin:] "'Released through discernment, released through discernment,' it is said. To what extent is one described by the Blessed One as released through discernment?" [Ananda:] "There is the case, my friend, where a monk, .... enters & remains in the first jhana .... And he knows it through discernment. It is to this extent that one is described by the Blessed One as released through discernment, though with a sequel. "Furthermore, with the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana... the third jhana... the fourth jhana... the dimension of the infinitude of space... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of nothingness... the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. And he knows it through discernment. It is to this extent that one is described by the Blessed One as released through discernment, though with a sequel. "Furthermore, with the complete transcending of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, he enters & remains in the cessation of perception & feeling. And as he sees with discernment, the mental fermentations go to their total end. And he knows it through discernment. It is to this extent that one is described by the Blessed One as released through discernment without a sequel." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.044.than.html Best wishes, #92540 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 4:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 11/11/2008 12:16:30 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: Hi Howard, Jon In a message dated 11/11/2008 7:26:53 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, _upasaka@..._ (mailto:upasaka@...) writes: Howard: For me, there is nothing more to people and things than namas & rupas, though I also balk at even considering them as individual "realities." ....................................................... TG: I would like the above sentence fine if it said "nama and rupa" instead of namas and rupas. The latter expression gives the impression of the discrete entities that I know Howard does not agree with. Yet adopting the plural expression, that so many of the members use, does give that impression. To say "nama and rupa" merely indicates "a distinguishable classification" of phenomena....not discrete separate phenomena's. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: I actually prefer the plural. The heat experienced at one time is not the heat experienced at another time. Heaviness and pains and itches etc are all distinguishable rupas, and the pain at one time differes from the pain at another time. General "principles" of hardness, warmth, sight, sound, and so on carry a universalist/substantialist sense for me. I prefer "the experience of the moment." ----------------------------------------------- ....................................................... However, as those of us here still have a lot of accumulated wrong view regarding people and things, I think "illusion" is a fair enough description. But I don't believe there's anything "insane" about seeing the world in terms of people and things while at the same time understanding the teachings to be saying that in truth and reality the world is otherwise. .................................................... TG: Otherwise indeed. "How ever it may be conceived, the fact is ever other than that. " -- Buddha ---------------------------------------------- Howard: With that I STRONGLY concur! ---------------------------------------------- This also applies to nama and rupa conceptual frameworks. Detachment is the thing needed to achieve. ------------------------------------------ Howard: D'accord! ----------------------------------------- TG ========================== With metta, Howard #92541 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:00 am Subject: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" scottduncan2 Dear TG, Regarding: TG: "Just the way you said it below was fine!": Me: "If I may, the view accepts a distinction between naama and ruupa but does not accept further distinctions within each class. How then, can one say that there is seeing versus hearing, for example? How can one say that there is visible object versus audible object?" TG: "There is seeing, there is hearing...great! There are namas that hear, there are namas that see....not so great. You might as well just say there is a 'person' that sees. The way namas and rupas get used is just a reduction and deferment of the same type of delusion IMO." Scott: This doesn't address the differentiation between seeing and hearing (naama) versus the seen and the heard (ruupa). The view seems to posit a quasi-permanent and layered intermingling wash of sense consciousness and objects of sense. The view fails to account one, for a basic difference between naama and ruupa and two, for differentiation within classes of naama and ruupa. Sincerely, Scott. #92542 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" TGrand458@... Hi Howard In a message dated 11/11/2008 11:02:03 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: Howard: I actually prefer the plural. The heat experienced at one time is not the heat experienced at another time. Heaviness and pains and itches etc are all distinguishable rupas, and the pain at one time differes from the pain at another time. General "principles" of hardness, warmth, sight, sound, and so on carry a universalist/on carry a universalist/substantialist sense for of the moment." ..................................................... TG: What is the need to translate into nama and rupa then? Why do it? Why not just use the English as the English perfectly conveys the meaning. I think there is an attachment to the Pali because somehow folks feel it "authentic," or, that there are "things" called namas and rupas. TG OUT #92543 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" upasaka_howard Hi, Scott (and TG) - In a message dated 11/11/2008 12:30:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear TG, Regarding: TG: "I would like the above sentence fine if it said 'nama and rupa' instead of namas and rupas. The latter expression gives the impression of the discrete entities that I know Howard does not agree with. Yet adopting the plural expression, that so many of the members use, does give that impression. To say 'nama and rupa' merely indicates 'a distinguishable classification' of phenomena....not discrete separate phenomena's." Scott: If I may, the view accepts a distinction between naama and ruupa but does not accept further distinctions within each class. How then, can one say that there is seeing versus hearing, for example? How can one say that there is visible object versus audible object? Sincerely, Scott. =========================== I agree with you on this issue, Scott. Moreover, not all warmths are the same. Not all sights are the same. All are empty of separate, own being, but it's not all a single mass either! With metta, Howard #92544 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 11/11/2008 1:26:40 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: Hi Howard In a message dated 11/11/2008 11:02:03 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: Howard: I actually prefer the plural. The heat experienced at one time is not the heat experienced at another time. Heaviness and pains and itches etc are all distinguishable rupas, and the pain at one time differes from the pain at another time. General "principles" of hardness, warmth, sight, sound, and so on carry a universalist/on carry a universalist/substantialist sense for of the moment." ..................................................... TG: What is the need to translate into nama and rupa then? --------------------------------------------- Howard: IMO: No need! --------------------------------------------- Why do it? Why not just use the English as the English perfectly conveys the meaning. ------------------------------------------ Howard: I quite agree. The Buddha also urged teaching the Dhamma in the vernacular! ------------------------------------------- I think there is an attachment to the Pali because somehow folks feel it "authentic," or, that there are "things" called namas and rupas. TG OUT ========================= With metta, Howard #92545 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" TGrand458@... Hi Scott In a message dated 11/11/2008 11:00:56 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: TG: "There is seeing, there is hearing...great! There are namas that hear, there are namas that see....not so great. You might as well just say there is a 'person' that sees. The way namas and rupas get used is just a reduction and deferment of the same type of delusion IMO." Scott: This doesn't address the differentiation between seeing and hearing (naama) versus the seen and the heard (ruupa). The view seems to posit a quasi-permanent and layered intermingling wash of sense consciousness and objects of sense. The view fails to account one, for a basic difference between naama and ruupa and two, for differentiation within classes of naama and ruupa. .................................................... Nothing you said in the English was the least bit confusing. How about visual object, eye, and visual consciousness...??? Ya think??? Sort of like the translations have done for a long time. TG OUT #92546 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" TGrand458@... Hi Howard Great below! But I am not alone in my reading of namas and rupas as used in this group and who's usage is stuck entailing a substantialist outlook... Howard: "The perspective that I sense on the part of some, though not all, of the admirers of Khun Sujin is that paramattha dhammas are entities: true, separable existents with essence that arise and are then annihilated. To me, this is an odd amalgam of substantialism and annihilationism, and not a middle way. " When you wrote about namas and rupas earlier today, that's how it reads to me...even though I know you don't mean it that way. And although you don't mean it that way, there are many who will read it that way...which is why I think its good to avoid. Just a point. TG In a message dated 11/11/2008 11:31:13 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: TG: What is the need to translate into nama and rupa then? --------------------------------------------- Howard: IMO: No need! --------------------------------------------- Why do it? Why not just use the English as the English perfectly conveys the meaning. ------------------------------------------ Howard: I quite agree. The Buddha also urged teaching the Dhamma in the vernacular! #92547 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 11/11/2008 1:43:18 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: When you wrote about namas and rupas earlier today, that's how it reads to me...even though I know you don't mean it that way. And although you don't mean it that way, there are many who will read it that way...which is why I think its good to avoid. Just a point. ======================== Point taken! :-) With metta, Howard #92548 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. nilovg Dear Scott, Op 11-nov-2008, om 16:08 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > Yes, 'seeing is so fast.' In knowing about seeing - that is, > when pa~n~naa functions in relation to the seen - is this pleasant > versus unpleasant valuation known as well? ------ N: When the object of satisampaja~n~na is seeing nothing else is known at that moment, only the nama dhatu that sees. As to valuation, that is thinking afterwards and it depends on sati sampaja~n~na whether that is an object or not. Nina. #92549 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:04 am Subject: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" scottduncan2 Dear TG, Regarding: TG: "...How about visual object, eye, and visual consciousness...?" Scott: I was going to get to this, TG. The above doesn't really adequately address the question. What about audible object, ear, and hearing-consciousness? What about the other sense-bases, objects and consciousness? The view seems to accept that seeing, hearing, touching, tasting, and sensing with the body can occur all at once, and that the objects of these different classes of consciousness can be present and experienced *all at once*. Sincerely, Scott. #92550 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question regarding the declining of .. nilovg Dear Jessica, Op 11-nov-2008, om 5:33 heeft jessicamui het volgende geschreven: > I often heard that it was said/predicted by the Buddha that the purity > of the Dhamma, the triple gems would become declined and corrupted > after so many years of his entering into the Parinibanna. And > eventually, the Dhamma that was "disclosed" by the Sakayamuni Buddha > will become extinct in this world one day. -------- N: I quote from a study made in Thai: < The Vinaya, Book of Discipline (V), Cullavagga X, Eight Important Rules for Nuns (the Brahma-faring will not last long) and the Gradual Sayings, Book of the Eights, Ch VI, The Gotamid, §1, explain about the endurance and the disappearance of the true Dhamma (saddhamma) in the Dispensation of the Buddha Gotama. We read that the Buddha said to Ĺnanda: “If, Ĺnanda, women had not obtained the going forth from home into homelessness in the dhamma and discipline proclaimed by the Truth- finder, the Brahma-faring, Ĺnanda, would have lasted long, true dhamma would have endured for a thousand years. But since, Ĺnanda, women have gone forth... in the dhamma and discipline proclaimed by the Truth-finder, now, Ĺnanda, the Brahma-faring will not last long, true dhamma will endure only for five hundred years....” The Commentary to the Sutta “The Gotamid”, in the Gradual Sayings, the Manorathapúraůí, gives an additional explanation: “The words vassasahassa˙, thousand years, that are used here, refer only to the arahats who were endowed with the four analytical knowledges (paěisambidhas 2). But when we take into consideration the following thousand years, there were only arahats who are sukkha vipassaka (who only developed insight and did not attain jhĺna). In the next period of thousand years (the third period) there are anĺgĺmis (who have attained the third stage of enlightenment, the stage of the non-returner). In the next period of thousand years (the fourth period) there are sakadĺgĺmís (who have attained the second stage of enlightenment, the stage of the once-returner). In the next period of thousand years (the fifth period) there are sotĺpannas (who have attained the first stage of enlightenment, the stage of the streamwinner). Thus, the saddhamma, the true dhamma, of the level of pativedha, realization, can, according to this reckoning, last for five thousand years. Evenso pariyatti dhamma (of the level of intellectual understanding) can endure for five thousand years. Without pariyatti dhamma there can be no pativedha dhamma 3. This means that when pariyatti dhamma has disappeared the monkhood will have changed into something else.” It can be concluded that at the present time, which is the third period of thousand years in the Dispensation of the Buddha Gotama, nobody has the excellent qualities of the degree of the arahat, and the highest attainment will only be that of the anĺgĺmí. In the Sumaňgalavilĺsiní, Commentary to the “Dialogues of the Buddha”, III, no 28, The Faith that satisfied (Sampasĺdaniya Sutta), the decline of Buddhism in the Buddha era of a former Buddha, Kassapa Buddha, has been explained, not the Dispensation of the Buddha Gotama. We read: “... the lineage of recluses dressed in white is not able to cause the endurance of the dispensation since the time of the Buddha Kassapa. The Dispensation could endure only thousand years with those who have attained the four analytical knowledges, another thousand years with those who had the six supranatural