#97600 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:08 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) kenhowardau Hi Robert E (and Nina) Robert, I believe you are approaching the Abhidhamma from the wrong angle. In effect you are asking, 'How can the teaching of ultimate reality be made to fit with my conventional ideas of reality?' But ultimate reality came first, didn't it? - and conventional reality afterwards. So your approach should be the other way around. ------------------ R: > Just to quote a portion of the sutta above: "...understanding > cannot of its own nature determine an object as 'impermanent, > painful, and no-self', but with applied thought giving [assistance] > by repeatedly beating [upon an object] it can." > > "Repeatedly beating" cannot take place in a single moment, can it? > How many times can it 'beat' in a single moment? ------------------ Any reality that is experienced outside a single moment of consciousness is just a conventional reality, or concept. Therefore, if the word "repeatedly" is to have any ultimately real meaning it must apply to something that occurs inside a single moment. So the reality vicara - which repeatedly beats upon an object - came first. *Concepts* of doing something repeatedly came second. If the realities and the concepts don't match up then it is the concepts that need to be changed. --------------------- R: > That would seem to > fly in the face of any meaning that "a single moment" could > possibly have. --------------------- The Dhamma is about "things unheard before" (Dhammacakkappavattana-sutta) and so the beginner will always find it difficult to understand. To help us to understand, the Buddha gave many conventional examples. That is, he used "things heard before" as descriptions of "things unheard before." These examples only become a problem when people mistake them for the realities they were meant to describe. Very often, when people read the Buddha's descriptions of the Eightfold Path, they get the idea that Right Concentration (for example) is the conventional reality commonly known as right concentration. They think the Buddha was talking about going to a secluded place, quietening the mind, and focusing on a concept (of a kasina etc.) . But that can't be right - those were things *heard before* not things *unheard before.* Ken H #97601 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:36 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) nilovg Dear Rob Ep, Op 26-apr-2009, om 18:28 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > however I think that sometimes the doctrine of single-ness can fly > in the face of the description of the cetasikas and their > functions, even as they are described in Abhidhamma. ------ N: Whatever function of a cetasika is desribed, it is always in a single moment. The same cetasika could not last for the performing of its function. In order to explain its function, it can be explained in a conventional way as Ken H said. This need not lead us astray, we can understand that the cetasikas fall away together with the citta they accompany. ----- > > R: Again, "repeated beatings," vs. "single moment." How can it be? > If you say that the "repeated beatings" can take place in > successive moments for successive arisings of panna, then I will be > content. ------- N: Certainly, you can rest content. Nina. #97602 From: "Leo" Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 1:15 am Subject: clay bowl leoaive Hi So time ago, I was thinking that bowl out of clay is the most original for Buddhist monks. And later I found that bowl out of clay is placed on smooth ground. I hope you like my findings! leo #97603 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 2:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - samudayasacca.m sarahprocter... Hi Alberto, --- On Sat, 25/4/09, sprlrt wrote: >From The shorter discourse on the lion's roar, MN 11, trans. Nm-BB - Alberto ... <...> >12. Though certain recluses and brahmins claim to propound the full understanding of all kinds of clinging they do not completely describe the full understanding of all kinds of clinging. They describe the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasure, clinging to views, and clinging to rules and observances without describing the full understanding of clinging to a doctrine of self. Why is that? Those good recluses and brahmins do not understand one instance of clinging as it actually is. Therefore they describe only the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasure, clinging to views, and clinging to rules and observances without describing the full understanding of clinging to a doctrine of self. ... S: And without a full understanding of dhammas as anatta, there cannot be an understanding of even the 1st NT - this is the understanding of khandhas as dukkha on account of their impermanence and the impossibility of any atta to exert any control over them. So, no vipassana nanas before hearing about and understanding dhammas as anatta.... mere dhammas rolling on. Pls let me know if there is still any disagreement....:). Metta, Sarah p.s. I had mentioned off-list we might be visiting Northern Italy in the summer, but now the flights to Milan have been cancelled, so we'll be flying to Rome, staying nearby and then just going between there and Lucca for my mother's 80th family gathering. Hope to meet another time! =============== #97604 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 2:54 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. sarahprocter... Hi James, --- On Sat, 25/4/09, buddhatrue wrote: >>S: I've been glad to read your 'spirited' comments in this and other threads:-). >James: I guess that's one way to put it. :-) ... S: :-) ... >> S: Again, I think the Buddha was pointed to the different kinds of accumulations which may manifest. >James: That could be. Again, I don't quite get that sutta. It's too vague to me. .... S: Just as now, one person may be having wise and calm reflections on the Buddha's virtues and another may be having some understanding of a sense experience or object. At the moment of enlightenment, all path factors arise and experience nibbana, but who can say for anyone what kinds of consciousness will arise and what will be experienced just prior to that moment or even after the various supramundane moments of consciousness and reviewing moments have fallen away? One thing for sure is that insight has to be developed in order for such enlightenment to occur. ... >>S:He wasn't indicating that one could choose how and when to become enlightened. >James: Well, I believe that one can choose the "vehicle" of enlightenment; but of course, no one can choose "when". .... S: Half an agreement is better than none, I suppose:). Can we choose whether to have ignorance or understanding of visible object now? Can we choose whether to have understanding of visible object or metta now? What exactly is this choosing.... ... >> Just my reflections on this topic. >James: Thanks. It feels like we have danced this dance many times before. :-) ... S: I know what you mean :-). Still a little out of step, but at least we understand each other's style of dance by now :-). No need to continue the dance either.... Thx for replying and for the good humour... Metta, Sarah p.s Hope your health's better and Happy Birthday for around this time...:-)) ======== #97605 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 3:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. sarahprocter... Hi Howard, Back to our old dance pattern after a long break....:). --- On Fri, 24/4/09, upasaka@... wrote: ------------ --------- --------- --------- H:> There is no "one" who, literally, does anything, and no "one," for that matter, who has accumulations. ... S: So far, so good... .... >But what is also true is that without the intentional setting up of current requisite conditions - physical and mental seclusion, attending primarily to a restricted field of attention such as the body or breath, and monitoring the process to avoid getting lost in thought, excitement, or lethargy, no samatha or vipassana bhavana will occur. .... S: As I see it, now there is no special "setting up" of anything in particular and no attending to any "restricted field" and yet, in between the various moments of seeing, hearing, excietement, lethargy and so on, there can be moments of calm, moments of wise reflection on the Dhamma, for example, or even moments of understanding of the visible object, lethargy or other realities appearing one at a time. I don't see a need or purpose in thinking about a different time when there is some special "intentional setting up". Cannot even such thinking about it be known as just another conditioned dhamma? .... >Predilection for jhana attainment does not develop by study only, and those who are facile with jhanas don't typically enter them while scuba diving, surfing, or tennis playing. ------------ --------- --------- --------- S: True, but I'd say that the development of calm and understanding so necessary in samatha can grow during any of these activities. We're talking about brief wholesome moments of consciousness involved in particular kinds of wise reflection. I think we need to look at how samatha and vipassana begin to develop, rather than being too concerned about what situation one might find oneself in whilst attaining jhana, but I know we disagree here. .... >>>H: Accumulations aren't tropical plants growing in the wild, without careful tending to the garden. What is done now yields the accumulations of the future. Without useful action now, there is no basis for useful results in the future. If not now, when? The past is gone, the future a dream. Now is the time. ------------ --------- --------- --------- - >>S: Again, I think it could be stressed that whether or not samatha develops depends on conditions, rather than choice by a self. ------------ --------- --------- --------- H:> Whenever I speak of choosing, you bring up "self." The Buddha made choices, Sarah. ... S: The Buddha taught us that there are just conditioned dhammas now arising and passing away. There is no Buddha, Sarah or Howard to make any choices. The 'careful tending' now has to be the function of wise attention and other wholesome mental factors. Yes, I agree, that now, is the time for them to arise. ... >This bringing up "self" whenever one wishes to put down someone's opinion is something that I find annoying. I love you, Sarah, really, but I'm not fond of this approach. ------------ --------- --------- --------- S: :) I apologise! As far as I'm concerned, it's certainly not a matter of 'putting down' your (or anyone else's)opinion. I may have misunderstood your comments, but they suggested (like James's) an idea of a self that could make choices, restrict attention, make bhavana occur. I certainly don't write in order to annoy you! (I love you too, btw!!) ... >The Body Field /Monks, whoever develops & pursues mindfulness immersed in the body encompasses whatever skillful qualities are on the side of clear knowing. Just as whoever pervades the great ocean with his awareness encompasses whatever rivulets flow down into the ocean, in the same way, whoever develops & pursues mindfulness immersed in the body encompasses whatever skillful qualities are on the side of clear knowing./ (From the Kayagata-sati Sutta) .... S: Mindfulness of the rupas (we refer to as the body)has to develop, along with mindfulness of all the various namas which make up our day. No special order, no selection. Yes, whenever there is awareness and understanding of such dhammas, there is clear knowing with no more idea of 'choice' or 'special selection' of what will arise at the next moment. Metta, Sarah ======== #97606 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 3:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Scott & Howard, --- On Wed, 22/4/09, Scott wrote: >>H: "I've read this frequently on DSG - that pan~na only has ultimate realities as object..." >Scott: This is the way I understand it. ... Sarah: If you've seen or understood this, it can only be referring to pa~n~naa of satipa.t.thaana. ... >>H: "...If that were so, I would wonder what, then, knows concept as merely concept. Any ideas?" >Scott: Not pa~n~naa, that's for sure. There is nothing of a concept that makes it an object for pa~n~naa. .... Sarah: In the development of samatha, the pa~n~naa (and other cetasikas), almost always have a concept as object. Similarly, in the development of satipa.t.thaana, when the understanding and awareness is at an intellectual stage (i.e pariyatti), the object is always a concept. So, it can be wise reflection with pa~n~naa of pariyatti which 'knows concept as merely concept'. For example, now, there can be wise reflecting on how all that's seen is visible object and that the words, labels and so on are just concepts. This is pariyatti with pa~n~naa. Metta, Sarah p.s Apologies if I've misunderstood anything written or if others have replied in the same way - I got a bit behind. ====== #97607 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 3:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Dear Scott (& Rob Ep), --- On Tue, 21/4/09, Scott wrote: >Scott: In the Sammohavinodanii, p. 111: >"Also as regards Right View and Right Thinking, understanding cannot of its own nature determine an object as 'impermanent, painful, and no-self', but with applied thought giving [assistance] by repeatedly beating [upon an object] it can. How? Just as a money-changer, having had a coin placed in his hand and being desirous of looking at it on all sides equally, cannot turn it over with the power of the eye only, but by turning it over with his fingers he is able to look at it on all sides; likewise understanding cannot of its own nature determine an object as impermanent, etc., but with applied thought with its characteristic of focussing the mind and its function of striking and threshing, as it were beating and turning over, it can take what is given and determine it. Therefore Right View only is included here in the understanding group as being of the same kind, but Right Thinking is included because of its action [of assisting]." >Scott: Right View is pa~n~naa cetasika. Right Thinking is vitakka cetasika. The above shows a bit of how conascent mental factors perform separate but coordinated functions, according to characteristic, within the whole of the moment of consciousness and directed at the same object. ... Sarah: Great quote and apt comment. You had a second thought (ha ha) about whether this was referring to vitakka, vicara or combined. As I understand, it is a great description of why vitakka (samma sankappa) is the 2nd factor of the Eightfold Path factors - samma di.t.thi needs its assistance to 'strike and thresh' the object in order for samma di.t.thi to penetrate its characteristic. Of course, whenever vitakka arises, so does vicaara. (This is, of course, except in the case of the second jhana -in fact, when enlightenment is 'based' on the higher jhanas, samma sankappa is no longer required as a path factor). Metta, Sarah ======= #97608 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 4/27/2009 6:28:58 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard, Back to our old dance pattern after a long break....:). --- On Fri, 24/4/09, upasaka@... wrote: ------------ --------- --------- --------- H:> There is no "one" who, literally, does anything, and no "one," for that matter, who has accumulations. ... S: So far, so good... .... >But what is also true is that without the intentional setting up of current requisite conditions - physical and mental seclusion, attending primarily to a restricted field of attention such as the body or breath, and monitoring the process to avoid getting lost in thought, excitement, or lethargy, no samatha or vipassana bhavana will occur. .... S: As I see it, now there is no special "setting up" of anything in particular and no attending to any "restricted field" and yet, in between the various moments of seeing, hearing, excietement, lethargy and so on, there can be moments of calm, moments of wise reflection on the Dhamma, for example, or even moments of understanding of the visible object, lethargy or other realities appearing one at a time. I don't see a need or purpose in thinking about a different time when there is some special "intentional setting up". Cannot even such thinking about it be known as just another conditioned dhamma? ---------------------------------------- I believe the Buddha would disagree with you. The narrowing of (the central focus of) intention, for example to the body (kayagatasati bhavana) or the breath (anapanasati bhavana), is taught by the Buddha, and it is explained by the Buddha as special activity with salutary consequence. ---------------------------------------- .... >Predilection for jhana attainment does not develop by study only, and those who are facile with jhanas don't typically enter them while scuba diving, surfing, or tennis playing. ------------ --------- --------- --------- S: True, but I'd say that the development of calm and understanding so necessary in samatha can grow during any of these activities. We're talking about brief wholesome moments of consciousness involved in particular kinds of wise reflection. I think we need to look at how samatha and vipassana begin to develop, rather than being too concerned about what situation one might find oneself in whilst attaining jhana, but I know we disagree here. ----------------------------------------- Yes, there is a clear area of agreement: our disagreement! LOL! ---------------------------------------- .... >>>H: Accumulations aren't tropical plants growing in the wild, without careful tending to the garden. What is done now yields the accumulations of the future. Without useful action now, there is no basis for useful results in the future. If not now, when? The