powers (abhińńĺs 4), another thousand years with those who had three knowledges (tevijjĺ 5), another thousand years with those who had “dry insight” (sukkha vipassakas), and another thousand years with those who observe the Pĺtimokkha. Thus, the Dispensation declined beginning with the penetration of the truths by the bhikkhus who came afterwards, and the transgression of the precepts by the bhikkhus who came afterwards. Since that time the appearance of another Buddha had no obstruction anymore>. I made a footnote: The “Dispeller of Delusion” (the Commentary to the Book of Analysis, Commentary to Ch 16, Classification of Knowledge) is one of the texts explaining about the disappearance of the teachings. We read (431): “For there are three kinds of disappearance: disappearance of theoretical understanding (pariyatti), disappearance of penetration (paěivedha) and disappearance of practice (paěipatti). Herein, pariyatti is the three parts of the Tipiěaka; the penetration is the penetration of the Truths; the practice is the way....” ------- Nina. #92551 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:19 am Subject: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: Me: "If I may, the view accepts a distinction between naama and ruupa but does not accept further distinctions within each class. How then, can one say that there is seeing versus hearing, for example? How can one say that there is visible object versus audible object?" H: "I agree with you on this issue, Scott. Moreover, not all warmths are the same. Not all sights are the same. All are empty of separate, own being, but it's not all a single mass either!" Scott: Alas, agreement is so ephemeral, isn't it? We may agree that there is a distinction between naama and ruupa. We may agree that, within each class, there are differentiatable elements - a given class of ruupa that is only to be experienced by a given class consciousness. I find a need for careful clarification with the rest. What do you mean by 'not all warmths are the same' or 'not all sights are the same?' I fear that 'sight' is different than 'visible object' - as naama differs from ruupa. Is 'visible object' any more than that? If you have any sutta references which show that there are different sorts of 'warmths' or 'sights,' I'd appreciate the chance to look into it. Sincerely, Scott. #92552 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:31 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Thanks for the discussion: Me: "Yes, 'seeing is so fast.' In knowing about seeing - that is, when pa~n~naa functions in relation to the seen - is this pleasant versus unpleasant valuation known as well?" N: "When the object of satisampaja~n~na is seeing nothing else is known at that moment, only the nama dhatu that sees..." Scott: This I understand. N: "...As to valuation, that is thinking afterwards and it depends on sati sampaja~n~na whether that is an object or not." Scott: And if 'thinking' is object of sati sampaja~n~na, the object would be citta, if I understand this. I would still like to know how the valuation comes in, or how this is known? Would sati sampaja~n~na know kusala or akusala and hence, know the distinction between 'pleasant' and 'unpleasant'? I'd guess not, since this distinction seems to be a 'content' of thought, not 'thinking.' Sincerely, Scott. #92553 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 8:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 11/11/2008 2:20:23 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: Me: "If I may, the view accepts a distinction between naama and ruupa but does not accept further distinctions within each class. How then, can one say that there is seeing versus hearing, for example? How can one say that there is visible object versus audible object?" H: "I agree with you on this issue, Scott. Moreover, not all warmths are the same. Not all sights are the same. All are empty of separate, own being, but it's not all a single mass either!" Scott: Alas, agreement is so ephemeral, isn't it? We may agree that there is a distinction between naama and ruupa. We may agree that, within each class, there are differentiatable elements - a given class of ruupa that is only to be experienced by a given class consciousness. I find a need for careful clarification with the rest. What do you mean by 'not all warmths are the same' or 'not all sights are the same?' ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Sometimes there is great heat experienced, sometimes mild warmth, etc. The visible object of this moment is not exactly the same as the visible object at another time. The sound of a lute is not the sound of a violin, and a quiet sound is not a loud one. This is rather straightforward, isn't it? ----------------------------------------- I fear that 'sight' is different than 'visible object' - as naama differs from ruupa. Is 'visible object' any more than that? ---------------------------------------- Howard: When I used the word 'sight' I meant what is seen, i.e., visible object. I wasn't referring to seeing consciousness. I realize that the word 'sight' is ambiguous in that respect, but I now have explained which was my usage. And my point was exactly, and only, that not all visible objects are identical, which, I should think, is obvious. --------------------------------------- If you have any sutta references which show that there are different sorts of 'warmths' or 'sights,' I'd appreciate the chance to look into it. ------------------------------------- Howard: Do you need a sutta to tell you that not all pains are the same, not all sounds are the same, not all visible objects are the same, not all odors are the same? Do you always feel the same pain, hear the same sound, see the same visible object, and smell the same odor? Geez! ------------------------------------- Sincerely, Scott. =========================== With metta, Howard #92554 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 1:51 pm Subject: Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "...Not all sights are the same..." Scott: Here's some preliminary material from Dhammsa"ngani (pp. 167-168) for our consideration: "[617] What is that [material] form which is the sphere of [visible] shape (ruupa.m ruupaayatana.m)? [The material] form which, derived from the great principles, is visible under the appearance of colour and reacting (Ya.m ruupa.m catunna.m mahaabhuutaana.m upaadaaya va.n.nanibhaa sanidassana.m sappa.tigha.m) - is blue, yellow, red, white, black, crimson, bronze, green-coloured, of the hue of the mango-bud; is long, short, big, little, circular, oval, square, hexagonal, octagonal, hekkaidecagonal; low, high, shady, glowing, light, dim, dull, frosty, smoky, dusty; like in colour to the disc of the moon, sun, stars, a mirror, a gem, a shell, a pearl, a cat's eye, gold, or silver; or whatever other shape there is which, derived from the four Great Phenomena, is visible and reacting - shape which, visible and reacting, one has seen, sees, will, or may see with the eye that is invisible and reacting - this is visible shape, this which is the sphere of visible shape, the constituent element of visible shape - this is that form which is the sphere of visible shape." Atthasaalinii (p. 414-416) regarding sappa.tigha.m - 'visible' and 'reacting': "In the exposition of 'visible object' colour is just 'coloured appearance'; or it shines - hence appearance. 'Evident to visual cognition' is the meaning of the compound term. 'Visible' is [literally] co-vision; the meaning is, it is to be seen by visual cognition. 'Reacting' is [literally] co-reaction; the meaning is, producing the friction of impact...Thus all visible objects, though of different sorts, such as blue-green, etc., are not specifically divided as regards their characteristic of striking the eye, the function or property of being in the relation of object to visual cognition, the manifestation of being the great field of visual cognition, the proximate cause of the four great essentials. Likewise all derived matter has the four great essentials as proximate cause. But where (in other sense cognition, etc.) there are different features, of that we shall speak. Where there are none the method used in the exposition of sight should be understood." Scott: So, as for visible object, the differences are seen to be irrelevant. There seems to be 'different features' spoken of, however. Sincerely, Scott. #92555 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 1:58 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: Howard: "Sometimes there is great heat experienced, sometimes mild warmth, etc. The visible object of this moment is not exactly the same as the visible object at another time. The sound of a lute is not the sound of a violin, and a quiet sound is not a loud one..." Scott: I've just posted something on visible object and will look into sound next. I'm sorry my response causes you to become agitated. I'm just trying to look at the question at hand - no need to continue should this be trying for you. Howard: "When I used the word 'sight' I meant what is seen, i.e., visible object. I wasn't referring to seeing consciousness. I realize that the word 'sight' is ambiguous in that respect, but I now have explained which was my usage..." Scott: Yes, what do you think of the Abhidhamma and Commentarial texts I have referenced in our last cross-post? Howard: "Do you need a sutta to tell you...Geez!" Scott: Again, no need to get agitated, Howard. I just like something to read, consider, and study and wondered if you had anything. Should you not wish to engage in the discussion, that's fine. Sincerely, Scott. #92556 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 2:08 pm Subject: Il Poya today celebrates the next Buddha! bhikkhu0 Friends: How to be a Real Buddhist through Observance? Il Poya day is the full-moon of November. This holy day celebrates: 1: The Buddha Gotama 's declaration of the next Buddha Metteyya . 2: The sending out in the world of the 60 missionary Arahats 3: The passing away of the general of the Dhamma: Sariputta . 4: The Buddha's 1st explanation of Anapanasati Breathing Meditation . More on the Significance of the Il Poya today: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/The_Importance_of_Il_Poya.htm The next Metteyya Buddha. On such Full-Moon Uposatha Poya Observance days: Any Lay Buddhist simply joins the Three Refuges and undertakes the Five Precepts like this: Newly bathed, shaved, white-clothed, with clean bare feet, one kneels at a shrine with a Buddha-statue, and bows first three times, so that feet, hands, elbows, knees & head touch the floor. Then, with joined palms at the heart, one recites these memorized lines in a loud, calm & steady voice: As long as this life lasts: I hereby take refuge in the Buddha. I hereby take refuge in the Dhamma. I hereby take refuge in the Sangha. I hereby seek shelter in the Buddha for the 2nd time. I hereby seek shelter in the Dhamma for the 2nd time. I hereby seek shelter in the Sangha for the 2nd time. I hereby request protection from the Buddha for the 3rd time. I hereby request protection from the Dhamma for the 3rd time. I hereby request protection from the Sangha for the 3rd time. I will hereby respect these Three Jewels the rest of my life! I accept to respect & undertake these 5 training rules: I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Killing. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Stealing. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Sexual Abuse. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Dishonesty. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Alcohol & Drugs. As long as this life lasts, I am thus protected by these 5 precepts... Then, one keeps and protects these sacred vows better than one's own eyes & children!, since they protect you & all other beings much better than any army! They are the highest offer one can give in & to this world! So is the start towards Nibbāna: the Deathless Element! This is the Noble Way to Peace, to Freedom, to Ease, to Happiness, initiated by Morality , developed further by Dhamma-Study and fulfilled by training of Meditation ... Today indeed is Pooya or Uposatha or observance day, where any lay Buddhist normally keeps even the Eight Precepts from sunrise until the next dawn... If any wish an official recognition by the Bhikkhu-Sangha, they may simply forward the lines starting with "I hereby ..." signed with name, date, town & country to me or join here . A public list of this new quite rapidly growing global Saddhamma-Sangha is set up here! The True Noble Community of Buddha's Disciples: Saddhamma Sangha: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/sangha/Saddhamma_Sangha.htm Can quite advantageously be Joined Here: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/sangha/Sangha_Entry.htm May your journey hereby be light, swift and sweet. Never give up !! Bhikkhu Samahita: what.buddha.said@... For Details on The Origin of Uposatha Observance Days: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/uposatha.html Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) ... #92557 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 11/11/2008 4:58:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: Howard: "Sometimes there is great heat experienced, sometimes mild warmth, etc. The visible object of this moment is not exactly the same as the visible object at another time. The sound of a lute is not the sound of a violin, and a quiet sound is not a loud one..." Scott: I've just posted something on visible object and will look into sound next. I'm sorry my response causes you to become agitated. I'm just trying to look at the question at hand - no need to continue should this be trying for you. -------------------------------------- Howard: :-) ------------------------------------- Howard: "When I used the word 'sight' I meant what is seen, i.e., visible object. I wasn't referring to seeing consciousness. I realize that the word 'sight' is ambiguous in that respect, but I now have explained which was my usage..." Scott: Yes, what do you think of the Abhidhamma and Commentarial texts I have referenced in our last cross-post? -------------------------------------- Howard: I think it best that I not get into that. -------------------------------------- Howard: "Do you need a sutta to tell you...Geez!" Scott: Again, no need to get agitated, Howard. I just like something to read, consider, and study and wondered if you had anything. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I do not have any textual material to provide to the effect that not all sounds are the same, etc. --------------------------------------------- Should you not wish to engage in the discussion, that's fine. Sincerely, Scott. =========================== With metta, Howard #92558 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 3:50 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: Howard: "I do not have any textual material to provide to the effect that not all sounds are the same, etc." Scott: Are you interested in anything I come up with, or should I just keep it to myself? Sincerely, Scott. #92559 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 11/11/2008 6:51:21 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: Howard: "I do not have any textual material to provide to the effect that not all sounds are the same, etc." Scott: Are you interested in anything I come up with, or should I just keep it to myself? ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Come up with, with regard to *what*, Scott? I might well be interested, but it depends on the topic. (It's not at all a matter of *your* coming up with it. Actually, I know that you are amazingly adept at good research, and I admire that. It's just a question of the subject.) ---------------------------------------------- Sincerely, Scott. ======================== With metta, Howard #92560 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:09 pm Subject: Re: Series Survey Quote. buddhatrue Hi Nina and all, I'm not sure who is asking these questions but I think they reveal a major pitfall in the presented philosophy. I have some inserted comments: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > > Question: If we don't cling to concepts, I fear that we don't know > that this is a pen. James: This questioner is concerned about pens, but I am concerned about a more important issue: the existence of beings. If you want to think that pens don't exist, that's fine with me! ;-)) But, when you choose to believe that people don't exist that presents significant problems. Predominately, there is no motivation to cultivate kindness, compassion, sympathy, or tranquility leading to insight. The idea that there is no person so there is no person who can intentionally choose to meditate and make other wholesome choices in life, is a very dangerous idea. I don't fear for pens; I fear for people. > > Sujin: That is not so. We should know realities in > accordance with the truth. What appears through the eyes falls away > and then there are mind-door process cittas, which arise afterwards > and know a concept. James: This reply is completely incomprehensible. What does it mean that there are mind-poor process cittas which "know a concept"? You cannot "know a concept", the mind forms a concept. The question is whether the concept matches a truth or reality. This answer is mixed up. Pa~n~na (wisdom) should know realities as they > are. It should know what is visible object which appears through the > eye-door. It should know that the experience of visible object is > different from the moment that citta knows a concept. Thus we can > become detached from the idea that visible object which appears are > beings, people, or things; we can become detached from that which is > the foundation of clinging. We should understand that when it is > known that there is a man, a woman, beings, or different people, the > object is an image or concept known through the mind-door. When we > develop satipatthana we should know, in order to be able to realize > the arising and falling away of nama and rupa, the characteristics of > the realities just as they naturally appear. It should be known that > paramattha dhammas are not concepts. One should continue to develop > pa~n~na when realities appear through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, > bodysense, and mind-door. James: The answer should not start with "This is not so" when the remainder of that answer is that it is so!! > > ******** > Nina. > Metta, James #92561 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:39 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: Howard: "Come up with, with regard to *what*, Scott? I might well be interested, but it depends on the topic. (It's not at all a matter of *your* coming up with it. Actually, I know that you are amazingly adept at good research, and I admire that. It's just a question of the subject.)" Scott: Why, with the subject at hand - you know, the thesis that there might be different degrees of 'heat', various sounds and whatnot. I'll post what I find if you are into it. Sincerely, Scott. #92562 From: han tun Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:36 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Mindfulness of Death (7) hantun1 Dear Nina, James, Sarah, Thank you very much for your positive feed-backs. I feel greatly encouraged. with my warmest regards and deepest respect on the full-moon day, today. Han #92563 From: "jessicamui" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 8:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question regarding the declining of .. jessicamui --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Jessica, > Op 11-nov-2008, om 5:33 heeft jessicamui het volgende geschreven: > > > I often heard that it was said/predicted by the Buddha that the purity > > of the Dhamma, the triple gems would become declined and corrupted > > after so many years of his entering into the Parinibanna. And > > eventually, the Dhamma that was "disclosed" by the Sakayamuni Buddha > > will become extinct in this world one day. > -------- > N: I quote from a study made in Thai: > < The Vinaya, Book of Discipline (V), Cullavagga X, Eight Important > Rules for Nuns (the Brahma-faring will not last long) and the Gradual > Sayings, Book of the Eights, Ch VI, The Gotamid, ?, explain about > the endurance and the disappearance of the true Dhamma (saddhamma) in > the Dispensation of the Buddha Gotama. We read that the Buddha said > to Ĺnanda: > "If, Ĺnanda, women had not obtained the going forth from home into > homelessness in the dhamma and discipline proclaimed by the Truth- > finder, the Brahma-faring, Ĺnanda, would have lasted long, true > dhamma would have endured for a thousand years. But since, Ĺn anda, > women have gone forth... in the dhamma and discipline proclaimed by > the Truth-finder, now, Ĺnanda, the Brahma-faring will not last long, > true dhamma will endure only for five hundred years....?> > The Commentary to the Sutta "The Gotamid? in the Gradual Sayings, > the Manorathapúraůí, gives an additional explanation: > "The words vassasahassa˙, thousand years, that are used here, refer > only to the arahats who were endowed with the four analytical > knowledges (paěisambidhas 2). But when we take into consideration the > following thousand years, there were only arahats who are sukkha > vipassaka (who only developed insight and did not attain jhĺna). In > the next period of thousand years (the third period) there are > anĺgĺmis (who have attained the third stage of enlightenment, the > stage of the non-returner). In the next period of thousand years (the > fourth period) there are sakadĺgĺmís (who have attained the second > stage of enlightenment, the stage of the once-returner). In the next > period of thousand years (the fifth period) there are sotĺpannas (who > have attained the first stage of enlightenment, the stage of the > streamwinner). Thus, the saddhamma, the true dhamma, of the level of > pativedha, realization, can, according to this reckoning, last for > five thousand years. Evenso pariyatti dhamma (of the level of > intellectual understanding) can endure for five thousand years. > Without pariyatti dhamma there can be no pativedha dhamma 3. This > means that when pariyatti dhamma has disappeared the monkhood will > have changed into something else.?> > It can be concluded that at the present time, which is the third > period of thousand years in the Dispensation of the Buddha Gotama, > nobody has the excellent qualities of the degree of the arahat, and > the highest attainment will only be that of the anĺgĺm? > In the Sumaňgalavilĺsin? Commentary to the "Dialogues of the > Buddha? III, no 28, The Faith that satisfied (Sampasĺdaniya Sutta), > the decline of Buddhism in the Buddha era of a former Buddha, Kassapa > Buddha, has been explained, not the Dispensation of the Buddha > Gotama. We read: > > ?.. the lineage of recluses dressed in white is not able to cause > the endurance of the dispensation since the time of the Buddha > Kassapa. The Dispensation could endure only thousand years with those > who have attained the four analytical knowledges, another thousand > years with those who had the six supranatural powers (abhińńĺs 4), > another thousand years with those who had three > knowledges (tevijj?5), another thousand years with those who had > "dry insight?(sukkha vipassakas), and another thousand years with > those who observe the Pĺtimokkha. Thus, the Dispensation declined > beginning with the penetration of the truths by the bhikkhus who came > afterwards, and the transgression of the precepts by the bhikkhus who > came afterwards. Since that time the appearance of another Buddha had > no obstruction anymore>. > > I made a footnote: The "Dispeller of Delusion?(the Commentary to the > Book of Analysis, Commentary to Ch 16, Classification of Knowledge) > is one of the texts explaining about the disappearance of the > teachings. We read (431): > "For there are three kinds of disappearance: disappearance of > theoretical understanding (pariyatti), disappearance of penetration > (paěivedha) and disappearance of practice (paěipatti). Herein, > pariyatti is the three parts of the Tipiěaka; the penetration is the > penetration of the Truths; the practice is the way....?> ------- > Nina. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > Dear Nina, Thank you very much for taking the time to answer my question. Although it is natural for the Dhamma to arise and pass away in due time just like everything else, I feel sad when reading these texts. I really appreciate your resourcefulness, and deep Metta in sharing your Dhamma knowledge. With Much Metta, Jessica. #92564 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 3:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 11/11/2008 8:39:28 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: Howard: "Come up with, with regard to *what*, Scott? I might well be interested, but it depends on the topic. (It's not at all a matter of *your* coming up with it. Actually, I know that you are amazingly adept at good research, and I admire that. It's just a question of the subject.)" Scott: Why, with the subject at hand - you know, the thesis that there might be different degrees of 'heat', various sounds and whatnot. I'll post what I find if you are into it. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Ah, okay, I'm sorry for not following. I do appreciate your willingness to do this, and I thank you for it, but I will pass. It is not an issue I have any question or doubts about. ----------------------------------------------------- Sincerely, Scott. ========================== With metta, Howard #92565 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question regarding the declining of .. sarahprocter... Dear Jessica, --- On Wed, 12/11/08, jessicamui wrote: >Dear Nina, Thank you very much for taking the time to answer my question. Although it is natural for the Dhamma to arise and pass away in due time just like everything else, I feel sad when reading these texts. ... S: If you have the time, you may also like to look at a section of "Useful Posts" in the DSG 'Files' section under 'Sasana - Decline of'. You'll find further posts saved from the archives which also address this with textual support. We can just feel glad that we still have access to the Dhamma. Metta, Sarah ============ #92566 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. nilovg Dear Scott, Op 11-nov-2008, om 20:31 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > And if 'thinking' is object of sati sampaja~n~na, the object > would be citta, if I understand this. I would still like to know how > the valuation comes in, or how this is known? Would sati sampaja~n~na > know kusala or akusala and hence, know the distinction between > 'pleasant' and 'unpleasant'? I'd guess not, since this distinction > seems to be a 'content' of thought, not 'thinking.' ------- N: Seeing is past when thinking arises, and it is not important to know whether the object was pleasant or unpleasant. Why do you want to know this? I think we cannot find out. Seeing is accompanied by indifferent feeling. In the case of bodyconsciousness it is different since this is accompanied by painful feeling or pleasant feeling. It falls away immediately, but the unpleasant object will impinge again and again. But still, we are likely to be confused as to vipaakacitta and akusala citta, and to be confused as to nama and rupa. We are so lost in stories about the objects experienced one at a time through one of the six doors. I add from the study of Vis. XIV, 193: The Dispeller of Delusion (Sammohavinodanii) deals with desirable and undesirable objects (p. 9-11), and states that kusala kamma does not condition undesirable objects. It mentions opinions of people who say that there are no intrinsic agreeable and disagreeable objects, but that it depends on people’s like or dislike of objects whether these are agreeable or disagreeable. The Co states that it is through perversion of perception that the same object is agreeable for one and disagreeable for another. We read that the elder Tipi.taka Cula-Abhaya said: 'The agreeable and disagreeable are distinguishable according to vipaaka (kamma result) only, not according to javana (impulsion that follows the vipaka). But it is impulsion through perversion of perception (sańńavipallasa) only that lusts for the agreeable and hates the same agreeable; that lusts for the disagreeable and hates the same agreeable. Only by way of vipaaka however is it rightly distinguishable. For resultant consciousness (vipaaka citta) cannot be mistaken. If the object is agreeable it is profitable result that has arisen; if disagreeable, it is unprofitable result that has arisen.” The Dispeller of Delusion adds that agreeableness and disagreeableness should be distinguished by way of doors. What is pleasant through the eyedoor may be unpleasant through the body-door. We have to distinguish between vipaakacittas that experience pleasant or unpleasant objects depending on the kamma that produce them, and the javana-cittas, the akusala cittas or kusala cittas arising afterwards that react to the objects in an unwholesome way or wholesome way. Like or dislike of the objects may arise with the javanacittas and these are condiitoned by a person’s accumulated inclinations. That is why it is said: As we read in the Vis. text, inferior and superior can be seen in a relative sense (pariyaayato: in a figurative way) and in the absolute sense (nippariyaayato, literally). It compares the ruupas of the deities in lower and higher deva planes that are produced by kusala kamma. The ruupas of those in a hell plane are inferior, since birth in a hell plane is the result of akusala kamma. In the ultimate sense the ruupa experienced by akusala vipaakacitta is inferior and the ruupa experienced by kusala vipaakacitta is superior. The Tiika to the Vis. states that for animals the ruupas of humans are disagreeable, that they run away after they have seen humans. When humans have seen the ruupas of devas, they are afraid. Although kusala vipaakacitta arises when these ruupas are seen, humans do not delight in them because they do not have merit similar to the devas. N: ruupas of animals are produced by akusala kamma and ruupas of humans and devas are produced by kusala kamma. However, others who perceive them, react differently. Conclusion: We attach great importance to the fact whether the objects we experience are pleasant objects or unpleasant objects. However, kusala kamma produces kusala vipaakacittas that experience a desirable object and akusala kamma produces akusala vipaakacittas that experience an undesirable object. It is beyond control what type of vipaakacitta arises at a particular moment. We think for a long time about pleasant or unpleasant situations or events, but we do not realize that akusala vipaakacitta or kusala vipaakacitta that experiences one object at a time through one doorway does not last, that it is gone immediately. We usually think about our experiences with akusala citta that likes or dislikes them and we are ignorant of the different cittas that arise each becaus of their own conditions. There may be wise attention or unwise attention to the objects that are experienced. If there is wise attention one does not have attachment nor aversion with regard to the object. There can be understanding of it as a conditioned dhamma that does not last. ******* Nina. #92567 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question regarding the declining of .. nilovg Dear Jessica, Op 12-nov-2008, om 5:14 heeft jessicamui het volgende geschreven: > I feel