past is gone, the future a dream. Now is the time. ------------ --------- --------- --------- - >>S: Again, I think it could be stressed that whether or not samatha develops depends on conditions, rather than choice by a self. ------------ --------- --------- --------- H:> Whenever I speak of choosing, you bring up "self." The Buddha made choices, Sarah. ... S: The Buddha taught us that there are just conditioned dhammas now arising and passing away. There is no Buddha, Sarah or Howard to make any choices. The 'careful tending' now has to be the function of wise attention and other wholesome mental factors. Yes, I agree, that now, is the time for them to arise. -------------------------------------- So, you just don't believe in volition! I find that just silly, but, hey, to each his/her own. ----------------------------------- ... >This bringing up "self" whenever one wishes to put down someone's opinion is something that I find annoying. I love you, Sarah, really, but I'm not fond of this approach. ------------ --------- --------- --------- S: :) I apologise! As far as I'm concerned, it's certainly not a matter of 'putting down' your (or anyone else's)opinion. I may have misunderstood your comments, but they suggested (like James's) an idea of a self that could make choices, restrict attention, make bhavana occur. I certainly don't write in order to annoy you! (I love you too, btw!!) -------------------------------------- :-) BTW, I don't think that James believes in a literal actor-entity either. -------------------------------------- ... >The Body Field /Monks, whoever develops & pursues mindfulness immersed in the body encompasses whatever skillful qualities are on the side of clear knowing. Just as whoever pervades the great ocean with his awareness encompasses whatever rivulets flow down into the ocean, in the same way, whoever develops & pursues mindfulness immersed in the body encompasses whatever skillful qualities are on the side of clear knowing./ (From the Kayagata-sati Sutta) .... S: Mindfulness of the rupas (we refer to as the body)has to develop, along with mindfulness of all the various namas which make up our day. No special order, no selection. Yes, whenever there is awareness and understanding of such dhammas, there is clear knowing with no more idea of 'choice' or 'special selection' of what will arise at the next moment. ------------------------------------------- ;-)) The Buddha taught "special selection" in so many ways: guarding the sense to distinguish wholesome from unwholesome and to choose the wholesome, centering attention on bodily sensations, directing one's thoughts to the Dhamma and away from trivialities ... so many areas of selection! Sarah, do you really see no difference in result between folks who make regular, special effort as regards introspection, ongoing mindfulness, guarding the senses, and intentionally calming the mind, and those who just live, as the mass of people do, however they happen to be inclined - according to whatever "feels good"? That is the real going "with the flow," and it comes down to being led by nose by craving and attachment. -------------------------------------------- Metta, Sarah ======================== With metta, Howard #97609 From: "Scott" Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 5:00 am Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Regarding: Me: "...This is the way I understand it." Sarah: "If you've seen or understood this, it can only be referring to pa~n~naa of satipa.t.thaana." Scott: Meaning, I take it, only if this refers to a non-intellectual Me: "Not pa~n~naa, that's for sure. There is nothing of a concept that makes it an object for pa~n~naa." Sarah: "In the development of samatha, the pa~n~naa (and other cetasikas), almost always have a concept as object." Scott: I don't follow here. How does pa~n~naa function 'in the development of samatha'? I thought samatha was a function of other mental factors. S: "Similarly, in the development of satipa.t.thaana, when the understanding and awareness is at an intellectual stage (i.e pariyatti), the object is always a concept." Scott: Can you please elaborate? I've misunderstood, it seems, something about the objects of pa~n~naa. If a concept is not an ultimate reality, then how can it be an object of pa~n~naa cetasika? In other words, I thought pa~n~naa only has paramattha dhammaa as objects. Does one define pariyatti as 'an intellectual stage of understanding and awareness'? Isn't this 'thinking'? It might be thinking 'correctly' but what is the link between pa~n~naa and its object and the thinking which arises later (and which must be a function of a host of other dhammaa in interaction and succession) and creates wholes (coherent thoughts) about realities? S: "So, it can be wise reflection with pa~n~naa of pariyatti which 'knows concept as merely concept'. For example, now, there can be wise reflecting on how all that's seen is visible object and that the words, labels and so on are just concepts. This is pariyatti with pa~n~naa." Scott: Again, what is the object? This perseveration should demonstrate how I'm not clear on something here... Sincerely, Scott. #97610 From: "Scott" Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 5:04 am Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, I should finish my sentences: Me: "Meaning, I take it, only if this refers to a non-intellectual" Scott: I think I wanted to say 'non-intellectual process' meaning the pure action of pa~n~naa in the moment. Sincerely, Scott. #97611 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 5:54 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 18. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > There should not be any idea of developing first certain good > qualities which are then developed in daily life. In that case one > thinks of "doing" something first, and the question is, who is doing? Always a good question! :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #97612 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 6:26 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Ken. Apologies in advance for my tone - I will take it back later. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > > Hi Robert E (and Nina) > > Robert, I believe you are approaching the Abhidhamma from the wrong > angle. In effect you are asking, 'How can the teaching of ultimate > reality be made to fit with my conventional ideas of reality?' But > ultimate reality came first, didn't it? - and conventional reality > afterwards. So your approach should be the other way around. My approach is not backwards. If one is to understand what is being said, which many hear say is necessary for pariyatti which leads to actual experience sometime down the road, then there has to be a preliminary explanation of how something takes place. Many of the explanations of Abhidhamma are not "unheard before" at all - they are just complicated; but if one follows the string of logic they all make sense. When you propose something that is impossible on its face because it contradicts its own definitions and you cannot offer a better explanation or a new definition that puts it into place, then we must doubt the understand of those who say "don't worry it will all work out - you are caught in a concept." It may be that those who give this assurance are themselves barking up the wrong tree, or they would be able to say something about how it works. For instance, you cannot at all explain how something can "repeatedly take place" in a single moment, yet you expect that it is possible just based on the general notion that it must be a thing "unheard before" Well, I may propose that you have never heard of a speckled rabbit that lays eggs and has wings, but that will not make it any more sensible than if you had heard of it before. It just doesn't wash. Maybe it is not a rabbit at all, but a bird, and then the whole thing fits into place. The idea of vicara "repeatedly beating on the object" to get the deeper understanding out of it and providing that knowledge of its investigation to panna which sees directly in the moment *does* make sense. That is the problem. It is a sensible and wise description of how something can take place that any of us can understand. It is not "unheard before." It just doesn't wash with the strict dogmatism of "single-moment fundamentalism." Now I think that there is a good explanation for how this takes place that doesn't sound like nonsense and that allows pariyatti to get an intellectual grasp of the mechanism. It is quite possible, since qualities are passed on from one citta to the next through the function of certain cetasikas, that vicara does its "repeated beatings" in successive moments and continues to pass on its new info to the successive cittas. This would not deny "single-moment/one moment at a time" ultimate reality at all. Given the activities of the various cetasikas, this seems highly possible to me. Or perhaps there is some other explanation, but there *is* an explanation that the intellect can preliminarily comprehend; otherwise the massive emphasis on pariyatti that is evidenced around here is just so much dogma itself. One must have a clear intellectual understanding before experiencing these things, it is said. So tell me something sensible about these repeated beatings to lead me towards pariyatti; don't just tell me the Abhidhamma equivalent of "God will reveal it to you in Heaven." It reminds me very much of my old girlfriend who was an Orthodox Jew. I asked her why she did the various practices that she was enjoined to do and she replied "Because God said so" or something like that. Well now you are telling me that the only explanation you have for "repeated beatings" taking place all at once is that "the Abhidhamma said so" and that it is a "formerly unheard thing." Well that is just a general cloud over the matter. At very best, it would be better to admit that you don't understand how it is possible yourself. You have faith that it makes sense on some other plane, even though the explanation is nonsensical, I don't. I need to understand first. > ------------------ > R: > Just to quote a portion of the sutta above: "...understanding > > cannot of its own nature determine an object as 'impermanent, > > painful, and no-self', but with applied thought giving [assistance] > > by repeatedly beating [upon an object] it can." > > > > "Repeatedly beating" cannot take place in a single moment, can it? > > How many times can it 'beat' in a single moment? > ------------------ > > Any reality that is experienced outside a single moment of consciousness > is just a conventional reality, or concept. Therefore, if the word > "repeatedly" is to have any ultimately real meaning it must apply to > something that occurs inside a single moment. Good, so explain it then. How does it repeat, repeat, repeat and do a number of beatings in a single moment. Let's hear it. It must be very fast and efficient to do this, since there is never a description of more than one thing taking place in sequence within one moment in anything I've every seen in the Abhidhamma. Have you? All the cetasikas that take place in a single moment happen at the same time. There is never a sequence. Yet you assume that this repeated beating takes place in one moment. Doesn't seem to fit the Abhidhamma itself. > So the reality vicara - which repeatedly beats upon an object - came > first. *Concepts* of doing something repeatedly came second. And your concept that repeated beatings can all take place at once within a single moment also came well after the actual reality, of which this explanation makes absolutely no sense in any reality. If the > realities and the concepts don't match up then it is the concepts that > need to be changed. Has it occurred to you that your concept may also be incorrect, since it does not seem to match with what the text actually says? > --------------------- > R: > That would seem to > > fly in the face of any meaning that "a single moment" could > > possibly have. > --------------------- > > The Dhamma is about "things unheard before" > (Dhammacakkappavattana-sutta) and so the beginner will always find it > difficult to understand. And the advanced may also have developed the bad habit of accepting things that don't make any sense and not even bother to investigate them. > To help us to understand, the Buddha gave many conventional examples. > That is, he used "things heard before" as descriptions of "things > unheard before." > > These examples only become a problem when people mistake them for the > realities they were meant to describe. Look, I have enough respect for the Abhidhamma to think it *does* make sense. When an arahant or high commentator says that vicara does "repeated beatings" and that by "repeatedly beating upon the object" it gives the deeper understanding of the object, it is clearly talking about looking into the object and investigating it further. The idea that this must take place in a single moment - the whole process - is not said or implied in the text and it is your own extrapolation that this is the only explanation, even though it goes against the description of the process in the Abhidhamma itself. I think one might try to get a better understanding of how the "string of cittas" which do communicate one to the next and do have transmissions beyond their single-moment existence, include this kind of deeper investigation or contemplation that is most likely passed on by cetasikas in some manner from citta to citta so that panna can keep picking up their new discoveries during the lifetime of the rupa or whatever is being investigated. Rather than dismiss this out of hand and take a simple view of the process, why not look at the text and wonder how it can take place rather than trying to stuff repeated beatings into a single action which even contradicts itself. We are all working with concepts that suggest the realities at large, and so the concepts, as imperfect as they may be, should at least be understandable. > Very often, when people read the Buddha's descriptions of the Eightfold > Path, they get the idea that Right Concentration (for example) is the > conventional reality commonly known as right concentration. They think > the Buddha was talking about going to a secluded place, quietening the > mind, and focusing on a concept (of a kasina etc.) . But that can't be > right - those were things *heard before* not things *unheard before.* Well actually it could be right. The fact that you consider it 'heard before' doesn't make it wrong. It has to be shown by what is being said. The Buddha gave teachings, not misdirection. To look deeper into his teachings is one thing. To say they are all in code and aren't worth the paper they were eventually written down on is another indeed. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #97613 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 6:28 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob Ep, > Op 26-apr-2009, om 18:28 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > > > however I think that sometimes the doctrine of single-ness can fly > > in the face of the description of the cetasikas and their > > functions, even as they are described in Abhidhamma. > ------ > N: Whatever function of a cetasika is desribed, it is always in a > single moment. The same cetasika could not last for the performing of > its function. > In order to explain its function, it can be explained in a > conventional way as Ken H said. This need not lead us astray, we can > understand that the cetasikas fall away together with the citta they > accompany. > ----- > > > > R: Again, "repeated beatings," vs. "single moment." How can it be? > > If you say that the "repeated beatings" can take place in > > successive moments for successive arisings of panna, then I will be > > content. > ------- > N: Certainly, you can rest content. > Nina. Well, if you can lead me to a more detailed explanation of this mechanism, I will be even more content! I am sure someone in Abhidhamma has laid it out in excruciating detail! ;-) Thanks, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #97614 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 2:29 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 18. upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 4/27/2009 8:57:54 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > There should not be any idea of developing first certain good > qualities which are then developed in daily life. In that case one > thinks of "doing" something first, and the question is, who is doing? Always a good question! :-) --------------------------------------- Yes, a fine question. My answer is that volition is the "motive force." And here's the thing: Volition is the baby, and the actually nonexistent actor is the bath water, and one should not throw out the baby with the bath water! ;-) ---------------------------------------- Best, Robert E. ======================== With metta, Howard /Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, & intellect./ (AN 6.63) (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.063.than.html#part-5) #97615 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 7:51 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 18. nilovg Hi Howard and Rob Ep, Op 27-apr-2009, om 15:29 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Yes, a fine question. My answer is that volition is the "motive > force." And here's the thing: Volition is the baby, and the > actually nonexistent > actor is the bath water, and one should not throw out the baby with > the > bath water! ;-) -------- N: There is volition, certainly, it is a cetasika arising with kusala citta that applies itself to mental development. We know, at least intellectually, that it is not self. However, let us not forget right understanding that is the foremost factor. Effort is not right effort if it does not accompany right understanding. ----- Nina. #97616 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 4:00 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 18. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Robert) - In a message dated 4/27/2009 10:52:36 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard and Rob Ep, Op 27-apr-2009, om 15:29 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Yes, a fine question. My answer is that volition is the "motive > force." And here's the thing: Volition is the baby, and the > actually nonexistent > actor is the bath water, and one should not throw out the baby with > the > bath water! ;-) -------- N: There is volition, certainly, it is a cetasika arising with kusala citta that applies itself to mental development. We know, at least intellectually, that it is not self. However, let us not forget right understanding that is the foremost factor. Effort is not right effort if it does not accompany right understanding. --------------------------------------- Now, how could I possibly take exception this, Nina? I would only point out that we are not perfect, and that effort made with good but less than perfect understanding is still effort well expended. If we hold off, waiting for perfection, there will never be perfecting. :-) We start where we are, not where we hope to be (as somebody once said! ;-) -------------------------------------- ----- Nina. ========================== With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97617 From: "matheesha" Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:26 am Subject: True dhamma matheesha333 "Upali, the dhammas of which you may know, 'These dhammas do not lead to utter disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, nor to Unbinding': You may definitely hold, 'This is not the Dhamma, this is not the Vinaya, this is not the Teacher's instruction.' "As for the dhammas of which you may know, 'These dhammas lead to utter disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding': You may definitely hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher's instruction.'" — AN 7.80 "Gotami, the dhammas of which you may know, 'These dhammas lead — to passion, not to dispassion; to being fettered, not to being unfettered; to accumulating, not to shedding; to self-aggrandizement, not to modesty; to discontent, not to contentment; to entanglement, not to seclusion; to laziness, not to aroused persistence; to being burdensome, not to being unburdensome': You may definitely hold, 'This is not the Dhamma, this is not the Vinaya, this is not the Teacher's instruction.' "As for the dhammas of which you may know, 'These dhammas lead — to dispassion, not to passion; to being unfettered, not to being fettered; to shedding, not to accumulating; to modesty, not to self-aggrandizement; to contentment, not to discontent; to seclusion, not to entanglement; to aroused persistence, not to laziness; to being unburdensome, not to being burdensome': You may definitely hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher's instruction.'" — AN 8.53 #97618 From: Ken O Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: effort. ashkenn2k Dear Robert > K: Buddha wipe out clinging completely. There is no trace of it even in bodily citta. It is because of resultant kamma of the body citta, Buddha experiences dukkha. It is not the namas that cling to perception because it would not be possible for Buddha who has extinguish all future rebirths. <> k: Anatta is present because it can be known and it is a characteristic that could be directly know. If not why did Buddha said it so plainly in the sutta. Form is not self, feeeling is not self. I am not the one sho say form is not self, it is Buddha who said it. Just like Buddha said Craving is the cause of suffering. He said it not me. Cheers Ken O #97619 From: "szmicio" Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:57 am Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta Analysis - Uddeso with commentaries szmicio Dear friends Uddeso 373. Ekaayano aya.m, bhikkhave, maggo sattaana.m visuddhiyaa, sokaparidevaana. m samatikkamaaya dukkhadomanassaana. m attha"ngamaaya ~naayassa adhigamaaya nibbaanassa sacchikiriyaaya, yadida.m cattaaro satipa.t.thaanaa. Katame cattaaro? Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu kaaye kaayaanupassii viharati aataapii sampajaano satimaa vineyya loke abhijjhaadomanassa. m, vedanaasu vedanaanupassii viharati aataapii sampajaano satimaa, vineyya loke abhijjhaadomanassa. m, citte cittaanupassii viharati aataapii sampajaano satimaa vineyya loke abhijjhaadomanassa. m, dhammesu dhammaanupassii viharati aataapii sampajaano satimaa vineyya loke abhijjhaadomanassa. m. Uddeso ni.t.thito. --------------------------------------- Commentaries to Uddeso continue: Dukkha domanassanam atthangamaya = "For the destruction of suffering and grief." For the cessation of bodily suffering and mental grief. This way maintained by contemplation is conducive to the destruction of suffering similar to that of the Elder Tissa, and of grief similar to that of Sakka. Tissa, the head of a family at Savatthi, renouncing forty crores of gold, became a homeless one, and dwelt in a forest far from other human beings. His sister-in-law sent a robber band of five hundred to scour the forest in order to find him, and ordered them to kill him when he was found. She sent him, it is said, in five batches of a hundred each in succession. After entering the forest and searching for the elder they in due course came to the place in which he lived and sat round him. When the robbers surrounded him, the elder spoke thus: "Lay disciples, why have you come?" They replied: "To kill you." Then the elder said: "On a security, give me my life for just this one night." Said the robbers: "O recluse, who will stand surety for you in a place like this?" The elder, thereupon, took a big stone, broke the bones of his legs and said: "Lay disciples, is the security of value?" They, leaving the elder, went to the end of the ambulatory and lighting a fire lay on the ground. The elder contemplating on the purity of his conduct, after suppressing his pain, attained arahantship, at dawn, having fulfilled the recluse's regimen in the three watches of the night. Giving expression to his feelings he said: "A surety let me raise breaking both my legs: To die with lustful mind I loathe and shrink. Having thought thus I saw things as they are, And with the dawn I reached the arahant's domain." --- nayassa adhigamaya = "For reaching the right path." The Noble Eightfold Path is called the right path. This preliminary, mundane Way of the Arousing of Mindfulness maintained (grown or cultivated) is conducive to the realisation of the Supramundane Way. --- Nibbanassa sacchikiriyaya = "For the attainment of Nibbana." It is said as follows: For the attainment, the ocular experience by oneself, of the deathless which has got the name "Nibbana" by reason of the absence in it of the lust [vana, literally, sewing, weaving, from the root va, to weave] called craving [tanha]. --- Cattaro Satipatthana = "The Four Arousings of Mindfulness." Four in relation to classes of objects of mindfulness. Why did the Buddha teach just Four Arousings of Mindfulness and neither more nor less? By way of what was suitable for those capable of being trained. In regard to the pair of the dull-witted and the keen-witted minds among tamable persons of the craving type and the theorizing type, pursuing the path of quietude [samatha] or that of insight [vipassana] in the practice of meditation, the following is stated: For the dull-witted man of craving type the Arousing of Mindfulness through the contemplation of the gross physical body is the Path to Purity; for the keen-witted of this type, the subtle subject of meditation on the feeling. And for the dull-witted man of the theorizing type the Path to Purity is the Arousing of Mindfulness through a subject not too full of distinctions, namely, consciousness [citta]; for the keen-witted of this type, the subject which teems with distinctions, namely the contemplation on things of the mind -- mental objects [dhammanupassana]. For the dull-witted man, pursuing quietude, the First Arousing of Mindfulness, body-contemplation, is the Path to Purity, by reason of the feasibility of getting at the mental reflex; for the keen-witted of this type, because he does not continue to stay in the coarse, the second Arousing of Mindfulness, the contemplation on feeling, is the Path to Purity. And for the dull-witted man pursuing the path of insight, the subject of meditation without many distinctions, the contemplation on consciousness, is the Path to Purity; and for the keen-witted of this type the contemplation on mental objects which is full of distinctions. Or it may be said that these Four Arousings of Mindfulness are taught for casting out the illusions [vipallasa] concerning beauty, pleasure, permanence, and an ego. The body is ugly. There are people led astray by the illusion that it is a thing of beauty. In order to show such people the ugliness of the body and to make them give up their wrong idea, the First Arousing of Mindfulness is taught. Feeling is suffering. There are people subject to the illusion that it gives pleasure. In order to show such people the painfulness of feeling and to make them give up their wrong idea, the Second Arousing of Mindfulness is taught. Consciousness is impermanent. There are people who, owing to an illusion, believe that it is permanent. To show them the impermanence of consciousness and to wean them of their wrong belief, the Third Arousing of Mindfulness is taught. Mental objects are insubstantial, are soulless, and possess no entity. There are people who believe by reason of an illusion that these mental things are substantial, endowed with an abiding core, or a soul, or that they form part of a soul, an ego or some substance that abides. To convince such errant folk of the fact of the soullessness or the insubstantiality of mental things and to destroy the illusion which clouds their minds, the Fourth Arousing of Mindfulness is taught. #97620 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 6:04 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Metta and ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Sarah and Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > ... > > S: Yes, there are many suttas like this one which don't specifically mention jhana as I recall. I was going to quote another from AN, but my eye just caught the following one which is also interesting because it clearly indicates that when nibbana is the object of the lokuttara cittas, there cannot be mundane jhana at such moments: > > AN, 10s, 6 "The Meditative Experience of Nibbaana - 1" (Bodi transl): > > "Once the Venerable Aananda approached the Blessed One and asked: > > " 'Can it be, Lord, that a monk attains to such a concentration of mind that in earth he is not percipient of earth, nor in water is he percipient of water, nor in fire....air...the base of the infinity of space.....the base of the infinity of consciousness....the base of nothingness...the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception is he percipient of these; nor is he percipient of this world or a world beyond - but yet he is percipient?' > > " 'Yes, Aananda, there can be such a concentration of mind that in earth a monk is not percipient of earth...nor is he percipient of this world or a world beyone - but yet he is percipient.' > > " 'But how, Lord, can a monk attain to such a concentration of mind?' > > " 'Here, Aananda, the monk is percipient thus: 'This is the peaceful, this is the sublime, namely, the stilling of all formations, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, Nibbaana.' It is in this way, Aananda, that a monk may attain to such a concentration of mind.' " > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======= > This sutta is a description of the Recollection of Peace (Nibbana) as detailed in the Vism. According to the Vism., it can lead to mundane jhana. The object of this meditation is the 'qualities of nibbana', not actual nibbana itself, so the practitioner is still percipient but is not percipient of nama or rupa. So, jhana is not specifically mentioned in this sutta but jhana is still a factor in this practice. Metta, James #97621 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 6:17 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > ... > S: I know what you mean :-). Still a little out of step, but at least we understand each other's style of dance by now :-). No need to continue the dance either.... James: Thanks for you other comments but I don't really have anything new to add. > > Thx for replying and for the good humour... > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s Hope your health's better and Happy Birthday for around this time...:-)) > ======== > James: Gosh, I don't know how you remember these things! Yeah, next week I will be the big 40! It won't be like a party as much as like a funeral. :-) Metta, James #97622 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 3:08 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Metta and ANAPANASATI: no 14. upasaka_howard Hi, James (and Sarah & Nina) - In a message dated 4/27/2009 9:05:25 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: Hi Sarah and Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > ... > > S: Yes, there are many suttas like this one which don't specifically mention jhana as I recall. I was going to quote another from AN, but my eye just caught the following one which is also interesting because it clearly indicates that when nibbana is the object of the lokuttara cittas, there cannot be mundane jhana at such moments: > > AN, 10s, 6 "The Meditative Experience of Nibbaana - 1" (Bodi transl): > > "Once the Venerable Aananda approached the Blessed One and asked: > > " 'Can it be, Lord, that a monk attains to such a concentration of mind that in earth he is not percipient of earth, nor in water is he percipient of water, nor in fire....air...the base of the infinity of space.....the base of the infinity of consciousness....the base of nothingness...the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception is he percipient of these; nor is he percipient of this world or a world beyond - but yet he is percipient?' > > " 'Yes, Aananda, there can be such a concentration of mind that in earth a monk is not percipient of earth...nor is he percipient of this world or a world beyone - but yet he is percipient.' > > " 'But how, Lord, can a monk attain to such a concentration of mind?' > > " 'Here, Aananda, the monk is percipient thus: 'This is the peaceful, this is the sublime, namely, the stilling of all formations, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, Nibbaana.' It is in this way, Aananda, that a monk may attain to such a concentration of mind.' " > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======= > This sutta is a description of the Recollection of Peace (Nibbana) as detailed in the Vism. According to the Vism., it can lead to mundane jhana. The object of this meditation is the 'qualities of nibbana', not actual nibbana itself, so the practitioner is still percipient but is not percipient of nama or rupa. So, jhana is not specifically mentioned in this sutta but jhana is still a factor in this practice. Metta, James ================== This is a case where I put no credence in the commentary. For me, this sutta pertains to nibbanic awareness, which I consider to be a non-dual "state" involving neither subject nor object, but partaking of the unconditioned itself and transcending all aspects of samsara, jhanas included. With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97623 From: "gazita2002" Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 7:31 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) gazita2002 hallo Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear azita, > > Regarding: > > azita: maybe interplay is a good word to use - what I'm trying to convey is the realisation that what is read is about realities that are/can be occuring now at this moment. > > Scott: Oh, you mean like when this particular idea comes to mind: What is read is about realities? Or do you refer to some moment, perhaps sometime after reading, when a moment of reality comes and goes out of focus, and then the come thoughts about that moment and what has been read come to mind? This occurs to me from time to time. Azita: interesting! I was referring to 'what is read is about realities', however your description of yr experience is familiar, to some degree. I can honestly say there has been no experience of a reality as described in some of the texts, eg seeing visible object as merely v.o. I am very cautious about believing there has been any degree of sati, and I guess that is bec. understanding is yet so weak; these days having reminders that all experiences are momentary and not 'me' seem to condition some calm feelings and some sort of 'relief' - cant think of a better word at this moment. Understanding that all experiences are not self is comforting, there isnt the mad rush to 'make things right for me' if you know what I mean. I think there is more patience with daily life. Its so nice outside, gotta get off this computor and experience the warm sunshine :-) patience, courage and good cheer, azita #97624 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 8:22 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. Thanks for including me in this post, even though it is obviously beyond my limited understanding. :-) I am still waiting desperately for someone to explain how this "threshing" and "beating" takes place, leaving aside how tough all this abuse must be on the poor dhamma. :( They thresh it, beat it, turn it over and thresh it and beat it again. This seems akusala to me. Below, I have separated out some parts of this wonderful quote - and I mean it, because it is such a clear description of how a dhamma is known - and hope you can direct me to some explanation of how they take place. They don't seem "single-moment" descriptors at all: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Dear Scott (& Rob Ep), > > --- On Tue, 21/4/09, Scott wrote: > >Scott: In the Sammohavinodanii, p. 111: > > >"Also as regards Right View and Right Thinking, understanding cannot of its own nature determine an object as 'impermanent, painful, and no-self', but with applied thought giving [assistance] by repeatedly beating [upon an object] it can. Okay, applied thought gives assistance by repeatedly beating. Sounds like more than one moment, yes? Also, looking into the nature of the three characteristics is dependent on understanding its "mode of change" - I forget the right word - and this is something that is comparing its former state to its present state is it not? > How? Just as a money-changer, having had a coin placed in his hand and being desirous of looking at it on all sides equally, cannot turn it over with the power of the eye only, but by turning it over with his fingers he is able to look at it on all sides; turning it over and looking at all sides - can this happen in a single moment? > likewise understanding cannot of its own nature determine an object as impermanent, etc., but with applied thought with its characteristic of focusing the mind and its function of striking and threshing, as it were beating and turning over, it can take what is given and determine it. applied thought, focusing the mind striking and threshing beating and turning over take what is given and determine it Is there any way imaginable that this kind of action - applying, striking and threshing, beating and turning over, taking and determining - can take place in a single moment? It goes against the whole sense of this function as one that is investigating and looking into the object further in order to see its nature as impermanent etc. >Therefore Right View only is included here in the understanding group as being of the same kind, but Right Thinking is included because of its action [of assisting]." > > >Scott: Right View is pa~n~naa cetasika. Right Thinking is vitakka cetasika. The above shows a bit of how conascent mental factors perform separate but coordinated functions, according to characteristic, > within the whole of the moment of consciousness and directed at the same object. Is there any reason why this cannot take place in successive moments? Many of the operations of consciousness depend on accumulations. Why can't this be a process in which understanding is accumulated through Right Thought? Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - #97625 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Apr 27, 2009 10:02 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Metta and ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ================== > This is a case where I put no credence in the commentary. James: I have no idea what the commentary states. I was just going on the content of the sutta. For me, this > sutta pertains to nibbanic awareness, which I consider to be a non-dual > "state" involving neither subject nor object, but partaking of the > unconditioned itself and transcending all aspects of samsara, jhanas included. James: I don't agree. I think this sutta is about Recollection of Peace. Ananda would have no reason to ask such question about an arahant. Ananada is just asking about an average monk who has concentration of mind. Additonally, this monk is still percipient when recollecting peace. An arahant immersed in nibbana is not percipient because then there is nothing to perceive and nothing to perceive with. > > With metta, > Howard > Metta, James #97626 From: "gazita2002" Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 2:30 am Subject: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) gazita2002 hallo Sarah, thanks for this, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Hi Azita, > > --- On Mon, 20/4/09, gazita2002 wrote: > > >azita: 'the suffering characteristic. .....reckoned as the oppression that consists of the rise and fall.. > How come oppressed? I can understand dhammas being dukkha because of impermanence, so would appreciate a bit more info about 'oppressed'. > thanks. > .... > S: 'being oppressed by rise and fall' - udayabbayapii.litattaa > > udayabbaya - rise and fall > > pii.lana - oppression, injury, damage > > pii.leti - to oppress, to crush, to molest, to subjugate. > > All conditioned dhammas are as if 'subjugated' or 'crushed' by their inherent nature to rise and fall. It is because of such 'subjugation' or 'oppression' that they are dukkha. As the text says, even the magga and phala cittas are thus include in the Truth of Suffering. azita: I rather like the meaning conveyed by 'crushed' :-) Seriously tho, I have great confidence that rise and fall of all dhammas does occur. My query is about the descriptions of such rise and fall. Is it bec we take dhammas for lasting etc when there is no understanding of the truth, that these descriptions are used to teach or would you say that despite 'us' rise and fall is oppressive? I mean if there were no ignorance or attachment would these dhammas still be crushed etc.etc.etc.? The above sounds a bit confused but I'm gonna post anyway....... patience, courage and good cheer, azita #97627 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 2:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] True dhamma nilovg Dear Matheesha, I am so glad to see your name again. Thank you for the quotes. They remind me that there should be detachment from the beginning to the end. First detachment from the idea of self who is doing it all, and then on and on until all defilements are eradicated. Nina. Op 27-apr-2009, om 18:26 heeft matheesha het volgende geschreven: > "As for the dhammas of which you may know, 'These dhammas lead to > utter disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to > direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding': You may > definitely hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is > the Teacher's instruction.'" #97628 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 2:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Azita, --- On Tue, 28/4/09, gazita2002 wrote: >> All conditioned dhammas are as if 'subjugated' or 'crushed' by their inherent nature to rise and fall. It is because of such 'subjugation' or 'oppression' that they are dukkha. As the text says, even the magga and phala cittas are thus include in the Truth of Suffering. >azita: I rather like the meaning conveyed by 'crushed' :-) Seriously tho, I have great confidence that rise and fall of all dhammas does occur. My query is about the descriptions of such rise and fall. Is it bec we take dhammas for lasting etc when there is no understanding of the truth, that these descriptions are used to teach or would you say that despite 'us' rise and fall is oppressive? ... S: Despite 'us', rise and fall is 'oppressive', dhammas are dukkha. Because of our ignorance and attachment, however, the Buddha used many descriptions, many similes to help us understand the truth. ... >I mean if there were no ignorance or attachment would these dhammas still be crushed etc.etc.etc. ? ... S: Yes, 'crushed' or 'oppressed' on account of not lasting for an instant - like being 'swatted' the moment they arise! ... >The above sounds a bit confused but I'm gonna post anyway...... . ... S: Not confused....whatever descriptions help - like the rupas which are 'molested', which I remember you raising before. I hope you're doing well back in Queensland and enjoying a little 'granny-time' too! Metta, Sarah ====== #97629 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 2:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sahajata-paccaya and annamanna-paccaya sarahprocter... Dear Chew, Thanks for all the detail about the Abhidhamma activities in Penang. Sounds great. --- On Thu, 23/4/09, Chew wrote: >F.Y.I, we have requested Sayadaw to change the topic. And Sayadaw has agreed to change the topic to Ayatana Yamaka (Pairs on Bases). Because we have the English translation of this chapter. So that we can distribute to the participants before they come to the class. ... S: You know, Chew, it would be wonderful if you and your group with the assistance of Sayadaw work towards copies of the various chapters in Pali and English, one chapter at a time. It would be a great service to the English speaking Dhamma community. Many of us would appreciate a copy. .... >Yes. I would like to post more interesting Dhamma at here. Since I am now also editing the Sacca Yamaka. It is so interesting. There are the clarification of the terms, such as, dukkha and dukkhasacca, samudaya and samudayasacca, nirodha and nirodhasacca, magga and maggasacca, etc. It tells the dhamma in the 4 Noble Truths, and what are the dhamma out of the 4 Noble Truths (the dhamma which are not to be categorized in the 4 NT), and so on. >There are many things to be discussed as here. Let me continue next time. ... S: This is all very interesting. Can you explain what is the distinction between dukkha and dukkha sacca, samudaya and samudaya sacca etc? Does it just refer to the realisation of the 4 Noble Truths? OK, the dhamma not categorized in the 4 NT are dukkha, but if not experienced then not the Noble Truth to be known. Is that correct? So again, it brings back the realisation of the 4 NTs to this moment and to khandha vs upadana khanda. Is that how you understand it? I'll look forward to your continuation. Metta, Sarah ======= #97630 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 3:20 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Metta and ANAPANASATI: no 14. sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep, --- On Mon, 27/4/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >>S: " 'Here, Aananda, the monk is percipient thus: 'This is the peaceful, this is the sublime, namely, the stilling of all formations, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, Nibbaana.' It is in this way, Aananda, that a monk may attain to such a concentration of mind.' " ... R:>This is also interesting in that it suggests that in the stilling of all formations, there is still awareness of the stilling of all formations. If a conditioned citta is aware of the unconditioned Nibbana, how is it that all formations and acquisitions are never-the-less relinquished and stilled? ... S: The object of the cittas referred to above is nibbana. What is referred to above is a description of nibbana, the unconditioned dhamma which has none of the characteristics of conditioned dhammas. So the conditioned citta itself (here, the phala samapatti cittas to be precise)are still formed and so on, but they experience the dhamma, the element, which is 'stilled of all formations'. At parinibbana, there are no more conditioned dhammas arising again to experience anything. It's very important to distinguish between the namas which experience an object and the object which is experienced. Only conditioned namas experience objects. The objects themselves may be rupas, other namas, nibbana (technically a nama too), or concepts. For example, seeing experiences visible object. The characteristic of seeing and that of visible object are quite different. Let's continue to discuss this... Pls ask me to clarify anything. Metta, Sarah p.s If it hasn't been clarified, I think you addressed one message to Scott that was intended for Ken O - #97595. At least you met the guidelines:-). ============= =========== #97631 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 3:47 am Subject: Re: Rupa and Nama (was: Re: [dsg] The Secluded Place...) sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep, --- On Mon, 27/4/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >> S: ...realities which can be known now, such as hearing or sound, seeing or visible object. R:> This is a basic question, but where exactly is the line drawn between rupa and nama in the hearing or seeing process? Visible object is rupa, is seeing nama? Is sense-door rupa or nama? .... S: Thx - basic qus are usually the best! Let's take the seeing process for discussion. Visible object is rupa as you say. It is experienced by a series of cittas (and accompanying cetasikas). All these cittas and cetasikas are namas. After some bhavanga cittas, there is a citta which 'adverts' to the visible object and this is followed by seeing consciousness and then several other cittas. So the one rupa is experienced by many namas. In order for these namas, including seeing consciousness, to experience visible object, there have to be other conditions in place. An important condition is the presence of eye-base. Eye-base or eye-sensitivity is another rupa which arises and falls away all the time in a living being, conditioned by past kamma. It is this eye-base which is actually the 'sense-door' by which seeing and the other cittas experience the visible object. ... R:> A bit confused on some of these distinctions. ... S: It is confusing and I think you're raising helpful questions for us all. Please ask for further clarifications. I think these are good points to clarify. ... >I am sure that recognition of what is seen is nama, and any thought-process beyond that is nama. Is awareness of visible object nama? If you can put these in order for me I would appreciate it. ... S: So, seeing (a nama) sees visible object (a rupa). The seeing (nama) is accompanied by perception/recognition (nama), contact (nama) and other namas. Thinking (nama) about what has just been seen (concepts about visible object). Awareness (nama) may accompany the cittas (namas) following seeing (nama) in the eye-door or mind-door process. Awareness (nama) can be aware of the visible object (rupa) or it can accompnay thinking (nama) when it experiences concepts, such as at moments of dana, sila, samatha development or pariyatti (intellectual understanding) - more namas. ... >I know this is all laid out in many places but not sure where to look at the moment for a good summary. ... S: In any case, sometimes it's good to ask the questions and clarify doubts or confusions about what one has read or heard. (See also p.99 of 'Survey of PD' for the series of cittas in a sense-door process.) Pls ask for any further clarifications. I appreciate the questions. It's a bit like a jigsaw puzzle isn't it? Slowly the pieces slot into place and the picture becomes clearer and clearer, especially when we understand it's all about 'now' and what can be known now. Metta, Sarah ========== #97632 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 3:50 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep, --- On Mon, 27/4/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >> S: Again, I think the Buddha was pointed to the different kinds of accumulations which may manifest. He wasn't indicating that one could choose how and when to become enlightened. R:> If you don't mind, I would like to put in a request to be enlightened sooner rather than later, and with very little additional suffering. ... S: I'd love to have the ability to grant you your request, but there are all those 'pesky' conditions and that anatta-thingy in the way...:-)) Best wishes for the best conditions... Metta, Sarah ====== #97633 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 2:34 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Metta and ANAPANASATI: no 14. upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 4/28/2009 1:03:28 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ================== > This is a case where I put no credence in the commentary. James: I have no idea what the commentary states. I was just going on the content of the sutta. ------------------------------------------- Oh. I thought you were basing your remarks on Budhaghosa's comments that, in turn, present his summary of older commentaries. ------------------------------------------ For me, this > sutta pertains to nibbanic awareness, which I consider to be a non-dual > "state" involving neither subject nor object, but partaking of the > unconditioned itself and transcending all aspects of samsara, jhanas included. James: I don't agree. I think this sutta is about Recollection of Peace. Ananda would have no reason to ask such question about an arahant. Ananada is just asking about an average monk who has concentration of mind. Additonally, this monk is still percipient when recollecting peace. An arahant immersed in nibbana is not percipient because then there is nothing to perceive and nothing to perceive with. -------------------------------------- Okay. :-) ------------------------------------- > > With metta, > Howard > Metta, James ========================== With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97634 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:07 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 21. nilovg Dear friends, We read in the Kindred Sayings (IV, Salåyatana-vagga, Kindred Sayings on Sense, Second Fifty, Chapter III, § 74, Sick) that the Buddha visited a sick monk, who said that he did not understand the meaning of the purity of life in the Dhamma taught by the Buddha. When the Buddha asked him in what sense he understood it, he answered: “Passion and the destruction of passion, lord,–that is what I understand to be the Dhamma taught by the Exalted One.” “Well said, monk! Well said! Well indeed do you understand the meaning of the Dhamma taught by me. Indeed it means passion and the destruction of passion. Now what think you, monk? Is the eye permanent or impermanent?” “Impermanent, lord.” “Is the ear…nose…tongue…body…is mind permanent or impermanent?” “Impermanent, lord.” “And what is impermanent, is that happiness or dukkha (suffering)?” “Dukkha, lord.” “And what is impermanent, dukkha, by nature changeable,–is it proper to regard that as ‘This is mine. I am this. This is myself’?” “No, indeed, lord.” “If he sees thus, the well-taught ariyan disciple is repelled by the eye, the ear, the tongue…so that he realizes ‘For life in these conditions there is no hereafter.’” ‘Thus spoke the Exalted One. And that monk was delighted and welcomed the words of the Exalted One. Moreover, when this discourse was uttered, in that monk arose the pure and flawless eye of the Dhamma, (so that he saw) “Whatsoever is of a nature to arise, all that is of a nature to cease.”