sad when reading these texts. ----- N: As Sarah said: be grateful for the Dhamma you can still hear and consider now. The future has not come yet, and now there is the present moment to be studied. Such texts can instill a sense of urgency, we better profit to the full now from the study of Dhamma. Nina. #92568 From: "sprlrt" Date: Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:38 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Rupa khandha sprlrt Dear Nina N: In conventional sense, we think: we look at our hand and colour impinges. But this may also be confusing, trying to define: this visible object, namely, of the hand. Any colour, that impinges on eyesense can be the object. If we try to figure out which one, it is thinking not seeing. We may look at the trees and define colour, but there is also background colour, lots of colours. But it is best not to think which colour, or the colour present in which group. Then theory can become confusing. A: I agree, my assumption misses some important points, I also found helpful the exchange that you, Scott and Howard had. Alberto #92569 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 12:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Go Ahead and Rain as Long as You Wish sarahprocter... Dear Han (& Ven Saranapala), Welcome to DSG, Ven Saranapala! --- On Sun, 9/11/08, han tun wrote: >Bhante Saranapala, ‘‘Channaa me ku.tikaa sukhaa nivaataa, vassa deva yathaasukha.m; Citta.m me susamaahita.m vimutta.m, aataapii viharaami vassa devaa’’ti. >My kuti (hut) is well-roofed, Safe and comfortable! My mind is well-concentrated And set free. Dwelling with diligence I spend my days in peace. Go ahead and rain, Oh dear Rain God, As long as you wish! ------------ --------- --------- >Han: Is the verse your own composition? ... S: It's not the Ven's own composition. It's from Theragaathaa 1, Section 1. [I discussed this verse with Phil, Joop and others before:] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/53769 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/34686 Subhuti (Thag 1.1) {v. 1}, Thanissaro transl: "My hut is roofed, comfortable, free of drafts; my mind, well-centered, set free. I remain ardent. So, rain-deva. Go ahead & rain." **** Subhuuti, Mrs Rhys Davids transl: "Well-roofed and pleasant is my little hut, And screened from winds - Rain at thy will, thou god! My heart is well composed, my heart is free, And ardent is my mood. Now rain, god! rain.*" *"Dhammapaala states that deva here refers to the spirit or deity of the thunder-cloud, Pajjunna" **** Subhuuti, Norman transl: "My small hut is roofed, pleasant, draught-free; rain, sky(-deva), as you please; my mind is well-concentrated, released; I remain zealous; rain, sky(-deva)." ***** >S: In the commentary, it says the verse was uttered by Subhuuti, the younger brother of Anathapindika. He became an arahant and was chief among the disciplesin the development of metta and thereby chief among them for bring worthy of receiving gifts. Prior to the uttering of this verse, he had arrived in Rajagaha and King Bimbisara had offered to make him a dwelling place but forgot. Subhuuti therefore dwelled in the open and ‘because of the Brother’s dignity, the god rained not, so the people were oppressed with the drought and raised a tumult at the door of the king’s house.’ A leaf-hut was then quickly made for Subhuuti who ‘declared the absence of any danger to himself from without, or from within’. .... S:> As summarised from Mrs R-d's translation of the commentary: Briefly, Subhuti was the nephew of Anathapindika. He had made a ‘resolve’ under Padumuttara Buddha aeons before and was present when Jetavana was presented to the Buddha. After listening to the teachings, he ordained, mastered the teachings and became an arahant with jhana through the development of metta as basis. It says that when he went round the houses for alms, he’d experience this jhana, receiving alms as he ‘emerged’ from jhana. This was said to bring great rewards to the householders and he became chief among the disciples worthy of gifts. So it was said by the Buddha that ‘Subhuti, bhikkhus, is the chief of my bhikkhu-disciples in universal (anodissaka) amity, and chief among such as are held worthy of gifts.’ Subhuti went to Rajagaha, but King Bimbisara forgot to prepare a place for him and so he had no shelter. Because of his good qualities, it didn’t rain thanks to the rain deva, but the people suffered from a drought as a result. The king then made him a leaf-hut and Subhuti declared that he was free from danger from without or within: “Well-roofed and pleasant is my little hut, And screened from winds – Rain at thy will, thou god! My heart is well composed, my heart is free, And ardent is my mood. Now rain, god! Rain.” (Mrs R-D's transl) ****** H:> If it is from Sn 1.2 Dhaniya Sutta, it is different from the text. Dhaniya the cattleman: "The rice is cooked, my milking done. I live with my people along the banks of the Mahi; my hut is roofed, my fire lit: so if you want, rain-god, go ahead & rain." The Buddha: "Free from anger, my stubbornness gone, I live for one night along the banks of the Mahi; my hut's roof is open, my fire out: so if you want, rain-god, go ahead & rain." **** S: Yes, very similar. Metta, Sarah ======== #92570 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 12:52 am Subject: Sri Lanka Revisited, Ch 6, no 8. nilovg Dear friends, We are bound to have misunderstandings about the characteristic and function of pańńĺ and take for pańńĺ what is not pańńĺ. Hardness and softness, for example, may appear and when we notice them we may believe that there is right awareness. Everybody, even a child, can know that something is hard or soft, but knowing this is not pańńĺ. We may not expressively think, “This is hard, this is soft”, but there may still be an idea of some thing that is hard or soft and then hardness and softness are not realized as only rúpa. Or we may try to direct sati to these characteristics since we want to know them and in this way the truth will not be realized. When kusala citta with mindfulness arises, hardness and softness are not changed into something else, but pańńĺ can know their true nature. Pańńĺ knows a nĺma or rúpa which appears as only a reality. What does this mean? When a nĺma or rúpa is known as only a reality it is not mixed up with the idea of a person or thing. Why is the word “only” used? When what we experience is taken for “something” or “somebody”, we attach great importance to it. We take what we experience for somebody who exists or for something we can control, thus, for “self” or “mine”. We are ignorant of the conditionality of phenomena. When pańńĺ knows, for example, hearing as only a reality, it knows it as a reality that has arisen because of its own conditions, not because of our will, and which cannot be controlled. Earsense and sound are conditions for hearing and also these factors are conditioned. Everything which arises because of conditions has to fall away. Hearing, sound and all the other conditioned realities are only present for an extremely short moment, they are insignificant realities. Bhante Dhammadhara remarked that the word “only” is important: “Only is another name for anattĺ.” A reality is only rúpa, not something, or only nĺma, not somebody. _______ Nina. #92571 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 12:58 am Subject: Series Survey Quote. nilovg Dear friends, Question: From what I heard just a moment ago it seems that a concept can be the object of satipatthana. S.: Only paramattha dhammas can be the object of satipatthana. When flavour impinges on the rupa which is tasting- sense, there are conditions for the arising of cittas which experience flavour through the tongue-door. First there is the five- door adverting-consciousness and then there are tasting- consciousness, receiving consciousness, investigating-consciousness, determining- consciousness, the javana-cittas and the tadalambana cittas (registering or retention). Then the flavour falls away and thus there is no grape in the absolute sense. However, when one joins different realities together into a whole, such as a grape, then the object is a concept. Satipatthana is developed when there is awareness of the characteristics of paramattha dhammas and they are realized as not a being, a person or self. When sati does not arise the characteristics of paramattha dhammas cannot be discerned, only concepts are known. Then there is all the time the idea of beings, people and self. Question: When we touch grapes or a picture of grapes, softness and hardness are paramattha dhammas, the flavour of grapes is a paramattha dhamma. Many realities which are joined together constitute a real grape and this we call a concept. Thus I am inclined to think that a concept is real. Sujin: The rupa of flavour arises and then falls away, it can only last as long as seventeen moments of citta. The rupa which is the colour of grapes arises and then falls away very rapidly since it only lasts as long as seventeen moments of citta. Can we then say that grapes exist? Q.: They exist in our memory. S.: There is a concept, a notion that there are grapes, but in reality there is only flavour which arises and then falls away, or hardness which arises and then falls away. Q.: A concept is formed because many paramattha dhammas are joined together into a mass or a whole. S.: When one does not realize the arising and falling away of one reality at a time one takes what appears to be a whole for a thing which exists. ------- Nina. #92572 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa khandha sarahprocter... Hi Alberto, --- On Wed, 12/11/08, sprlrt wrote: >S: In inanimate objects, the rupas are only conditioned by utu (temperature) .... ... >A: I was taking into account plants also, and oja/nutriment should be essential for mantaining this form of inanimate rupa (just pure octads of the 8 inseparables) as well as for mantaining the life in sentient beings, though I can't give you any text reference supporting this. ... S: Two points here: 1) Oja/nutriment is only a condition for producing rupas of the body. CMA, ch V1 Compendium of Matter: "Nutriment, known as nutritive essence, on reaching its stage of presence, produces material phenomena originating from nutriment *at the time it is swallowed*. More detail in the guide note. The rupas outside the body, including those of plants are only conditioned by temperature. I know this is a difficult point. 2) Nutritive essence or oja is one of the rupas which has to arise with every kind of materiality, including in the pure octads as you suggest - it's one of the the eight inseparable rupas. *** From: Ch.12 Nutriment-Condition (ahara-paccaya)in Nina's book on 'Conditions': "As regards physical nutriment, this sustains the rupas of the body. Nutritive essence (oja) present in food that has been taken suffuses the body and then new rupas can be produced. As we have seen, nutrition is one of the four factors which produces rupas of the body, the other three being kamma, citta and temperature. Nutritive essence is present in all groups of rupas; it is one of the eight "inseparable rupas" present in all materiality, no matter it is the body or materiality outside. Nutritive essence arises together with the four Great Elements of solidity, cohesion, temperature and motion, and with visible object, flavour and odour. Nutritive essence present in the groups of rupas of the body cannot produce new rupas without the support of nutritive essence which is in food, external nutritive essence. For the new being in the mother's womb it is necessary that the mother takes food so that nutritive essence present in food can suffuse its body. Then nutritive essence can produce new rupas and thus it goes on throughout life. The nutritive essence which, because of the support of external nutritive essence, produces new rupas of the body also supports and maintains the groups of rupas produced by kamma, citta and temperature. "When nutriment has been taken the nutritive essence present in the body can produce new groups of rupas, and nutritive essence present in such a group can in its turn produce another group of eight "inseparable rupas" (an octad), and so on, and thus there can be several occurrences of octads. In this way nutriment which has been taken can be sufficient for some time afterwards (Visuddhimagga XX, 37)." "There is nutritive essence with nutriment, but one cannot eat nutritive essence alone. We need also sufficient substance or solidity, so that we do not go hungry. Edible food, after making it into portions[117] can be swallowed; it has the function of nourishing. **** S: None of this applies to plants. You may also like to look in Nina's e-book on 'Rupas' on-line. It's very helpful. Metta, Sarah ======= #92573 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa khandha nilovg Dear Alberto, Op 12-nov-2008, om 12:27 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > You may also like to look in Nina's e-book on 'Rupas' on-line. It's > very helpful. ------ N: I am just waiting for Alan's printproof, it can arrive any day and will send you the book when it is finished in print. As to plants, in conventional sense we say: they need soil, moist, sunlight, but plants do not have life faculty, they cannot commit kamma, have no citta. Thus, they are produced by the element of heat. Nina. #92574 From: "sprlrt" Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa khandha sprlrt Dear Sarah and Nina I don't want to make an issue on this, but for now I think I'll stick to my view :-) Alberto --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Alberto, > > --- On Wed, 12/11/08, sprlrt wrote: > >S: In inanimate objects, the rupas are only conditioned by utu > (temperature) .... > ... #92575 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 6:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: inner aayatanas, was: Series Quote Survey nilovg Hi TG, Op 11-nov-2008, om 3:49 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > I've read Dhammasangani, > At least half through, > I've read Atthasalini, > The whole thing too. ------- N: I am still impressed by your poem where you so quietly mentioned what you studied. Very impressive. I wonder why you never shared with us all the gold you found in there? What happened? Did you connect what you read and studied with your daily life? Or did this connection somehow fail? Did it not help you to cope with problems in life as we all have? Problems in the relationship with others? Nina. #92576 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:25 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Corner: Threes (24-27) and Commentary, part 1. nilovg Dear friends, Sutta: Three periods, to wit, past, future, present Tayo addhaa - atiito addhaa, anaagato addhaa, paccuppanno addhaa. --------- The Tiika to Vis. XIV, 190, explains that the classifications of present, past and future as extent (or life span, addhaa), as continuity (serial presence, santati) and as period, samaya, are figurative expressions (sapariyaaya), not literal (nippariyaaya). It explains that there are other dhammas (ańńe dhammaa) at present, that there were other dhammas in the past and that there will be other dhammas in the future. This refers to the classification of extent, addhaa, etc. Not to the classification as to moment, kha.na. Only the classification according to moment, kha.na, is to be taken literally. Text Vis. 190: (d) 'According to moment': what is included in the trio of moments, [that is to say, arising, presence, and dissolution] beginning with arising is called 'present'. At a time previous to that it is 'future'. At a time subsequent to that it is 'past'. ------------------------------ The Tiika explains that the classification according to moment, kha.na is according to time (kala). The Tiika adds to ‘At