‘ ---------- Nina. #97635 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:24 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca,... nilovg Dear Rob Ep, I will be away from this Thursday until Monday. Today I can still answer mail. Op 27-apr-2009, om 15:28 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > R: Again, "repeated beatings," vs. "single moment." How can it be? > > > If you say that the "repeated beatings" can take place in > > > successive moments for successive arisings of panna, then I > will be > > > content. > > ------- > > N: Certainly, you can rest content. > > Nina. > > Well, if you can lead me to a more detailed explanation of this > mechanism, I will be even more content! I am sure someone in > Abhidhamma has laid it out in excruciating detail! ;-) ------- N: We are talking now about pa~n~naa that understands the characteristic of a reality that appears. It arises in a process accompanying kusala citta. In a process of cittas, not only one kusala citta with pa~n~naa arises but seven. Each kusala citta conditions the next one and this type of condition is called repetition-condition, asevana-paccaya. The kusala citta is accompanied by pa~n~naa and also by vitakka which assists pa~n~naa, hitting the reality that appears, so that at that very moment pa~n~naa can understand it. Pa~n~naa is also assisted by sati which is aware of the object, by concentration which is focussed on that one object, and by many other cetasikas which are all sobhana, beautiful. They all arise together while they accompany the citta performing their functions and then they all fall away immediately. It is perhaps hard to imagine how citta and cetasikas can each perform their own function during the extremely short moment one citta lasts. We do not need to worry, all these realities do this by nature. And don't forget, there is accumulation of skill. I hope that you are content with this excruciating detail. Nina. #97636 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:41 pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta Analysis - Uddeso with commentaries szmicio Dear friends, Commentaries continue: Drawing distinctions, it is said: Body and feeling are the cause of zest [assadassa karana]. For the rejection of that zest of body, by the dull-witted [manda] man of the craving type [tanhacarita], the seeing [dassana] of the ugly [asubha] in the body, the coarse object [olarika arammana], which is the basis of craving [tanha vatthu], is convenient. To that type of man the contemplation on corporeality, the First Arousing of Mindfulness, is the Path to Purity [Visuddhi Magga]. For the abandoning of that zest, by the keen-witted [tikha] man of the craving type, the seeing of suffering in feeling, the subtle object [sukhuma arammana], which is the basis of craving, is convenient, and for him the contemplation on feeling, the Second Arousing of Mindfulness, is the Path to Purity. For the dull-witted man of the theorizing type [ditthi carita] it is convenient to see consciousness [citta] in the fairly simple way it is set forth in this discourse, by way of impermanence [aniccata], and by way of such divisions as mind-with-lust [saragadi vasena], in order to reject the notion of permanence [nicca sañña] in regard to consciousness. Consciousness is a special condition [visesa karana] for the wrong view due to a basic belief in permanence [niccanti abhinivesa vatthutaya ditthiya]. The contemplation on consciousness, the Third Arousing of Mindfulness, is the Path to Purity of this type of man. For the keen-witted man of the theorizing type it is convenient to see mental objects or things [dhamma], according to the manifold way set forth in this discourse, by way of perception, sense-impression and so forth [nivaranadi vasena], in order to reject the notion of a soul [atta sañña] in regard to mental things. Mental things are special conditions for the wrong view due to a basic belief in a soul [attanti abhinivesa vatthutaya ditthiya]. For this type of man the contemplation on mental objects, the Fourth Arousing of Mindfulness, is the Path to Purity. Consciousness and mental objects constitute the outstanding conditions of theorizing. Consciousness is such a condition because it is a decisive factor in the belief in permanence. Mental objects are such conditions because these are decisive factors in the belief in a soul. Consciousness and mental objects are decisive factors of craving as well as of theorizing. And body and feeling are decisive factors of theorizing as well as of craving. Yet to point out that which is stronger in body and feeling, namely, craving, and that which is stronger in consciousness and mental objects, namely, theorizing, distinctions have been drawn. #97637 From: "gazita2002" Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 3:17 pm Subject: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) gazita2002 hallo Sarah --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Azita, > --- On Tue, 28/4/09, gazita2002 wrote: > > >> All conditioned dhammas are as if 'subjugated' or 'crushed' by their inherent nature to rise and fall. It is because of such 'subjugation' or 'oppression' that they are dukkha. As the text says, even the magga and phala cittas are thus include in the Truth of Suffering. > > >azita: I rather like the meaning conveyed by 'crushed' :-) > Seriously tho, I have great confidence that rise and fall of all dhammas does occur. > My query is about the descriptions of such rise and fall. Is it bec we take dhammas for lasting etc when there is no understanding of the truth, that these descriptions are used to teach or would you say that despite 'us' rise and fall is oppressive? > ... > S: Despite 'us', rise and fall is 'oppressive', dhammas are dukkha. Because of our ignorance and attachment, however, the Buddha used many descriptions, many similes to help us understand the truth. > ... > >I mean if there were no ignorance or attachment would these dhammas still be crushed etc.etc.etc. ? > ... > S: Yes, 'crushed' or 'oppressed' on account of not lasting for an instant - like being 'swatted' the moment they arise! > ... > >The above sounds a bit confused but I'm gonna post anyway...... . > ... > S: Not confused....whatever descriptions help - like the rupas which are 'molested', which I remember you raising before. azita: you do have a good memory Sarah. My association with 'molested' rupas came about as I sat looking at my old car which was being eaten by rust! thats conceptual I know, as its this very present that is being 'crushed etc'. thanks for the explanation. It is clearer - for now :-) > > I hope you're doing well back in Queensland and enjoying a little 'granny-time' too! azita; yeah, living in a small country town in the north is quite wonderful, and I get to see the family every so often when I make the trip to Cairns. getting restless again tho......accumulations for restlessness.....time to think about another move! Patience, courage and good cheer, azita #97638 From: "gazita2002" Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 3:24 pm Subject: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) gazita2002 Hallo Sarah, apologies for the double-up, last evening when I tried to post my reply to you, it all just disappeared, as it sometimes happens. didnt check this morning to see if it had 'arrived' anyway, no harm done, just extra mail from me, which is a bit unusual! may all beings be happy azita #97639 From: "gazita2002" Date: Tue Apr 28, 2009 3:41 pm Subject: Re: ANAPANASATI: no 21. gazita2002 hallo Nina, thank you Nina, a wonderful example of the Buddha teaching about anatta, anicca and dukkha. for one who has a restless nature and like to see new or different sights, I like to be reminded that seeing just sees a visible object, no different now to any future seeing - just visible object and then the concepts that follow, and attachment etc. patience, courage and good cheer, azita. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > > We read in the Kindred Sayings (IV, Salåyatana-vagga, Kindred Sayings > on Sense, Second Fifty, Chapter III, § 74, Sick) that the Buddha > visited a sick monk, who said that he did not understand the meaning > of the purity of life in the Dhamma taught by the Buddha. When the > Buddha asked him in what sense he understood it, he answered: > > "Passion and the destruction of passion, lord,–that is what I > understand to be the Dhamma taught by the Exalted One." > "Well said, monk! Well said! Well indeed do you understand the > meaning of the Dhamma taught by me. Indeed it means passion and the > destruction of passion. > Now what think you, monk? Is the eye permanent or impermanent?" > "Impermanent, lord." > "Is the ear…nose…tongue…body…is mind permanent or impermanent?" > "Impermanent, lord." > "And what is impermanent, is that happiness or dukkha (suffering)?" > "Dukkha, lord." > "And what is impermanent, dukkha, by nature changeable,–is it proper > to regard that as `This is mine. I am this. This is myself'?" > "No, indeed, lord." > "If he sees thus, the well-taught ariyan disciple is repelled by the > eye, the ear, the tongue…so that he realizes `For life in these > conditions there is no hereafter.'" > `Thus spoke the Exalted One. And that monk was delighted and welcomed > the words of the Exalted One. Moreover, when this discourse was > uttered, in that monk arose the pure and flawless eye of the Dhamma, > (so that he saw) "Whatsoever is of a nature to arise, all that is of > a nature to cease."` > > ---------- > Nina. #97640 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 29, 2009 12:02 am Subject: ADL in French nilovg Dear friends, Sébastien wrote to me that now three chapters of ADL have been translated into French: The first 3 chapters of ADL are available here : http:// s.billard.free.fr/abhidhamma/ Feel free to give the adress to anyone. Nina. #97641 From: "sprlrt" Date: Wed Apr 29, 2009 12:20 am Subject: Five sense doors, its objects, and its consciousness sprlrt Hi, Fifteen of the eighteen dhatus may help in understanding these relationships Pancadvara - Pancarammana - Dvipancavinnana (5 doors, 5 objects, 2*5 consciousness) 1. Cakkhudhatu - Rupadhatu - Cakkuvinnanadhatu (eye, 1 visible object, 2 visual consciousness) 2. Sotadhatu - Saddadhatu -Sotavinnanadhatu (ear, 1 audible object, 2 hearing consciousness) 3. Ghanadhatu - Gandhadhatu - Ghanavinnanadhatu (nose, 1 smellable object, 2 nose consciousness) 4. Jivhadhatu - Rasadhatu - Jivhavinnanadhatu (tongue, 1 tastable object, 2 tongue consciousness) 5. Kayadhatu - Phottabbadhatu - Kayavinnanadhatu (body, 3 touchable objects, 2 body consciousness) The five (sense) doors are made of rupas that only kamma can prdouce, and it is a single kamma that does all this and more, conditioning the arising of the ribirth consciousness, a vipaka citta, immediately after death, that same vipaka that will then turn into bhavanga/life-continuum after that as well, which will also have the function of sixth door (manodvara, a kamma conditioned, like the other five doors and by that same kamma), a nama dhamma (unlike the other 5 which are rupa dhamma), until the next death, which in its turn will condition, as anantara paccaya, along with another single kamma that will dicatate, as kamma paccaya, yet one more vipaka rebirth consciousness. The self thinks of owning "its" kamma; the "intentions" one has, while it's actually cetana cetasika, just a (the) sankhara dhamma, sharing the three common characteristics all sankhara dhammas have, anatta (arising because of conditions, period), anicca (falling away immediately, very many times each second, and accumulating along with lobha or alobha, dosa or metta, avijja or panna), hence dukkha. The seven gocaravisaya rupas are the only ones allowed in through their corresponding 5 doors, the pasture feeding seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching consciousness of its objects; they are included in the groups of the 8 avinibhoga, indivisible rupas, produced by all four dhammas, two nama (kamma and citta) and two rupa (heat and nutrition), apo/cohesion, and oja/nutrition excluded; the 7th is sound, sadda, which can arise from heat and citta only. The arising of sense consciousness, seeing, hearing etc., is also dictated by kamma (like the rupa dhammas of the five doors, which are also the basis/place of origin (vatthu) of sense consciousness, and the nama dhammas of the sixth door), but each time by a different kamma, and each single kamma can only condition the arising of a single sense consciousness. Alberto #97642 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 29, 2009 12:22 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 22. nilovg Dear friends, For the sick monk the four necessary conditions for enlightenment were fulfilled: he had met the right person, he had listened to the Dhamma which was explained to him, he had wisely considered it and he had developed right understanding of realities. Should we be surprised that the Buddha, in order to show the way to the destruction of passion, first asked: “Is the eye permanent or impermanent?”. And the same for the other doorways? People who wish to get rid of passion quickly may wonder whether they should suppress it, rather than develop understanding of realities appearing through the six doors. The development of understanding seems to be a long way to get rid of passion. However, the Buddha showed cause and effect. There cannot be the destruction of passion without there being first the eradication of the wrong view of self through awareness of all realities which appear. When right understanding of nåma and rúpa has been developed they can be realized as impermanent and not self. This is the only way that leads to detachment from the eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue, the body, the mind, to detachment from all realities. Realities appearing through the six doors are explained in the Tipitaka time and again, and whenever we read about this we can be reminded to be aware right at that moment. Are there not phenomena appearing through the six doors all the time? We should not be forgetful of them so that the way leading to enlightenment can be realized. ----------- Nina. #97643 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Dear Scott, --- On Mon, 27/4/09, Scott wrote: >>Sarah: "If you've seen or understood this, it can only be referring to pa~n~naa of satipa.t.thaana. " >Scott: Meaning, I take it, only if this refers to a non-intellectual ... Sarah: Yes, only when the pa~n~naa is of the degree of satipa.t.thaana, i.e. pa.tipatti as opposed to pariyatti, does it refer to the understanding of realities, as opposed to concepts. ... >>Sarah: "In the development of samatha, the pa~n~naa (and other cetasikas), almost always have a concept as object." >Scott: I don't follow here. How does pa~n~naa function 'in the development of samatha'? I thought samatha was a function of other mental factors. ... Sarah: For any kind of bhaavanaa, pa~n~naa is the foremost factor in the development. There can be moments of samatha, such as metta, without pa~n~naa, but no development without it. Of course, it is accompanied by many other sobhana factors. So as you rightly said, in another discussion, that pa~n~naa always has the characteristic of pa~n~naa, it's also right to say there are different kinds of pa~n~naa. The pa~n~naa in the development of samatha is different from that in the development of satipa.t.thaana. It understands the object, such as a person or other concept, in a wholesome way. .... >>Sarah: "Similarly, in the development of satipa.t.thaana, when the understanding and awareness is at an intellectual stage (i.e pariyatti), the object is always a concept." >Scott: Can you please elaborate? I've misunderstood, it seems, something about the objects of pa~n~naa. If a concept is not an ultimate reality, then how can it be an object of pa~n~naa cetasika? In other words, I thought pa~n~naa only has paramattha dhammaa as objects. ... Sarah: It has to develop. Like now, if there is wise reflecting on dhammas, pa~n~naa arises, but the object is a concept (about dhammas). .... >Scott: Does one define pariyatti as 'an intellectual stage of understanding and awareness'? Isn't this 'thinking'? ... Sarah: Yes, pariyatti is thinking about concepts of realities appearing now. For example, there has to be wise thinking about seeing and visible object, wise conceptual understanding of them as dhammas, not-self, before there can be the direct understanding of the realities. This is why we read about pa~n~naa based on what is heard (suta-maya-pa~n~naa), what is considered (cinta-maya-pa~n~naa) and what is directly understood (bhaavanaa-maya-pa~n~naa). ... Scott:> It might be thinking 'correctly' but what is the link between pa~n~naa and its object and the thinking which arises later (and which must be a function of a host of other dhammaa in interaction and succession) and creates wholes (coherent thoughts) about realities? .... Sarah: (If I understand you), there can be wise or unwise thinking about the concepts or 'wholes'. Like now as we think about the words on the screen, there can be reflection with pa~n~naa about how really there is only visible object seen or there can be ignorance and attachment. Of course, kusala and akusala