a time subsequent to that it is past': that this is to be taken literally. It is past when it has passed through the three moments of arising, presence and dissolution. We read in the Dispeller of Delusion (p. 8): ---- Co to Sangiitisutta: three extents means three times (kaala). There are two methods: that of the Suttanta and that of the Abhidhamma. As to the Suttanta method, the past period is before the rebirth- consciousness. What is after the dying-consciousness is future. What is in between rebirth and death is present. ------ N: Thus here addhaa refers to lifespan. ---------- Co: As to the Abhidhamma method, what is included in the trio of moments (kha.na), [that is to say, arising, presence, and dissolution] beginning with arising is called 'present'. At a time previous to that it is 'future'. At a time subsequent to that it is 'past'. N: The future has not come but will come, that is why it is said: At a time previous to that. ------- N: Nama and rupa are considered as to their arising moment, the moment of presence and the moment of dissolution. Each dhamma arising at present has the afore-mentioned three moments. This reminds us of their impermanence. Whatever dhamma arises has to fall away. ---------- Co: Tayo addhaati tayo kaalaa. Atiito addhaatiaadiisu dvepariyaayaa suttantapariyaayo ca abhidhammapariyaayo ca. Suttantapariyaayena pa.tisandhito pubbe atiito addhaa naama. Cutito pacchaa anaagato addhaa naama. Saha cutipa.tisandhiihi tadantara.m paccuppanno addhaa naama. Abhidhammapariyaayena tiisu kha.nesu bha"ngato uddha.m atiito addhaa naama. Uppaadato pubbe anaagatoaddhaa naama..... (to be continued) ------------- Nina #92577 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 11:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. nilovg Hi James, I appreciate your interest in reading these Survey Quotes. Op 12-nov-2008, om 2:09 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > Question: If we don't cling to concepts, I fear that we don't > know > > that this is a pen. > > James: This questioner is concerned about pens, but I am concerned > about a more important issue: the existence of beings. If you want > to think that pens don't exist, that's fine with me! ;-)) But, when > you choose to believe that people don't exist that presents > significant problems. Predominately, there is no motivation to > cultivate kindness, compassion, sympathy, or tranquility leading to > insight. The idea that there is no person so there is no person who > can intentionally choose to meditate and make other wholesome > choices in life, is a very dangerous idea. I don't fear for pens; I > fear for people. -------- N: The point you raise is a valid one and it is raised here all the time. I think the reason is that for our logical reasoning it is so hard to give up the idea of self, it does not fit our logical thinking. We have learnt about anatta, but we also know that it is hard to really, really relinguish the idea of a self or person. It is a lifelong process of developing understanding of nama and rupa. I have not given up the idea of self or person, but I see the value of learning to think in the right way. As said before, no person exists does not mean: there is nothing. As you know: a person is nama and rupa that do not last for a moment. We care about the nama and rupa of the 'other individual'. When we see suffering we try to alleviate pain by giving medicine for example against coughing. When in Kaeng Kracang or Bangkok this happens all the time. Thai friends handing out medicine as soon as someone is coughing. No persons are doing this, but we begin to understand that kusala citta moves rupas we call hand at such moments. When I consider that kusala citta is the source of such actions it becomes more understandable that there is no person doing so. The same for other wholesome decisions in life you mentioned. Or we care for nama of others. Someone is sad and distressed, discouraged. We are concerned, want to encourage by kind speech. That 'we' I mention here is nama, arisen because of former accumulations. --------- > > Janes quotes: > Sujin: That is not so. We should know realities in > > accordance with the truth. What appears through the eyes falls > away > > and then there are mind-door process cittas, which arise > afterwards > > and know a concept. ------- > > James: This reply is completely incomprehensible. What does it mean > that there are mind-poor process cittas which "know a concept"? You > cannot "know a concept", the mind forms a concept. The question is > whether the concept matches a truth or reality. This answer is > mixed up. ------- N: The object of citta is not a nama or rupa but a concept. You prefer forming up, we can use the word thinking. The concept is different from colour, a reality that is directly cognized or experienced through the eyesense. But without seeing colour, there could not be thinking, cognizing, noting, remembering a concept on account of what was seen. Because of sa~n~naa, remembrance or perception, we know: this is a pen, that a person, different concepts. ------- > > James quotes: ..... It should be known > that > > paramattha dhammas are not concepts. One should continue to > develop > > pa~n~na when realities appear through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, > > bodysense, and mind-door. > > James: The answer should not start with "This is not so" when the > remainder of that answer is that it is so!! ------ N: The Q. was: If we don't cling to concepts, I fear that we don't know that this is a pen. Then the answer was: that is not so. But the Q. was speaking about *clinging* to concepts. Kh Sujin explained that we should also know the moments that a concept is the object. That is the reality of life. But don't you think that the truth of anatta should be more and more understood and that it should be related to our life? We should realize that it is hard to give up the idea of self. > Perhaps many of our questions and doubts about no person are caused > by holding on to self, which is very understandable. > Long ago Sarah wrote a post quoting the "Dispeller of Delusion' (p. > 59): We see a whole, a person, we fail to see different elements. ------- Nina. #92578 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 2:30 pm Subject: Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before kenhowardau Hi Howard, -------------- <. . .> H: > Well, I guess you must know what wanting to be "special" (even via omission) is an instance of ... hmm? LOLOL! (Hey, have you tried being a barefoot surfer? ;-) --------------- Hi Howard, These were probably closing, rhetorical, remarks but I will carry on regardless. :-) Yes, I am aware of the akusala nature of minor vanities. There is no getting away from them, though, is there? If I tried not to be vain about being a little different from the rest then I would find myself being vain about something else. Wanting to be just like the rest, for example! The inevitability of akusala is classically demonstrated by people who go on retreats, isn't it? They try to get away from it all only to find they have 'brought themselves along.' I remember reading Ven. Sumedho's story of his early days in a forest monastery. With nothing else to get angry about he became seethingly furious at the way monks were sweeping leaves. :-) This method of stopping akusala never works. Stories of jhana meditators going to quiet places would seem to be an exception, but, as you know, I believe jhana meditators are a different class of people (with highly developed understanding of kusala). It is not out of "wanting to have less akusala and wanting to have more kusala" that they go to quiet places. Even in the case of jhana meditation there is no permanent avoidance of akusala. Only by right understanding of conditioned dhammas (satipatthana) are the defilements actually decreased. Ken H PS: Barefoot surfers are run-of-the-mill where I live. :-) #92579 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/12/2008 5:30:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, -------------- <. . .> H: > Well, I guess you must know what wanting to be "special" (even via omission) is an instance of ... hmm? LOLOL! (Hey, have you tried being a barefoot surfer? ;-) --------------- Hi Howard, These were probably closing, rhetorical, remarks but I will carry on regardless. :-) Yes, I am aware of the akusala nature of minor vanities. There is no getting away from them, though, is there? --------------------------------------------- Howard: Not yet - not for any of us! That's for sure! :-) ------------------------------------------- If I tried not to be vain about being a little different from the rest then I would find myself being vain about something else. Wanting to be just like the rest, for example! ------------------------------------------- Howard: Yep, me too! I think what's important is to be aware of it (as you are, and as I am). ------------------------------------------- The inevitability of akusala is classically demonstrated by people who go on retreats, isn't it? ----------------------------------------- Howard: Perhaps for some, some of the time. I haven't been on a retreat for a very long time, it happens. Hey, is that good, then? ;-)) --------------------------------------- They try to get away from it all only to find they have 'brought themselves along.' I remember reading Ven. Sumedho's story of his early days in a forest monastery. With nothing else to get angry about he became seethingly furious at the way monks were sweeping leaves. :-) ------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes, I seem to recall reading that also. We humans are an amusing lot! :-) ---------------------------------------- This method of stopping akusala never works. Stories of jhana meditators going to quiet places would seem to be an exception, but, as you know, I believe jhana meditators are a different class of people (with highly developed understanding of kusala). ------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not sure what a "jhana meditator" is, but I'll just leave that. ------------------------------------------- It is not out of "wanting to have less akusala and wanting to have more kusala" that they go to quiet places. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: For serious Buddhist meditators, they meditate for cultivation of the mind and not just pleasant experiences. ---------------------------------------------- Even in the case of jhana meditation there is no permanent avoidance of akusala. Only by right understanding of conditioned dhammas (satipatthana) are the defilements actually decreased. Ken H ========================== With metta, Howard #92580 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 4:34 pm Subject: Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before buddhatrue Hi Ken (and Howard), I was glad that Howard brought this issue up because I was thinking about it myself. But, I didn't want to say anything because the Buddha said to look at one's own faults rather than the faults of others. However, since this doesn't seem to bother you, I will comment: Wanting to be so different from everyone else that you would go to extremes to do so is a strong form of conceit. It may be beneficial for you to examine that. Additionally, realize that your over-enthusiasm for the fringe sect of Buddhism presented in this group might be tied to this same desire to be different. I have some additional comments to follow: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > This method of stopping akusala never works. Stories of jhana > meditators going to quiet places would seem to be an exception, but, > as you know, I believe jhana meditators are a different class of > people (with highly developed understanding of kusala). It is not out > of "wanting to have less akusala and wanting to have more kusala" > that they go to quiet places. James: This does not correspond with what the Buddha taught. We should avoid akusala behaviors and thinking as much as possible. It is a cop-out to say "Well, we all have akusala, all the time." So, what is your point? What if a man said "I beat my wife and kids, but we all have akusala; and there is no self; so it is counter- productive to try to stop beating my wife and kids."? Would that be okay to you? Yes, we all have various levels of akusala but the goal of the Buddha's teaching is to rid the mind of these levels, step by step. The wife beater has very gross levels of akusala to deal with before the more subtle levels. You Ken, have only subtle levels of akusala to deal with- so you should deal with them. Making excuses for yourself is weak and a cop-out. > > Even in the case of jhana meditation there is no permanent avoidance > of akusala. Only by right understanding of conditioned dhammas > (satipatthana) are the defilements actually decreased. James: It isn't just by "right understanding" but also by "right action" that akusala mind states are erradicated. The Buddha, even before he became enlightened, took stock of his mental states and determined which were akusala and which were kusala. He then determined to avoid akusala thoughts and cultivate kusala thoughts. This had nothing to do with jhana, etc. This is just the beginning, the basics, the necessary groundwork for following the Buddha's teachings. > > Ken H > > PS: Barefoot surfers are run-of-the-mill where I live. :-) > Metta, James #92581 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 4:46 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > -------- > N: The point you raise is a valid one and it is raised here all the > time. I think the reason is that for our logical reasoning it is so > hard to give up the idea of self, it does not fit our logical > thinking. We have learnt about anatta, but we also know that it is > hard to really, really relinguish the idea of a self or person. James: There is no reason to talk down to me just because you disagree with me. You have already closed your mind to what I am saying. You have dismissed me as being unable to accept anatta. Well, I have news for you Nina, I can accept anatta just fine. What I don't accept is the idea that people don't exist. The Buddha doesn't teach that "self" equals "person"; and he was the supreme teacher and he personally knew anatta. So, rather than judging everyone who disagrees with your approach, just listen to them for a change! It is > a lifelong process of developing understanding of nama and rupa. > I have not given up the idea of self or person, but I see the value > of learning to think in the right way. James: Well, this is some expression of humility, but hardly. You still think you have all the answers and that you know what anatta means. > > As said before, no person exists does not mean: there is nothing. As > you know: a person is nama and rupa that do not last for a moment. > We care about the nama and rupa of the 'other individual'. When we > see suffering we try to alleviate pain by giving medicine for example > against coughing. When in Kaeng Kracang or Bangkok this happens all > the time. Thai friends handing out medicine as soon as someone is > coughing. No persons are doing this, but we begin to understand that > kusala citta moves rupas we call hand at such moments. James: Well, this just sounds ridiculous to me. You are just applying different labels to the same thing. It doesn't matter if you call a person's mind/intellect: nama, and a person's body: rupa; we are talking about the same thing! If you say that only nama and rupa exist, but no person, then you are saying that there are no aggregates or khandas. Nina, think about it and don't just dismiss me off-hand. When I > consider that kusala citta is the source of such actions it becomes > more understandable that there is no person doing so. The same for > other wholesome decisions in life you mentioned. Or we care