cittas follow each other rapidly in succession. ... >>Sarah: "So, it can be wise reflection with pa~n~naa of pariyatti which 'knows concept as merely concept'. For example, now, there can be wise reflecting on how all that's seen is visible object and that the words, labels and so on are just concepts. This is pariyatti with pa~n~naa." >Scott: Again, what is the object? This perseveration should demonstrate how I'm not clear on something here... ... Sarah: Actually, there are many, many (mind-door)processes of cittas involved with concept as object. Interspersed are sense-door processes too. So when we refer to wise reflection with pa~n~naa of concepts (as in my example above), many processes of cittas 'build up' such concepts, but no need to count. It's enough to know that concepts rather than realities are the objects. It's quite different from when there is direct understanding of visible object without any thinking involved. The point of the path is, of course, to directly understand, not just think about, such dhammas. Please let me know if I've misunderstood anything you've written or haven't clarified to your satisfaction. Metta, Sarah ====== #97644 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sahajata-paccaya and annamanna-paccaya nilovg Dear Chew, I join Sarah in her request to share your knowledge with us. Op 28-apr-2009, om 11:58 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > S: This is all very interesting. Can you explain what is the > distinction between dukkha and dukkha sacca, samudaya and samudaya > sacca etc? Does it just refer to the realisation of the 4 Noble > Truths? OK, the dhamma not categorized in the 4 NT are dukkha, but > if not experienced then not the Noble Truth to be known. Is that > correct? So again, it brings back the realisation of the 4 NTs to > this moment and to khandha vs upadana khanda. Is that how you > understand it? ------- N: Yes, we are so grateful to Kh Sujin for helping us to relate all our knowledge to this moment. That makes it so interesting. Take the aayatanas, we learnt about them from the books, but we should not forget that there is a meeting, an association now of outer aayatanas and inward aayatanas, so that there can be different experiences. Let us remind each other of realities appearing at this moment, so that the study becomes more fruitful. Nina. #97645 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) nilovg Dear Scott, I wonder whether I shall have another go at explainign about pariyatti. I read your mails about this subject. Op 27-apr-2009, om 14:00 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > Scott: Can you please elaborate? I've misunderstood, it seems, > something about the objects of pa~n~naa. If a concept is not an > ultimate reality, then how can it be an object of pa~n~naa > cetasika? In other words, I thought pa~n~naa only has paramattha > dhammaa as objects. > > Does one define pariyatti as 'an intellectual stage of > understanding and awareness'? Isn't this 'thinking'? It might be > thinking 'correctly' but what is the link between pa~n~naa and its > object and the thinking which arises later (and which must be a > function of a host of other dhammaa in interaction and succession) > and creates wholes (coherent thoughts) about realities? --------- N: I try to think of an example, taking it from my ADL: <... So in many hundred suttas there is only mentality-materiality which is illustrated, not a being, not a person. Therefore, just as when the component parts (of a chariot) such as axles, wheels, frame, poles... are arranged in a certain way, there comes to be the mere conventional term `chariot', yet in the ultimate sense, when each part is examined, there is no chariot... so too, when there are the five khandhas of clinging there comes to be the mere conventional term `a being', `a person', yet in the ultimate sense, when each component is examined, there is no being as a basis for the assumption `I am' or `I'; in the ultimate sense there is only mentality-materiality. The vision of one who sees in this way is called correct vision.> The Buddha uses words, concepts, but these stand for realities, clarify realities. When we speak about concept we have to take into account: what kind of concept, whether or not it stands for a reality. In Survey you can read the part about concept and see that there are many kinds. Now, you are reading the above quote, and while reading and thinking there can be kusala cittas accompanied by understanding. Not a being, not a person, you begin to understand this, and then after a while you may notice that understanding has grown, though it is hardly noticeable that it develops. After a year or so you may notice a difference. Cittas with understanding arise and pass away so rapidly, that we cannot pinpoint exactly when pa~n~naa accompanies thinking. It does not matter whether it is still pa~n~naa of the level of pariyatti, it can be correct understanding. Certainly, there is a difference when direct awareness and understanding arise and the object is a characteristic of a reality that appears now. However, also a beginning understanding is still pa~n~naa. Do not worry too much about concepts. We read:< in the ultimate sense there is only mentality-materiality. The vision of one who sees in this way is called correct vision.> These words can gain in meaning in the course of many years, even many lives, and one day direct awareness and understanding can arise, provided we do not cling. We do not really mind when this happens, it is beneficial to study so that there will be more correct understanding. This is our aim: more understanding, and it can grow. But it has to begin from scratch. If there were no pa~n~naa of the level of pariyatti, how could it grow into pa~n~naa of pa.tipatti? I do not know whether this helps. Nina. #97646 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Apr 29, 2009 3:08 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) kenhowardau Hi Robert E, Sorry for the delay in replying. I have been busy - having recently entered the full-time work force. That is going to come as a shock to everyone who knows me. :-) -------------- R: > Apologies in advance for my tone - I will take it back later. -------------- Thanks for the advance warning, but there was nothing offensive in your tone. I was a bit disappointed! :-) ------------- <. . .> R: > Many of the explanations of Abhidhamma are not "unheard before" at all - they are just complicated; -------------- For the record I will repeat: I believe every word of the Dhamma was about conditioned dhammas - "things unheard before." ------------------------------ R: > but if one follows the string of logic they all make sense. ------------------------------ Yes. To me the understanding that dhammas carry out functions in a single moment does make sense. To you, it doesn't. I think you are clinging to your conventional understanding of the world. ------------------------------------ R: > When you propose something that is impossible on its face because it contradicts its own definitions and you cannot offer a better explanation or a new definition that puts it into place, then we must doubt the understand of those who say "don't worry it will all work out - you are caught in a concept." It may be that those who give this assurance are themselves barking up the wrong tree, or they would be able to say something about how it works. For instance, you cannot at all explain how something can "repeatedly take place" in a single moment, ------------------------------------- I did try to explain, but you rejected my explanation. I have also tried to explain how anicca was an inherent characteristic of [momentary] dhammas. You've rejected that explanation and insisted anicca was a concept deduced after a series of observations. --------------------------- R: > yet you expect that it is possible just based on the general notion that it must be a thing "unheard before" --------------------------- A lot of things were unheard before, but the ones that the Buddha taught were, I believe, perfectly possible. ------------------------------- R: > Well, I may propose that you have never heard of a speckled rabbit that lays eggs and has wings, but that will not make it any more sensible than if you had heard of it before. It just doesn't wash. Maybe it is not a rabbit at all, but a bird, and then the whole thing fits into place. The idea of vicara "repeatedly beating on the object" to get the deeper understanding out of it and providing that knowledge of its investigation to panna which sees directly in the moment *does* make sense. ------------------------------- Let's take the example of "tenacity." I believe it is real. I am not sure which paramattha dhamma could be called tenacity, but I believe one of them could be. Therefore I believe tenacity to be a conditioned paramattha dhamma, and, by definition, momentary. You, on the other hand, would argue that tenacity could only be a concept deduced after a series of observations E.g., (1) a person might be observed to be holding an opinion . . . (2) still holding that opinion . . . (3) still holding that opinion! Gosh, that's tenacity! I think your approach to the Abhidhamma will have the same consequences no matter which conditioned dhamma is considered. It will not allow you to see how a dhmma could be a reality existing for just one moment. I'd better post this now and try to respond to the rest of your message later. I seem to have gone from one extreme to another - lazy beachcomber to non-stop worker. Time is money! :-) Ken H #97647 From: "bhikkhu.samahita" Date: Wed Apr 29, 2009 4:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The 10 future Buddhas! bhikkhu.sama... Hello Howard and Azita: Reg: The 10 future Buddhas! 1: Buddha Gotama foretold the next Buddha Metteyya in DN 26 (iii 77)! 2: Certain things in the future is fixed and determined now. 3: Other things are still being developed and refined... 4: The earth regenerates during each big bang. (as do the countries) 5: ALL Sammasam-Buddhas and Pacceka-Buddhas arise in middle India. 6: The next 10 Buddhas is standard Theravada and neither Mahayana nor superstition. U may advantageously reconsider ur level of faith! The cure for insufficient faith and sceptical doubt is daily devout kneeling worship in front of shrine or bo tree repeating this aloud: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/The_Three_Jewels.htm PS: Dry intellectualism with neither meditation nor moral praxis, nor 5 ability training is incapable of inducing any real attainment! => Empty Learning => Void Pride... Best Wishes. Bhikkhu Samahita, Ceylon. ;-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Dear Bhikkhu Samahita - > > In a message dated 4/22/2009 4:05:27 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > bhikkhu.samahita@... writes: > > Friends: > > What is known about the next 10 Future Buddhas? > ============================== > Apparently 1) that it is all already determined who they are - so, no > new Buddha's-to-be coming up for trillions upon trillions of years, and 2) > judging from their names, that they will all be from India (even though the > planet earth will be long gone.) > For me, this is Buddhist mythology, begun in early Buddhism and going > way beyond the due respect and appreciation for our great teacher, and > taken to more extreme heights in Mahayana, that makes for iconic religious > devotionalism but has no bearing on the liberating Dhamma practice taught by > the Buddha and which I consider a treasure. Can you tell me why I am wrong in > this, if you think I am? > > With respect and metta, > Howard > > #97648 From: Lim Date: Wed Apr 29, 2009 6:43 pm Subject: Happy Vesak for 2009! limf@ymail.com Happy Vesak for 2009! May you attain the lasting peace of Nibbana! #97649 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:09 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Metta and ANAPANASATI: no 14. epsteinrob Hi Sarah! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > It's very important to distinguish between the namas which experience an object and the object which is experienced. Only conditioned namas experience objects. The objects themselves may be rupas, other namas, nibbana (technically a nama too), or concepts. If nibbana is a nama, doesn't that mean that *it* experiences too? If not, what kind of nama is it? > p.s If it hasn't been clarified, I think you addressed one message to Scott that was intended for Ken O - #97595. At least you met the guidelines:-). ha ha, except for addressing the wrong person. I get those guys mixed up..... :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #97650 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:11 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Ken. Sorry I addressed you as Scott! :-) Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - #97651 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:07 am Subject: Rupa and Nama (was: Re: [dsg] The Secluded Place...) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Hi Rob Ep, > > --- On Mon, 27/4/09, Robert Epstein wrote: > > >> S: ...realities which can be known now, such as hearing or sound, seeing or visible object. > > R:> This is a basic question, but where exactly is the line drawn between rupa and nama in the hearing or seeing process? Visible object is rupa, is seeing nama? Is sense-door rupa or nama? > .... > S: Thx - basic qus are usually the best! :-) > Let's take the seeing process for discussion. > > Visible object is rupa as you say. It is experienced by a series of cittas (and accompanying cetasikas). All these cittas and cetasikas are namas. After some bhavanga cittas, Can you explain where the bhavanga cittas come in within the process and what exactly they accomplish? > there is a citta which 'adverts' to the visible object this means it moves from the bhavanga realm [not sure how to say that] and heads back to sensory experience of rupa? > and this is followed by seeing consciousness and then several other cittas. So the one rupa is experienced by many namas. So these namas have a certain number of moments to experience the rupa at different stages of its existence as it rises, changes and falls away? Sort of like a sporting event for cittas? Some come early and see the rising moments; others come late and only see the end of the show? And then when its over, a new set arise for the new sequence of rupa? > In order for these namas, including seeing consciousness, to experience visible object, there have to be other conditions in place. An important condition is the presence of eye-base. Eye-base or eye-sensitivity is another rupa which arises and falls away all the time in a living being, conditioned by past kamma. When you say 'conditioned by past kamma' is that to say that the ability to see or sense a particular rupa is conditioned at a given moment by certain past experiences or propensities that have been cultivated by past conditions? Is that the equivalent of one "seeing what one expects to see" and not seeing at all what one is not conditioned to see? > It is this eye-base which is actually the 'sense-door' by which seeing and the other cittas experience the visible object. > ... > >I am sure that recognition of what is seen is nama, and any thought-process beyond that is nama. Is awareness of visible object nama? If you can put these in order for me I would appreciate it. > ... > S: So, seeing (a nama) sees visible object (a rupa). The seeing (nama) is accompanied by perception/recognition (nama), contact (nama) and other namas. Thinking (nama) about what has just been seen (concepts about visible object). Awareness (nama) may accompany the cittas (namas) following seeing (nama) in the eye-door or mind-door process. A little confused on the definition and coordination of the eye-door with the mind-door. Do they act in tandem or what is the process? And is the mind-door process or processes different than "thinking," "awareness," "recognition," etc., or is this what "mind-door" processes refer to? > Awareness (nama) can be aware of the visible object (rupa) or it can accompany thinking (nama) when it experiences concepts, is it either/or; could awareness arise for both rupa, followed by awareness of thinking as well? and if there is awareness present, is that sati? Or is sati a more distinct form of awareness? > such as at moments of dana, sila, samatha development or pariyatti (intellectual understanding) - more namas. > ... > >I know this is all laid out in many places but not sure where to look at the moment for a good summary. > ... > S: In any case, sometimes it's good to ask the questions and clarify doubts or confusions about what one has read or heard. That makes sense, and I enjoy the clarifications. (See also p.99 of 'Survey of PD' for the series of cittas in a sense-door process.) Thank you for that; that is a good reference. And lucky me, I have the reference book! :-) > Pls ask for any further clarifications. I appreciate the questions. It's a bit like a jigsaw puzzle isn't it? Yes it is. Certainly on an intellectual level, it's fun to fit the pieces together, however slow one may be at it..... [It's easy to feel brain-dead when faced with the voluminous creativity and perception of those annoying arahants. Especially when they all insist on speaking in Pali or Sanskrit or whatever...] > Slowly the pieces slot into place and the picture becomes clearer and clearer, especially when we understand it's all about 'now' and what can be known now. Good reminder, about the "now" aspect of it - puts concepts into perspective and re-tunes awareness for the present moment. Thanks much, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #97652 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:08 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Hi Rob Ep, > > --- On Mon, 27/4/09, Robert Epstein wrote: > >> S: Again, I think the Buddha was