for nama > of others. Someone is sad and distressed, discouraged. We are > concerned, want to encourage by kind speech. That 'we' I mention here > is nama, arisen because of former accumulations. James: Lord, you are still talking about people! It doesn't matter if you use the terms nama and rupa, it is still people giving and taking medicine and using kind speech! Metta, James #92582 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:00 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,313 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 313. (d) The production of only formations, etc., respectively and no others with ignorance, etc., as the respective reasons, like that of curd, etc., with milk, etc., as the respective reasons, is called the 'method of ineluctable regularity'. One who sees this rightly abandons the no-cause view and the moral-inefficacy-of-action view by understanding how the fruit accords with its condition. One who sees it wrongly by apprehending it as non-production of anything from anything, instead of apprehending the occurrence of the fruit in accordance with its conditions, clings to the no-cause view and to the doctrine of fatalism. So this Wheel of Becoming: As to source in the [four] truths, As to function, prevention, similes, Kinds of profundity, and methods, Should be known accordingly. *********************** 313. avijjaadiihi pana kaara.nehi sa"nkhaaraadiina.myeva sambhavo khiiraadiihi dadhiaadiina.m viya, na a~n~nesanti aya.m eva.mdhammataanayo naama. ya.m sammaa passanto paccayaanuruupato phalaavabodhaa ahetukadi.t.thi.m akiriyadi.t.thi~nca pajahati. micchaa passanto paccayaanuruupa.m phalappavatti.m aggahetvaa yato kutoci yassa kassaci asambhavaggaha.nato ahetukadi.t.thi~nceva niyatavaada~nca upaadiyatiiti. evamida.m bhavacakka.m, saccappabhavato kiccaa, vaara.naaupamaahi ca. gambhiiranayabhedaa ca, vi~n~naatabba.m yathaaraha.m.. #92583 From: "colette" Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:57 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before ksheri3 Hi All, This will be difficult since there are so many Howards in this post: upasaka_howard will be UH (no not ultra-high as in frequency) and the other howard will just be howard. > Yes, I am aware of the akusala nature of minor vanities. There is no > getting away from them, though, is there? > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Not yet - not for any of us! That's for sure! :-) > ------------------------------------------- > colette: there, so both UH and howard are fully aware of vanity. What is the difference between a minor and major vanity? How can they be different? ------------------------------ > If I tried not to be vain > about being a little different from the rest then I would find myself > being vain about something else. Wanting to be just like the rest, > for example! > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yep, me too! I think what's important is to be aware of it (as you are, > and as I am). > ------------------------------------------- > colette: where in the Buddhist doctrine does it say or suggest that the Path is only to be followed by those that are INTENTIONALLY AND DELIBERATELY of the mind to SEPERATE THEMSELVES from their brothers and sisters? I was always under the impression that a Boddhisatva is to realize the equality and sameness they have with others. How can there be a difference between the individual on the path and those that do not walk the path? -------------------------------------------- > > The inevitability of akusala is classically demonstrated by people > who go on retreats, isn't it? > ----------------------------------------- > Howard: > Perhaps for some, some of the time. I haven't been on a retreat for a > very long time, it happens. Hey, is that good, then? ;-)) > --------------------------------------- > colette: I think both of you are intentionally missing the point of a retreat which is designed to immerse the individual in the teachings. Experience may be a requirement for the Pure Land Sect but I can't see how any Theravadan would consider denying the power of bringing "experience" to the table with them when learning the Path. I understand akusala and kusala to be almost identicle but maybe I've been too immersed in Shunyata and Budda-Nature. Eventhough I just found of a piece called the Ratna-gotra-vibhaga and the Dharma- Dharmata-vibhaga I haven't read anything from them yet, hopefully soon, I think both of you are getting a little too petty with your focus on things like akusala and kusala since they are nothing but completely Dependent upon each individual and completely transient from one second to another. --------------------------------------------------- FAMILIARITY BREEDS CONTEMPT > They try to get away from it all only > to find they have 'brought themselves along.' I remember reading Ven. > Sumedho's story of his early days in a forest monastery. With nothing > else to get angry about he became seethingly furious at the way monks > were sweeping leaves. :-) > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Yes, I seem to recall reading that also. We humans are an amusing lot! > :-) > ---------------------------------------- colette: is that all? what? you miss the point, IMO, completely. The Mosa exists and this monk that had to become agry with the way other monks were sweeping leaves is nothing but proof that mosa, even at a retreat, is present and needs to be minded in the mind of the person that cannot control it. Humans are a strange lot, huh? Well sure, but for those that have the intelligence and experience to cognize and re- cognize these behaviors and characteristics then the Buddhist doctrines are an uncomparable asset and power to the person that sees how they can be used, applied. ----------------------------------- > > > This method of stopping akusala never works. colette: boy could you use a little time immersed in the Madhyamika! ---------------------------------- Stories of jhana > meditators going to quiet places would seem to be an exception, but, > as you know, I believe jhana meditators are a different class of > people (with highly developed understanding of kusala). > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I'm not sure what a "jhana meditator" is, but I'll just leave that. > ------------------------------------------- > colette: sounds good Howard. --------------------------- > It is not out > of "wanting to have less akusala and wanting to have more kusala" > that they go to quiet places. > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > For serious Buddhist meditators, they meditate for cultivation of the > mind and not just pleasant experiences. > ---------------------------------------------- > colette: WHAT? ISN'T IT SUCH AN ENORMOUS PLEASURE TO HAVE THAT CULTIVATION AND BE ABLE TO RAISE IT TO CONSCIOUSNESS AT WILL? I know it is for me but then again, I was relating this exact sensation to some Western occultists in the form of A.Maslow's work called: Religions, Values, and the Peak Experience. -------------------------------------- > > > > Even in the case of jhana meditation there is no permanent avoidance > of akusala. Only by right understanding of conditioned dhammas > (satipatthana) are the defilements actually decreased. > colette: I won't bother explaining that something that does not exist cannot be either akusala or kusala but I think you're going on a wild goose chase looking to find kusala and akusala within "conditioned dhammas". I love this thought thread, now I want to get one more before time expires for me tonight. toodles, colette #92584 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:55 pm Subject: Ease Anger! bhikkhu0 Friends: The Elimination of Anger: BURNING Those absorbed in such accusations as: "He/She/They abused, hurt, did me or us wrong " whether right or wrong!, such foolish ones only prolong own pain by being obsessed by own anger. However!!! Those freed of these accusations: "He/She/They abused, hurt, did me or us wrong " noting: whether right or wrong - so what!!! - such clever ones stop own pain by relinquishing all anger. Dhammapada Illustration 3+4 Background Story 3+4 FUEL ON FIRE? Not by anger is Hate ever quenched. Only by Kindness is Hate always quenched. This Ancient Law is an Eternal ... Truth ... Dhammapada Illustration 5 Background Story 5 What good does any accusation - whether right or wrong - do to anybody ? Nothing...!!! On the contrary: It burns up Mind, inflames ill-will, infects with hate! In short: The way to the Downfall! Hate brings great misfortune, hate churns up and harms the mind; this fearful danger deep within this most people do not understand. Itivuttaka 84 <....> Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) .... #92585 From: "colette" Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:16 pm Subject: Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before ksheri3 HELLO JAMES, Well, sorry, I'm not trying to butter you up but I can't tell you how wonderful it was to read this post that has soooooo many interesting aspects that I completely agree with! Thank you! > James: This does not correspond with what the Buddha taught. We > should avoid akusala behaviors and thinking as much as possible. It > is a cop-out to say "Well, we all have akusala, all the time." So, > what is your point? What if a man said "I beat my wife and kids, > but we all have akusala; and there is no self; so it is counter- > productive to try to stop beating my wife and kids."? Would that be > okay to you? Yes, we all have various levels of akusala but the > goal of the Buddha's teaching is to rid the mind of these levels, > step by step. colette: EXACTLY! it's a graduated cylander type of thing. The aspirant couldn't possibly reach certain levels of meditation if they cannot free their mind from these fetters of kusala and akusala. If all is suffering then how can there be a kusala suffering and then an akusala suffering? --------------------------------------------- The wife beater has very gross levels of akusala to > deal with before the more subtle levels. You Ken, have only subtle > levels of akusala to deal with- so you should deal with them. > Making excuses for yourself is weak and a cop-out. > colette: weak and a cop-out? It's nothing more or less than avoiding the responsibility completely! Don't give me that "transference" bs. ------------------------------------------ > > James: It isn't just by "right understanding" but also by "right > action" that akusala mind states are erradicated. colette: EXACTLY. Talk is cheap so why be a disc jockey that doesn't make the music only plays the pre-recorded music from a play list which is a form of programming a machine, but isn't that how a disc jockey makes money? Cheap cheap cheap, I mean talk talk talk? What does a bird say? How about a caged bird? Maybe a parrot? Once the person can articulate the right understanding then the hard part comes in exhibiting that understanding and grasp. It's like a Sen. said on the Bill Maher show: "the tough part comes the day after the election when the people have to show their patriotism" or something like that. Electing the guy is only part of the deal, just like grasping and cognizing the Right understanding and Right action. -------------------------------- The Buddha, even > before he became enlightened, took stock of his mental states and > determined which were akusala and which were kusala. He then > determined to avoid akusala thoughts and cultivate kusala thoughts. colette: I hear ya! What you speak of is soooooo extremely DIFFICULT! It reminds me of the months I spent learning Pranayama. The aggrivation was tremendous but I had to transcend that and continue, the same with akusala and kusala thoughts. -------------------------------- > This had nothing to do with jhana, etc. This is just the beginning, > the basics, the necessary groundwork for following the Buddha's > teachings. colette: EXACTLY. Now the practitioner has to actually implement the procedure! I bet both Howards are shakin' in their shoes at the thought of actually doing both parts of the procedure. but then again they seem to have the good life all taken care of so they'll probably pay some stupid suffer to do the hard part for them at a dirt cheap price for the difficulty of the procedure. Have a good night and day James It was wonderful to read your views. toodles, colette #92586 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 11:37 pm Subject: Sri Lanka Revisited, Ch 6, no 9. nilovg Dear friends, “How can we begin to develop pańńĺ”, this was a question that people often asked. Khun Sujin invariably answered: “Develop it now!” There is no other answer because right understanding can only begin at the present moment and all the material to be studied is there already; thus, we have to develop it now. Do we believe that we have to do something else first, such as thinking of nĺma and rúpa, before there can be mindfulness? Thinking and considering are very useful, but we should not believe that we have to think first in order to induce the arising of sati. When we think of nĺma and rúpa, it is conditioned, we could not think of them if we had not studied the Dhamma. There is no self who thinks. At that very moment there can be mindfulness and understanding of thinking as only a reality, and that is the beginning of pańńĺ. Some people may believe that thinking is not suitable as object of awareness. When thinking arises, that is the reality of the present moment, we should not wait. When people were worried about there being more often thinking than mindfulness, Khun Sujin said: “What about this moment?” She remarked: “We should not forget to develop right understanding of seeing as only an experience, different from visible object which appears. Develop it now. How can pańńĺ be clear immediately, just at the moment of awareness? Develop understanding, don’t worry about it when it is not clear yet. When understanding arises more often it will be clearer.” Don’t we expect too much in the beginning? When realities do not appear clearly we become impatient already and we wonder how pańńĺ can ever develop. We should not be afraid to develop understanding of a nĺma or rúpa which appears now, even if pańńĺ does not know it clearly. Isn’t there time and again an object impinging on one of the six doors? Through ignorance of realities we are enslaved by our many defilements. When pańńĺ is being developed now there will eventually be detachment and freedom from defilements. We read at the end of the “Discourse on the Six Sixes” which was quoted above about the detachment brought about by right understanding of realities: “Seeing this thus, monks, the instructed ariyan disciple turns away from eye, turns away from visible objects, turns away from eye- consciousness, turns away from eye-contact, turns away from feeling, turns away from craving. He turns away from ear, he turns away from sounds... He turns away from nose, he turns away from smells... He turns away from tongue, he turns away from tastes... He turns away from body, he turns away from touches... He turns away from mind, he turns away from mental objects, he turns away from mind- consciousness, he turns away from mind-contact, he turns away from feeling, he turns away from craving. Turning away he is dispassionate; by dispassion he is freed; in freedom is the knowledge that he is freed, and he comprehends: Destroyed is birth, brought to a close the Brahma-faring, done is what was to be done, there is no more of being such or so.” ******* Nina. #92587 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 11:41 pm Subject: Series Survey Quote. nilovg Dear friends, Question: Is a concept not real? A concept is constituted of many kinds of paramattha dhammas (realities): softness, hardness, heat, colour, odour or flavour. They are joined together, they are a whole, a