pointed to the different kinds of accumulations which may manifest. He wasn't indicating that one could choose how and when to become enlightened. > > R:> If you don't mind, I would like to put in a request to be enlightened sooner rather than later, and with very little additional suffering. > ... > S: I'd love to have the ability to grant you your request, but there are all those 'pesky' conditions and that anatta-thingy in the way...:-)) > > Best wishes for the best conditions... Thanks. :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #97653 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:19 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca,... epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob Ep, > I will be away from this Thursday until Monday. > Today I can still answer mail. > Op 27-apr-2009, om 15:28 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > > > R: Again, "repeated beatings," vs. "single moment." How can it be? > > > > If you say that the "repeated beatings" can take place in > > > > successive moments for successive arisings of panna, then I > > will be > > > > content. > > > ------- > > > N: Certainly, you can rest content. > > > Nina. > > > > Well, if you can lead me to a more detailed explanation of this > > mechanism, I will be even more content! I am sure someone in > > Abhidhamma has laid it out in excruciating detail! ;-) > ------- > N: We are talking now about pa~n~naa that understands the > characteristic of a reality that appears. It arises in a process > accompanying kusala citta. In a process of cittas, not only one > kusala citta with pa~n~naa arises but seven. Each kusala citta > conditions the next one and this type of condition is called > repetition-condition, asevana-paccaya. The kusala citta is > accompanied by pa~n~naa and also by vitakka which assists pa~n~naa, > hitting the reality that appears, so that at that very moment > pa~n~naa can understand it. Pa~n~naa is also assisted by sati which > is aware of the object, by concentration which is focussed on that > one object, and by many other cetasikas which are all sobhana, > beautiful. They all arise together while they accompany the citta > performing their functions and then they all fall away immediately. > It is perhaps hard to imagine how citta and cetasikas can each > perform their own function during the extremely short moment one > citta lasts. We do not need to worry, all these realities do this by > nature. And don't forget, there is accumulation of skill. > > I hope that you are content with this excruciating detail. > > Nina. :-) Well that is exceptionally clear and I do actually find it quite satisfying. I appreciate this clear description of how this occurs. It confirms the idea that the work of vitakka can have a number of moments to successively "beat and turn over" the object while panna arises repeatedly to take in the latest "news" in a single moment [each time.] The fact that skill [and, I take it, understanding] can accumulate during this succession also helps the whole thing make sense. The understanding of this as "repetition condition" is sort of what I was looking for, and the roles of sati and other cetasikas assisting is interesting too. I also note with some poetic interest your comment in passing that the kusala cittas and cetasikas as they quickly arise and perform their momentary roles are all "sobhana - beautiful." This is worthy of appreciation. There's something there. Thanks much, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = #97654 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:12 am Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Nina and Sarah, Thank you for your detailed replies. I've been feeding the tax man lately but can now begin to slowly address this question. I'm thinking about thinking - thoughts in particular. And I'm thinking about the relation of pa~n~naa to certain kinds of thoughts. In particular, I'm thinking about the thoughts about Dhamma I think from time to time everyday. I want to focus on a 'thought'. A 'thought', as I understand it, in its structure and as its given to experience, seems formed, whole, coherent, having meaning. It seems to be in the form of words, almost as if it is 'heard' or 'being read' in the mind. In the same way that the experience of visible object, which is said to arise and be given to seeing consciousness one at a time, and to fall away is part of a rapid sequence of alternating dhammaa, including bhavanga, so too, I imagine, the 'thought' through the mind-door. Whereas the 'world' seems continuous and made up of coherent visible structures, people, animals, movement, sounds, smells, etc., so too 'thought' seems at least semi-continuous. Does the 'thought' arise in the form we experience it? I'd suggest that a 'thought', like any other dhamma of experience, and Sarah I think you have said this, is not the whole it seems to be, but rather is part of a much more complex series of dhammaa: Sarah: "...there are many, many (mind-door)processes of cittas involved with concept as object. Interspersed are sense-door processes too. So when we refer to wise reflection with pa~n~naa of concepts (as in my example above), many processes of cittas 'build up' such concepts, but no need to count. It's enough to know that concepts rather than realities are the objects. It's quite different from when there is direct understanding of visible object without any thinking involved. The point of the path is, of course, to directly understand, not just think about, such dhammas." Scott: And Nina, you also make a similar point: Nina: "...Cittas with understanding arise and pass away so rapidly, that we cannot pinpoint exactly when pa~n~naa accompanies thinking." Scott: Is the coherence of a 'thought' as illusory as the apparent coherence of the rest of the external world? Given that pa~n~naa is not present permanently, but rather, in relation to an experienced thought about the world, has already arisen and fallen away, what is it that makes the reflection 'wise' as opposed to 'unwise'? How does a right thought about dhamma relate to pa~n~naa? Sarah, you suggest: Sarah: "...there can be wise or unwise thinking about the concepts or 'wholes'. Like now as we think about the words on the screen, there can be reflection with pa~n~naa about how really there is only visible object seen or there can be ignorance and attachment. Of course, kusala and akusala cittas follow each other rapidly in succession." Scott: Here, 'reflection with pa~n~naa' implies that pa~n~naa is present as part of the moment of reflection. How does this then come to be a 'thought' about Dhamma such as you or I experience in a day? The experience of the intellectual understanding of the Dhamma I 'have' is that it seems to agree (for the most part and with less 'knowledge') with that which you, Nina and Sarah, seem to 'have'. And it disagrees with those thoughts presented by others, whose understanding again is different, and whom, I would say, are 'wrong'. Consider the following, from the Sammohavinodani (p.p. 140-141); this is from a section discussing the Noble Eightfold Path, and seems to be distinguishing mundane from supramundane 'thinking': "...Then, at the moment of insight, thinking which is associated with insight arises in him effecting the destroying and the cutting away of the foundation of applied thought of sense desire through substitution by opposing qualities. Pursuing insight, he reaches the path...Thus, these, namely, thinking of renunciation and so on, are multiple in the prior stage because of the multiplicity of arising through insight and jhaana. But at the moment of the path, profitable thinking arises singly fulfilling the path factor by accomplishing non-arising because of the cutting away the foundation of the unprofitable thinking which had arisen in the three instances. This is Right Thinking." Scott: What is the 'thinking' referred to in the above? How do you understand the notion of 'multiplicity' versus 'singly'? Again, what is a 'thought'? What is 'adverting' - is it 'thinking about'? What is the relation of the moment to the experienced 'whole thought'? Thanks for the discussion. Sincerely, Scott. #97655 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:17 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, --- On Mon, 27/4/09, kenhowardau wrote: >The Dhamma is about "things unheard before" (Dhammacakkappavatt ana-sutta) and so the beginner will always find it difficult to understand. To help us to understand, the Buddha gave many conventional examples. That is, he used "things heard before" as descriptions of "things unheard before." These examples only become a problem when people mistake them for the realities they were meant to describe. .... S: Well put - yes, we shouldn't wonder that the Dhamma is deep and subtle... Congratulations on the job - that was a long surfing holiday you took.... May we ask what your new title is? Does it mean we may get to see you in Bangkok next year? Metta, Sarah ========= #97656 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Five sense doors, its objects, and its consciousness sarahprocter... Hi Alberto, Thanks for all the good detail. May I ask which texts you are finding most your detail in? For example, I'm interested to read about the 'single kamma' conditioning as you suggest as opposed to different kamma conditioning each single sense consciousness. It makes sense and is along the lines I've heard. I like this comment about cetana 'just a sankhara dhamma....': "The self thinks of owning "its" kamma; the "intentions" one has, while it's actually cetana cetasika, just a (the) sankhara dhamma, sharing the three common characteristics all sankhara dhammas have, anatta (arising because of conditions, period), anicca (falling away immediately, very many times each second, and accumulating along with lobha or alobha, dosa or metta, avijja or panna), hence dukkha." Metta, Sarah --- On Wed, 29/4/09, sprlrt wrote: >The five (sense) doors are made of rupas that only kamma can prdouce, and it is a single kamma that does all this and more, conditioning the arising of the ribirth consciousness, a vipaka citta, immediately after death, <....> #97657 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. sarahprocter... Hi Howard & all, --- On Mon, 27/4/09, upasaka@... wrote: >>S: As I see it, now there is no special "setting up" of anything in particular and no attending to any "restricted field" and yet, in between the various moments of seeing, hearing, excietement, lethargy and so on, there can be moments of calm, moments of wise reflection on the Dhamma, for example, or even moments of understanding of the visible object, lethargy or other realities appearing one at a time. I don't see a need or purpose in thinking about a different time when there is some special "intentional setting up". Cannot even such thinking about it be known as just another conditioned dhamma? ------------ --------- --------- --------- - H:> I believe the Buddha would disagree with you. The narrowing of (the central focus of) intention, for example to the body (kayagatasati bhavana) or the breath (anapanasati bhavana), is taught by the Buddha, and it is explained by the Buddha as special activity with salutary consequence. ------------ --------- --------- --------- - S: Sometimes the Buddha referred to the rupas of the body (which of course we're so very attached to), sometimes to breath, sometimes to vedana (feelings), sometimes to the sense experiences. I think that whichever realities he referred to, we have to understand the meaning of the practice in the light of all conditioned dhammas being anatta, beyond anyone's control. It's a matter of understanding what is conditioned now, what is experienced now. After all, that's all there ever is. .... H:> Yes, there is a clear area of agreement: our disagreement! LOL! ------------ --------- --------- --------- - S: Yes :-). ..... >>S: Again, I think it could be stressed that whether or not samatha develops depends on conditions, rather than choice by a self. ------------ --------- --------- --------- H:> Whenever I speak of choosing, you bring up "self." The Buddha made choices, Sarah. ... S: He made it clear that in an absolute sense, there is no Buddha and any such choices are conditioned and anatta. They are merely moments of conditioned thinking - such as now. .... >>S: The Buddha taught us that there are just conditioned dhammas now arising and passing away. There is no Buddha, Sarah or Howard to make any choices. The 'careful tending' now has to be the function of wise attention and other wholesome mental factors. Yes, I agree, that now, is the time for them to arise. ------------ --------- --------- -------- H:>So, you just don't believe in volition! I find that just silly, but, hey, to each his/her own. ------------ --------- --------- ----- S: Cetana arises with each citta and is just as conditioned as any other dhamma. As Alberto wrote and I just quoted: "The self thinks of owning "its" kamma; the "intentions" one has, while it's actually cetana cetasika, just a (the) sankhara dhamma, sharing the three common characteristics all sankhara dhammas have, anatta (arising because of conditions, period), anicca (falling away immediately, very many times each second, and accumulating along with lobha or alobha, dosa or metta, avijja or panna), hence dukkha.". There is no 'right intention' as an eightfold path factor. ... H:> BTW, I don't think that James believes in a literal actor-entity either. ------------ --------- --------- -------- S: He'd have to answer that. I have had many discussions with him about whether there are literally people existing. ... >>S: Mindfulness of the rupas (we refer to as the body)has to develop, along with mindfulness of all the various namas which make up our day. No special order, no selection. Yes, whenever there is awareness and understanding of such dhammas, there is clear knowing with no more idea of 'choice' or 'special selection' of what will arise at the next moment. ------------ --------- --------- --------- ---- H:> ;-)) The Buddha taught "special selection" in so many ways: guarding the sense to distinguish wholesome from unwholesome and to choose the wholesome, ... S: Guarding the senses - being aware of the reality experienced. When there is awareness and understanding of visible object or sound, for example, there is wise attention, there is guarding. There's no need or purpose in 'choosing' anything. ... H:>centering attention on bodily sensations, directing one's thoughts to the Dhamma and away from trivialities ... so many areas of selection! .... S: I see a difference between being aware and understanding the object with sati sampaja~n~naa vs directing, selecting one's thoughts which suggests Self to me. As you say, we have to agree to disagree here. .... H:> Sarah, do you really see no difference in result between folks who make regular, special effort as regards introspection, ongoing mindfulness, guarding the senses, and intentionally calming the mind, and those who just live, as the mass of people do, however they happen to be inclined - according to whatever "feels good"? That is the real going "with the flow," and it comes down to being led by nose by craving and attachment. ------------ --------- --------- --------- ----- S: I think the danger in the first approach with the 'regular, special effort' is a growing accumulation of attachment to self, to being the one with 'ongoing mindfulness', 'calm' and so on. In other words, the opposite of detachment. I think the danger is the second approach you mention is just continued ignorance. I think the middle way that the Buddha taught, the 'one way' is that of awareness and understanding with detachment towards whatever is conditioned at this moment, regardless of the object and without concern for self having 'ongoing mindfulness' or being any particular way. This is the development not for oneself, not for the world, but for the sake of Dhamma. Just my reflections, of course, Howard. No need to ever agree:-)). Metta, Sarah ====== #97658 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:53 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. sarahprocter... Hi James, --- On Tue, 28/4/09, buddhatrue wrote: >James: Gosh, I don't know how you remember these things! Yeah, next week I will be the big 40! It won't be like a party as much as like a funeral. :-) .... S: Oh well, we're having a week of these funerals, so I tend to think of other funerals around the same time;-). Enjoy the 40s while they last! Metta, Sarah ====== #97659 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:58 am Subject: Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Colette Thanks for coming in on this message, and my apologies for the delay in replying. (97445) > ---------------------- > colette: so the reality exists that a person can and does delusion and/or hallucinates that they possess a self and all the characteristics that come with that hallucination/delusion. > ---------------------- Ideas of self arise, but they are momentary and not ever-present. > ---------------------- the only issue I have to raise here, on this subject, is that characteristic or those characteristics which a person imposes upon another person: the individual in question can hallucinate and/or delusion that they have a self and that this delusion/hallucination has characteristics which verify this dreams existance > ---------------------- What you refer to as characteristics that one person imposes on another I would see as being in reality momentary ideas arising in the mind of the first person. > ---------------------- ... > You gave us the wisdom of the misconception, the misinterpretation, and the mislabeling, of a self and all I'm suggesting is that these hallucinations/delusions are ofter transfered upon others as a means of defiling another sentient being without that