thing which has such or such colour, this or that shape. There is a concept of this or that person with such outward appearance. Thus a concept is made up by paramattha dhammas. Sujin: One will know that concepts are not paramattha dhammas one if one learns to discern the characteristics of the different paramattha dhammas which arise together. One should be aware of one characteristic at a time as it appears through one doorway at a time. In order to know the truth we should realize the arising and falling away of rupa, which appears through one door way at a time. Each rupa lasts only as long as seventeen moments of citta and then it falls away. Therefore rupa which arises has no time to stand, walk, or do anything. During the time one lifts one's hand already more than seventeen moments of citta have passed. One sees people walking or lifting their hands but in reality the rupas which arise fall away immediately and are succeeded by other rupas. The rupa which is visible object appears to cittas of the eye-door process and then, after there have been bhavanga-cittas in between, there are many mind-door processes of cittas. That is why one can see people walking or lifting their hands. Seventeen moments of citta pass away extremely rapidly. Thus we should consider what happens in reality. ********* Nina. #92588 From: "sprlrt" Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 3:11 am Subject: Re: Rupa khandha sprlrt The rupa khandha is what we take for our body, the bodies of other beings, flowers and trees, things we make, buy or sell, rivers and oceans, rocks and mountaints, planets and stars, coming into existence and disintegrating almost at the same time, again and again because and as long as there are conditions for this to happen. Death consciousness occurs when the kamma that resulted in that birth expires, and the eye of the corpse won't see anymore because there are no more conditions for this to happen, body-sense don't arise & fall anymore, and death will condition the arising of patisandhi/birth consciousness (the result of some other kamma which arose and fall in any one of the counteless previous existences on the many kama planes) arises immediately afterward then falls and then body consciousness will arise & fall in this brand new body, probably in a different kama plane. Notable exeptions to this rule are the cuti citta of ariyas which will be the last one in case of an arahant, or which will result in births, seven at most for sotapannas and even less for the others, always in a sugati plane. In this respect kusala kamma (sila, including metta, and dana) alone without panna won't offer any of the above warranties, and jhanas are not a safe bet either Alberto #92589 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" sarahprocter... Hi Scott & Howard, --- On Wed, 12/11/08, upasaka@... wrote: Scott:> If you have any sutta references which show that there are different sorts of 'warmths' or 'sights,' I'd appreciate the chance to look into it. ------------ --------- --------- ------- Howard: Do you need a sutta to tell you that not all pains are the same, not all sounds are the same, not all visible objects are the same, not all odors are the same? Do you always feel the same pain, hear the same sound, see the same visible object, and smell the same odor? Geez! ------------ --------- --------- ------- Sarah: :-)) Actually, I'm with Howard on this thread and issue, Geez! Nina posted some good quotes from 'Survey' by A. Sujin recently on the same point. Here was one I liked: "Are sounds which appear through the earsense entirely the same or are there different sounds? Each sound is different depending on the conditions which cause the arising of that sound. No matter how many people there are, the sound of each individual is different. Citta clearly knows each of the different sounds which appear. Citta knows the sound of ridicule, of sarcasm, of contempt, of a fan, of a waterfall, the cry of an animal, the different calls of various kinds of animals, or even the sound of a man who imitates the sound of an animal. Citta clearly knows the characteristics of the different sounds, it hears each different sound. All kinds of realities can appear when citta arises and clearly knows the object which presents itself. The citta which smells through the nose can arise and clearly know the different odours which appear. It can clearly know the smell of different kinds of animals, plants or flowers, the smell of food, of curry and of sweets. Even if we only smell without seeing anything, we can know what kind of smell it is." .... Sarah: I'm also thinking of all the references in the Atthasalini and elsewhere about the variegated nature of citta and citta as leader (of cetasikas). It knows it's object very, very precisely just as it is. As Howard said before, "not all warmths are the same" - actually no warmth, no tangible object, no rupa of any kind is ever the same. I'm happy to look at/discuss any of Scott's textual references too:-). Metta, Sarah ======= #92590 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Nov 12, 2008 11:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before upasaka_howard Hi, Colette (and Ken) - In a message dated 11/12/2008 11:51:33 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, ksheri3@... writes: Hi All, This will be difficult since there are so many Howards in this post: upasaka_howard will be UH (no not ultra-high as in frequency) and the other howard will just be howard. --------------------------------------------- Howard: Except that each "Howard" quoted below, as in the next quote, is actually me, a.k.a. upasaka_howard. And the going name for "the other Howard" is 'Ken' or 'KenH'. ---------------------------------------------- > Yes, I am aware of the akusala nature of minor vanities. There is no > getting away from them, though, is there? > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Not yet - not for any of us! That's for sure! :-) > ------------------------------------------- > colette: there, so both UH and howard are fully aware of vanity. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, both me & Ken. ------------------------------------------ What is the difference between a minor and major vanity? How can they be different? ------------------------------ > If I tried not to be vain > about being a little different from the rest then I would find myself > being vain about something else. Wanting to be just like the rest, > for example! > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yep, me too! I think what's important is to be aware of it (as you are, > and as I am). > ------------------------------------------- > colette: where in the Buddhist doctrine does it say or suggest that the Path is only to be followed by those that are INTENTIONALLY AND DELIBERATELY of the mind to SEPERATE THEMSELVES from their brothers and sisters? ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't make that claim. I don't think Ken does either, but he'll have to speak for himself. The Buddha did say, though, that his teaching goes against the stream, and I think that is so. ------------------------------------------------- I was always under the impression that a Boddhisatva is to realize the equality and sameness they have with others. How can there be a difference between the individual on the path and those that do not walk the path? ------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not a bodhisatta. In any case, I think the difference between one who follows the practice and one who does not is, well, exactly that. ------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- > > The inevitability of akusala is classically demonstrated by people > who go on retreats, isn't it? > ----------------------------------------- > Howard: > Perhaps for some, some of the time. I haven't been on a retreat for a > very long time, it happens. Hey, is that good, then? ;-)) > --------------------------------------- > colette: I think both of you are intentionally missing the point of a retreat which is designed to immerse the individual in the teachings. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: I've been on many retreats, Colette, and I've benefitted from the intensive practice, which, BTW, is what I see as the purpose of a retreat. In more recent years, I've preferred solitary practice. ------------------------------------------------ Experience may be a requirement for the Pure Land Sect but I can't see how any Theravadan would consider denying the power of bringing "experience" to the table with them when learning the Path. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't know what "experience" you are speaking of here. If you mean "formal practice," as Ken likes to call it, I'm very much involved with that. ---------------------------------------------- I understand akusala and kusala to be almost identicle but maybe I've been too immersed in Shunyata and Budda-Nature. Eventhough I just found of a piece called the Ratna-gotra-vibhaga and the Dharma- Dharmata-vibhaga I haven't read anything from them yet, hopefully soon, I think both of you are getting a little too petty with your focus on things like akusala and kusala since they are nothing but completely Dependent upon each individual and completely transient from one second to another. --------------------------------------------------- FAMILIARITY BREEDS CONTEMPT ----------------------------------------------- Howard: At this point, you seem to be entering into a soliloquy, Colette. ---------------------------------------------- > They try to get away from it all only > to find they have 'brought themselves along.' I remember reading Ven. > Sumedho's story of his early days in a forest monastery. With nothing > else to get angry about he became seethingly furious at the way monks > were sweeping leaves. :-) > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Yes, I seem to recall reading that also. We humans are an amusing lot! > :-) > ---------------------------------------- colette: is that all? what? you miss the point, IMO, completely. The Mosa exists and this monk that had to become agry with the way other monks were sweeping leaves is nothing but proof that mosa, even at a retreat, is present and needs to be minded in the mind of the person that cannot control it. Humans are a strange lot, huh? Well sure, but for those that have the intelligence and experience to cognize and re- cognize these behaviors and characteristics then the Buddhist doctrines are an uncomparable asset and power to the person that sees how they can be used, applied. ----------------------------------- > > > This method of stopping akusala never works. colette: boy could you use a little time immersed in the Madhyamika! ---------------------------------- Stories of jhana > meditators going to quiet places would seem to be an exception, but, > as you know, I believe jhana meditators are a different class of > people (with highly developed understanding of kusala). > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I'm not sure what a "jhana meditator" is, but I'll just leave that. > ------------------------------------------- > colette: sounds good Howard. --------------------------- > It is not out > of "wanting to have less akusala and wanting to have more kusala" > that they go to quiet places. > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > For serious Buddhist meditators, they meditate for cultivation of the > mind and not just pleasant experiences. > ---------------------------------------------- > colette: WHAT? ISN'T IT SUCH AN ENORMOUS PLEASURE TO HAVE THAT CULTIVATION AND BE ABLE TO RAISE IT TO CONSCIOUSNESS AT WILL? I know it is for me but then again, I was relating this exact sensation to some Western occultists in the form of A.Maslow's work called: Religions, Values, and the Peak Experience. -------------------------------------- > > > > Even in the case of jhana meditation there is no permanent avoidance > of akusala. Only by right understanding of conditioned dhammas > (satipatthana) are the defilements actually decreased. > colette: I won't bother explaining that something that does not exist cannot be either akusala or kusala but I think you're going on a wild goose chase looking to find kusala and akusala within "conditioned dhammas". I love this thought thread, now I want to get one more before time expires for me tonight. toodles, colette =========================== With metta, Howard #92591 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 5:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" sarahprocter... Dear Friends, I think the quotes given here from the Udaayi Sutta, SN 35:234 as quoted in "Survey of Paramattha Dhammas" by A.Sujin, translated by Nina, clearly indicate that any 'voidness', as in the heart of the plantain-tree, refers to the lack of 'atta' in any naama or ruupa. Without understanding the various kinds of naamas and ruupas, there is bound to be the idea of a plantain-tree, pen or person as a 'whole'. The following seems relevant to several of the recent discussions on 'voidness' and understanding of naamas and ruupas: "As we read in the Sutta, Aananda said to Udaayin with reference to seeing-consciousness, that the Buddha had explained that this is also without the self. Aananda said to Udaayin: “Owing to the eye and visible object arises seeing-consciousness, does it not, friend?” “Yes, friend.” “Well, friend, it is by this method that the Exalted One has explained, opened up, and shown that this consciousness also is without the self.” He repeated the same about the other sense-cognitions and the consciousness that experiences objects through the mind-door. This Sutta shows how beneficial it is that the Buddha explained the Dhamma completely and in all details. He explained about all types of citta, which are naama. If someone could realize the noble Truths by having only one kind of object of mindfulness, of what use would it be that the Buddha explained about all the other dhammas? He explained all about seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, the experience of tangible object, thinking, pleasant and unpleasant feeling, remembrance and other dhammas. He did so in order to help people to be mindful of these realities, to consider, study and clearly comprehend them. That is the way leading to the complete eradication of doubt and wrong view about naama and ruupa. Someone may believe that, by knowing only one type of naama or one type of ruupa, he can still realize the noble Truths. He pretends to be able to realize enlightenment, but he does not understand the characteristics of naama and ruupa as they naturally appear, just as they are. Then he is sure to have doubt and uncertainty about the naama and ruupa he believes he cannot know. It is evident that he in that way cannot attain enlightenment. We read further on in the Sutta that was quoted above, about a simile Aananda used. He said to Udaayin: “Suppose, friend, that a man should roam about in need of heart of wood, searching for heart of wood, looking for heart of wood, and, taking a sharp axe, should enter a forest. There he sees a mighty plantain-trunk, straight up, new-grown, of towering height. He cuts it down at the root. Having cut it down at the root, he chops it off at the top. Having done so he peels off the outer skin. But he would find no pith inside, much less would he find heart of wood. “Even so, friend, a monk beholds no trace of the self nor of what pertains to the self in the sixfold sense-sphere. So beholding, he is not attached to anything in the world. Unattached he is not troubled. Untroubled, he is of himself utterly set free. So that he realizes, ‘Destroyed is rebirth. Lived is the righteous life. Done is the task. For life in these conditions there is no hereafter.’” We just read that Aananda said that a man in search for heart of wood enters a forest and sees a mighty plantain-trunk, straight up, new-grown, of towering height. So long as it is a plantain-trunk it still has the appearance of a “whole”. Then we read, “Having cut it down at the root, he chops it off as the top. Having done so, he peels off the outer skin.” We should eliminate clinging to what we are used to taking for a “whole”, for a “thing”, for self. We then read, “But he would find no pith inside, much less would he find heart of wood”. Thus he becomes detached from the idea of plantain-trunk. It is the same as in the case of a cow that is still not cut up by a cattle butcher, as we read in the “Papa~ncasuudaaní”, the Commentary to the “Satipa.t.thaanasutta”. If the cattle butcher does not skin it and cut it up in different parts he is bound to see it as a cow, he does not see it as different elements. So long as ruupas are still seen as joined together, one perceives them as a “whole”, or as a whole posture such as the “sitting ruupa”. People are bound to consider realities as a thing, a self, a being or person who is there. Only if someone knows naama and ruupa as they are he does not take them for beings or people anymore. It is just as after peeling off the skin of the plantain, any pith in it is not to be found, much less heart of wood. As we have read, Aananda said: ”Even so, friend, a monk beholds no trace of self nor what pertains to the self in the sixfold sense-sphere”.< Metta, Sarah ============= #92592 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 5:21 am Subject: Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" scottduncan2 Dear Sarah and Howard, Howard: "Do you need a sutta to tell you that not all pains are the same, not all sounds are the same, not all visible objects are the same, not all odors are the same? Do you always feel the same pain, hear the same sound, see the same visible object, and smell the same odor? Geez!" ------------ --------- --------- ------- Sarah: ":-)) Actually, I'm with Howard on this thread and issue, Geez!" Scott: Yes, sorry about that. Sincerely, Scott. #92593 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 5:24 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Thanks for the reply: N: "Seeing is past when thinking arises, and it is not important to know whether the object was pleasant or unpleasant. Why do you want to know this?..." Scott: I just realised that I had not really understood this. Sincerely, Scott. #92594 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 7:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. nilovg Hi James, Op 13-nov-2008, om 1:46 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > James: There is no reason to talk down to me just because you > disagree with me. You have already closed your mind to what I am > saying. You have dismissed me as being unable to accept anatta. > Well, I have news for you Nina, I can accept anatta just fine. What > I don't accept is the idea that people don't exist. The Buddha > doesn't teach that "self" equals "person"; and he was the supreme > teacher and he personally knew anatta. So, rather than judging > everyone who disagrees with your approach, just listen to them for a > change! ------ N: Talking down? You misunderstand me. All those who are not sotaapannas have not eradicated clinging to the idea of self. Yes, I listen and I know what you mean, differentiating self and person. -------- > > J quotes: It is > > a lifelong process of developing understanding of nama and rupa. > > I have not given up the idea of self or person, but I see the > value > > of learning to think in the right way. > > James: Well, this is some expression of humility, but hardly. You > still think you have all the answers and that you know what anatta > means. ------- N: Hey, I do not fully grasp it, how could I, not being a sotaapanna. -------- > > As said before, no person exists does not mean: there is > nothing. ... > . Thai friends handing out medicine as soon as someone is > > coughing. No persons are doing this, but we begin to understand > that > > kusala citta moves rupas we call hand at such moments. > > James: Well, this just sounds ridiculous to me. You are just > applying different labels to the same thing. It doesn't matter if > you call a person's mind/intellect: nama, and a person's body: rupa; > we are talking about the same thing! If you say that only nama and > rupa exist, but no person, then you are saying that there are no > aggregates or khandas. Nina, think about it and don't just dismiss > me off-hand. ------- N: It makes all the difference to say: a person exists, or: there are many different cittas and rupas arising and falling away within splitseconds, just elements. Did you read Sarah's post quoting the sutta about the plaintain tree? So long as the idea of a person, of a whole, is not understood as different elements, we are bound to cling to the idea of a person exists. I will also mention a pen now. Even things as a pen we can have wrong view about, so long as the whole is taken for something existing. We see only colour, we do not see a pen. Thus, to me it is very meaningful what I learnt from the suttas: Udaayi Sutta, SN 35:234: <“Owing to the eye and visible object arises seeing-consciousness, does it not, friend?” “Yes, friend.” “Well, friend, it is by this method that the Exalted One has explained, opened up, and shown that this consciousness also is without the self.” He repeated the same about the other sense-cognitions and the consciousness that experiences objects through the mind-door.> This is about cittas experiencing objects through six doorways. It helps me to realize that at the moment of seeing only colour appears, no person, no pen. Six doorways, and six different worlds, appearing one at a time. It will lead to more detachment, more understanding of the meaning of anatta. ------- > > James: Lord, you are still talking about people! It doesn't matter > if you use the terms nama and rupa, it is still people giving and > taking medicine and using kind speech! ------- N: We can talk about people to give examples of different cittas with different motivations, performing kusala and akusala. Such moments do not last and no persons are the owners of cittas. When you or I or anyone are kind, using gentle speech, and at another moment using harsh speech, does it not seem that there are as it were different personalities? The reason is that cittas are so different that it seems that there are different personalities. The conditions are entirely different at one moment and the next moment. This helps us to understand anattaness, not just the word or the theory, but the characteristic. ------- Nina. #92595 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 11:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. nilovg Dear Scott, Op 13-nov-2008, om 14:24 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > N: "Seeing is past when thinking arises, and it is not important to > know whether the object was pleasant or unpleasant. Why do you want > to know this?..." > > Scott: I just realised that I had not really understood this. -------- N: We had before many discussions about this, also with Rob M. Now I dug out a post by Rob K from his forum (study of texts) with interesting details. But first this: Kh Sujin said that there are things that we cannot find out, things that the Buddha knew. We should not delay, she said, developing more understanding of what appears now. She warned as to studying too many details, losing the purpose of it al. Rob quotes Sarah's post: Now the other post about the agreeableness of visible object: -------- Nina. #92596 From: "connie" Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 2:06 pm Subject: Subject: Vism.XVII,313 nichiconn Re: #92582 Path of Purity, p.706 The activities and so on arise because of ignorance and so on, just as curds and so on are due to milk and so on, not to other causes: - this is known as the nature of being such. He who sees it rightly, knowing that a result comes in accordance with a cause, abandons the theory of no-cause and the theory of no-action; seeing it wrongly not grasping the proceeding of a result in accordance with a cause but holding some impossible view that something arises from somewhere, he clings to the theory of no-cause and the doctrine of assurance. Thus the wheel of becoming By way of origin in truths, function, And simile, prevention, different kinds Of deep methods should fittingly be known. #92597 From: "colette" Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:34 am Subject: [dsg] Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before ksheri3 Good Morning Howard, I only have a few minutes and I wanted to say that I'm under a lot of stress recently and I'm physically tired after 30 years of practice. It's well known that I don't acknowledge and cow-tow to the ideology of "titles" and heirarchies. It's a fact that I've practiced maik from a Western shamanistic tradition for 30 years and don't really need titles and ceremonies (pomp & circumstance). I've only studied Buddhism for about 4 years now so I don't have it all under my belt or even close to perfect. I have a good understanding of the basics and I guess somewhat a bit of the esoteric side of Buddhism. I'm not trying to paint you in a corner or mock you, I'm just putting out my understanding of the doctrine. Sure, I get things a bit screwed up now & then and it takes me time to concentrate on my mistakes but at least I'm very cognizant of this condition and, as always, very observant to the fact that I may get things wrong now & then until I can internalize things good. I studied Kabbalah for at least 15 years, I meditated on the Kabbalistic glyph, the sepira, etc, and then I find, 2004, the internet and an entire new world opens up for me in that there's so many people out there that actually study what I adore, what I love, and their perspectives, their understanding, their wisdom, has completely overwhelmed me. As I've said, I'm tired, I've done this for 30 years and things are still happening in an exact predetermined fashion, robotics, "ordered", that I'm simply resigned to say that if "they're" gonna kill me then let it be. There's nothing I can do for them and I've already accomplished what I had originally set out to accomplish. Please, take my comments and jokes as nothing more than trying to relate and have fun relating my interpretation from ignorance. You got tons more knowledge about this stuff than I do so do not feel slighted. But I've gotta go and start the slave rotine around this house I live in. toodles, colette #92598 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 9:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before upasaka_howard Hi, Colette - Nice post, Colette! Thank you!! :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/13/2008 5:19:21 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, ksheri3@... writes: Good Morning Howard, I only have a few minutes and I wanted to say that I'm under a lot of stress recently and I'm physically tired after 30 years of practice. #92599 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:38 pm Subject: Re: To Boldly Go Where No Sutta Has Gone Before kenhowardau Hi James, ----------------- J: > I was glad that Howard brought this issue up because I was thinking about it myself. But, I didn't want to say anything because the Buddha said to look at one's own faults rather than the faults of others. However, since this doesn't seem to bother you, I will comment: Wanting to be so different from everyone else that you would go to extremes to do so is a strong form of conceit. ------------------- No one said anything about extremes. I like to resist cultural imperialism but only when it's convenient to do so. I have never spoilt anyone's dinner plans, for example, by refusing to eat at McDonald's. The one time I did eat there I was with a group. (A group of traitorous collaborators!) (Joke) ----------------------------------- J: > It may be beneficial for you to examine that. Additionally, realize that your over-enthusiasm for the fringe sect of Buddhism presented in this group might be tied to this same desire to be different. ----------------------------------- In your eyes it is over enthusiasm, but not in mine. Therefore, I do not assume my enthusiasm for this version of the Dhamma to be due to anything akusala. --------------------------------------------------- <. . .> KH: > > . . . I believe jhana meditators are a different class of > people (with highly developed understanding of kusala). It is not out > of "wanting to have less akusala and wanting to have more kusala" > that they go to quiet places. James: This does not correspond with what the Buddha taught. ---------------------------------------------------- I believe it does. I am sure there are endless sutta quotes to the effect that desire (lobha) is always akusala and akusala was *never* recommended by the Buddha. ---------------------- J: > We should avoid akusala behaviors and thinking as much as possible. ----------------------- Yes, but how? Before the Buddha expounded the Dhamma no one knew how. Even today only a few know. ---------------------------- J: > It is a cop-out to say "Well, we all have akusala, all the time." So, what is your point? What if a man said "I beat my wife and kids, but we all have akusala; and there is no self; so it is counter- productive to try to stop beating my wife and kids."? --------------------------- Well, to be fair, I was talking about *minor* akusala. Life is full of little desires conceits and prejudices. There's no point in worrying about them. Major akusala, is different of course, and a wife beater should certainly seek help. BTW, I heard somewhere that the sons of wife beaters almost invariably spend their childhoods hating their fathers and vowing with all their might that, when they grow up, they will NEVER EVER hit their wives. And yet, in the heat of the moment, most (or many) of them do hit their wives. It is due to conditions. ----------------- J: > Would that be okay to you? Yes, we all have various levels of akusala but the goal of the Buddha's teaching is to rid the mind of these levels, step by step. The wife beater has very gross levels of akusala to deal with before the more subtle levels. You Ken, have only subtle levels of akusala to deal with- so you should deal with them. Making excuses for yourself is weak and a cop-out. ------------------ I notice you have made considerable progress in this regard. Apart from a few regrettable lapses (such as yesterday's outburst) the rude, angry James we used to know at DSG has vanished. So you do know what you're talking about! Even so, I believe behavioural changes brought about by striving are only superficial. Who knows what will happen in the heat of the moment? To get to the root of the problem there really needs to be deep understanding. ---------------------------- KH: > > Even in the case of jhana meditation there is no permanent avoidance > of akusala. Only by right understanding of conditioned dhammas > (satipatthana) are the defilements actually decreased. James: > It isn't just by "right understanding" but also by "right action" that akusala mind states are erradicated. The Buddha, even before he became enlightened, took stock of his mental states and determined which were akusala and which were kusala. He then determined to avoid akusala thoughts and cultivate kusala thoughts. This had nothing to do with jhana, etc. This is just the beginning, the basics, the necessary groundwork for following the Buddha's teachings. ------------------------------ I hope you will forgive me for saying this, James, but those are just empty words. They might sound good to some people, but there is no profound meaning to them. They are the same sort of platitude that can be heard from any preacher, anywhere. Ken H