sentient being's permision. > ---------------------- Well, I'd agree that we tend to assume the same about others as we experience for ourselves. But I'd say that's our problem, more thatn the other person's ;-)) Jon #97660 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:02 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Metta and ANAPANASATI: no 14. sarahprocter... Hi James & Howard, --- On Tue, 28/4/09, upasaka@... wrote: >>S: AN, 10s, 6 "The Meditative Experience of Nibbaana - 1" (Bodi transl): > > "Once the Venerable Aananda approached the Blessed One and asked: > > " 'Can it be, Lord, that a monk attains to such a concentration of mind that in earth he is not percipient of earth, nor in water is he percipient of water, nor in fire....air. ..the base of the infinity of space.....the base of the infinity of consciousness. ...the base of nothingness. ..the base of neither-perception- nor-non-percepti on is he percipient of these; nor is he percipient of this world or a world beyond - but yet he is percipient?' > > " 'Yes, Aananda, there can be such a concentration of mind that in earth a monk is not percipient of earth...nor is he percipient of this world or a world beyone - but yet he is percipient.' > > " 'But how, Lord, can a monk attain to such a concentration of mind?' > > " 'Here, Aananda, the monk is percipient thus: 'This is the peaceful, this is the sublime, namely, the stilling of all formations, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, Nibbaana.' It is in this way, Aananda, that a monk may attain to such a concentration of mind.' " .... J: >This sutta is a description of the Recollection of Peace (Nibbana) as detailed in the Vism. According to the Vism., it can lead to mundane jhana. ... S: I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. Perhaps you could give me the Vism ref. ... >The object of this meditation is the 'qualities of nibbana', not actual nibbana itself, so the practitioner is still percipient but is not percipient of nama or rupa. ... S: Nibbana is the object. The commentary specifies that in this context it is referring to the phala samapatti cittas which have the reality of nibbana as object. ... J:> So, jhana is not specifically mentioned in this sutta but jhana is still a factor in this practice. ... S: Actually, this is correct - without jhana as basis for enlightenment, there cannot be subsequent phala samapatti cittas which can experience nibbana after the enlightenment cittas have fallen away. So this only refers to those with prior mundane jhana, not to all or most. ... ============ ====== H:> This is a case where I put no credence in the commentary. For me, this sutta pertains to nibbanic awareness, which I consider to be a non-dual "state" involving neither subject nor object, but partaking of the unconditioned itself and transcending all aspects of samsara, jhanas included. ... S: Yes, I agree with you that it is referring to the drect experience of nibbana, the unconditioned dhamma. I'd have to see the ref. James has in mind. Metta, Sarah ======= #97661 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:02 am Subject: Description or doctrine/instruction? (was, Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Robert E (97452) > ---------------------- > > As I'm sure you know, I don't see in the suttas any "giving meditation instruction", and my comments are simply a corollary of that understanding. If someone followed what they took to be a meditation instruction when in fact it was a description of a person of certain attainments, there could hardly be much (or any) kusala > > involved. > > I understand that this is your view, but you didn't really answer the question - which is, what makes you think that is the case? What is the evidence? The basis? > ---------------------- We would have to look at one or more of the passages that you had in mind when making your comment about whether the Buddha was giving meditation instruction or was describing arising cittas that happen to look a certain way. Perhaps the passage I cite below would be one of those. > ---------------------- > > There is frequent reference in the texts to the attainment of enlightenment with jhana as basis, but that is a description of those who have attained or are within reach of attaining jhana rather than a statement of general doctrine, as I understand it. > > Can you direct me to a passage where this is demonstrated? I could use some details or facts, rather than just assertions. > ---------------------- An example of a passage that is a description rather than a general statement of doctrine would be the well-known section on anapanasati from the Satipatthana Sutta. I am pasting a copy below. Happy to discuss, if you'd like to. Jon Satipatthana Sutta MN 10 "And how, O bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu live contemplating the body in the body? "Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty place, sits down, bends in his legs crosswise on his lap, keeps his body erect, and arouses mindfulness in the object of meditation, namely, the breath which is in front of him. "Mindful, he breathes in, and mindful, he breathes out. He, thinking, 'I breathe in long,' he understands when he is breathing in long; or thinking, 'I breathe out long,' he understands when he is breathing out long; or thinking, 'I breathe in short,' he understands when he is breathing in short; or thinking, 'I breathe out short,' he understands when he is breathing out short. "'Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe in,' thinking thus, he trains himself. 'Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe out,' thinking thus, he trains himself. 'Calming the activity of the body, I shall breathe in,' thinking thus, he trains himself. 'Calming the activity of the body, I shall breathe out', thinking thus, he trains himself. "Just as a clever turner or a turner's apprentice, turning long, understands: 'I turn long;' or turning short, understands: 'I turn short'; just so, indeed, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, when he breathes in long, understands: 'I breathe in long'; or, when he breathes out long, understands: 'I breathe out long'; or, when he breathes in short, he understands: 'I breathe in short'; or when he breathes out short, he understands: 'I breathe out short'. He trains himself with the thought: 'Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe in'. He trains himself with the thought: 'Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe out'. He trains himself with the thought: 'Calming the activity of the body I shall breathe in'. He trains himself with the thought: 'Calming the activity of the body I shall breathe out'. "Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally, or he lives contemplating the body in the body externally, or he lives contemplating the body in the body internally and externally. He lives contemplating origination-things in the body, or he lives contemplating dissolution-things in the body, or he lives contemplating origination-and-dissolution-things in the body. Or indeed his mindfulness is established with the thought: 'The body exists,' to the extent necessary just for knowledge and remembrance, and he lives independent and clings to naught in the world. Thus, also, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html #97662 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] True dhamma sarahprocter... Hi Matheesha, Good to see your contribution. Do you have any of your own comments to add or any particular reason for the quotes at this time? I hope you're well and that your Dhamma activities are prospering. Any more talks? Metta, Sarah --- On Tue, 28/4/09, matheesha wrote: >"Upali, the dhammas of which you may know, 'These dhammas do not lead to utter disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, nor to Unbinding': You may definitely hold, 'This is not the Dhamma, this is not the Vinaya, this is not the Teacher's instruction. ' "As for the dhammas of which you may know, 'These dhammas lead to utter disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding': You may definitely hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher's instruction. '" — AN 7.80 .... #97663 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:05 am Subject: Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E (97452) > ---------------------- > > Yes, the Patisamphidaa Magga, which is cited here from time to time and has been the subject of some series in the past. > > For a moment I was thrilled that you gave me a specific reference. It took my breath away for a moment. Then I became deflated again when I realized that it does not seem to exist on the internet, and I have no idea how to find a copy [in English.] Any ideas? > ---------------------- My apologies, but I misspelt the name. It should be *Patisambhida* Magga (English translation by Nanamoli under the name "Path of Discrimination"). Many, many citations on this list. Just key "Patisambhida" into the search box on the list website (as I've just done) and you'll get any number of references. In fact, the first post I opened was one of yours which cites this text ;-)). See: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/95872 Also, many post references given in UP under the heading "Patisambhidaa (discriminations) & Patisambhidamagga (Path of Discrimination text)". To get there, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ Then scroll down to the item: "Useful_Posts_March_2009.htm" Open it and click on the letter 'P' Then scroll down a few screens until you get to the heading. > Well, we are keeping each other jumping anyway. I hope it is healthy exercise. Yes, I think it is (keeps me out of trouble, anyway ;-)) Jon #97664 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The 10 future Buddhas! upasaka_howard Hi, Bhante (Bhikkhu Samahita), and Azita - In a message dated 4/29/2009 11:04:11 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, bhikkhu.samahita@... writes: Hello Howard and Azita: Reg: The 10 future Buddhas! 1: Buddha Gotama foretold the next Buddha Metteyya in DN 26 (iii 77)! --------------------------------------- Okay. If that is correct recording, something I cannot know for sure, but I suspect probably is the case, then I would accept that the Buddha knew of that bodhisatta at the time. That strikes me as a possibility and not necessarily just mythology. As regards all 10, well, I consider it unlikely. -------------------------------------- 2: Certain things in the future is fixed and determined now. ------------------------------------- Of course. We do not know what, however. -------------------------------------- 3: Other things are still being developed and refined... ----------------------------------- Agreed. ----------------------------------- 4: The earth regenerates during each big bang. (as do the countries) ------------------------------------- I find that absurd, and I disbelieve it. (And I do not NEED to believe that to be a faithful follower of the Dhamma.) --------------------------------------- 5: ALL Sammasam-Buddhas and Pacceka-Buddhas arise in middle India. ----------------------------------------- I consider that to be nonsense, and I entirely disbelieve it. --------------------------------------- 6: The next 10 Buddhas is standard Theravada and neither Mahayana nor superstition. U may advantageously reconsider ur level of faith! ------------------------------------------- Thank you for the invitation, but I'm not interested in such faith, Sir. I have unshakable confidence, however, in the actual Buddhadhamma. ----------------------------------------- The cure for insufficient faith and sceptical doubt is daily devout kneeling worship in front of shrine or bo tree repeating this aloud: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/The_Three_Jewels.htm --------------------------------------------- There are no bo trees nearby where I live, Bhante. In any case, skeptical doubt has nothing to do with cosmology, proper Dhammic faith does not depend on ritual, and the cure for skeptical doubt is stream entry, the cause of which is Dhamma practice. -------------------------------------------- PS: Dry intellectualism with neither meditation nor moral praxis, nor 5 ability training is incapable of inducing any real attainment! => Empty Learning => Void Pride... ------------------------------------------- Sir, who are you suggesting engages in "dry intellectualism with neither meditation nor moral praxis, nor 5 ability training,"? Why do you suddenly raise this? ========================== With metta, Howard Hindrances /Suppose there were a river, flowing down from the mountains — going far, its current swift, carrying everything with it — and a man would open channels leading away from it on both sides, so that the current in the middle of the river would be dispersed, diffused, & dissipated; it wouldn't go far, its current wouldn't be swift, and it wouldn't carry everything with it. In the same way, when a seeker has not abandoned these five obstacles, hindrances that overwhelm awareness and weaken discernment, i.e., sensual desire, ill will, sloth & torpor, restlessness & anxiety, and sceptical doubt, when s/he is without strength and too weak in discernment to understand what is for one's own benefit, to understand what is for the benefit of others, to understand what is for the benefit of both, then to realize a superior human state, a truly noble distinction in knowledge & vision: that is impossible/ (From the Avarana Sutta) #97665 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 4/30/2009 8:52:19 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Just my reflections, of course, Howard. No need to ever agree:-)). ======================== Be not concerned! LOLOL! ;-)) With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97666 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:20 am Subject: Re: thinking thinks, just it. No problem at all. szmicio Dear friends, Kokanuda Sutta To Kokanuda (On Viewpoints) translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu On one occasion Ven. Ananda was staying near Rajagaha, at Tapoda monastery. Then, as night was ending, he got up & went to the Tapoda Hot Springs to bathe his limbs. Having bathed his limbs and having gotten out of the springs, he stood wearing only his lower robe, drying his limbs. Kokanuda the wanderer, as night was ending, also got up & went to the Tapoda Hot Springs to bathe his limbs. He saw Ven. Ananda from afar, and on seeing him said to him, "Who are you, my friend?" "I am a monk, my friend." "Which kind of monk?" "A son-of-the-Sakyan contemplative." "I would like to ask you about a certain point, if you would give me leave to pose a question." "Go ahead and ask. Having heard [your question], I'll inform you." "How is it, my friend: 'The cosmos is eternal. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless.' Is this the sort of view you have?" "No, my friend, I don't have that sort of view." "Very well, then: 'The cosmos is not eternal. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless.' Is this the sort of view you have?" "No, my friend, I don't have that sort of view." "Very well, then: 'The cosmos is finite... The cosmos is infinite... The soul & the body are the same... The soul is one thing and the body another... After death a Tathagata exists... After death a Tathagata does not exist... After death a Tathagata both does & does not exist... After death a Tathagata neither does nor does not exist. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless.' Is this the sort of view you have?" "No, my friend, I don't have that sort of view." "Then in that case, do you not know or see?" "No, my friend. It's not the case that I don't know, I don't see. I do know. I do see." "But on being asked, 'How is it, my friend: "The cosmos is eternal. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless." Is this the sort of view you have?' you inform me, 'No, my friend, I don't have that sort of view.' On being asked, 'Very well then: "The cosmos is not eternal... The cosmos is finite... The cosmos is infinite... The soul & the body are the same... The soul is one thing and the body another... After death a Tathagata exists... After death a Tathagata does not exist... After death a Tathagata both does & does not exist... After death a Tathagata neither does nor does not exist. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless." Is this the sort of view you have?' you inform me, 'No, my friend, I don't have that sort of view.' But on being asked, 'Then in that case, do you not know, I don't see?' you inform me, 'No, my friend. It's not the case that I don't know or see. I do know. I do see.' Now, how is the meaning of this statement to be understood?" "'The cosmos is eternal. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless,' is a viewpoint. 'The cosmos is not eternal... The cosmos is finite... The cosmos is infinite... The soul & the body are the same... The soul is one thing and the body another... After death a Tathagata exists... After death a Tathagata does not exist... After death a Tathagata both does & does not exist... After death a Tathagata neither does nor does not exist. Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless,' is a viewpoint. The extent to which there are viewpoints, view-stances, the taking up of views, obsessions of views, the cause of views, & the uprooting of views: that's what I know. That's what I see. Knowing that, I say 'I know.' Seeing that, I say 'I see.' Why should I say 'I don't know, I don't see'? I do know. I do see." "What is your name, my friend? What do your fellows in the chaste life call you?" "My name is Ananda, my friend, and that's what my fellows in the chaste life call me." "What? Have I been talking with the great teacher without realizing that it was Ven. Ananda? Had I recognized that it was Ven. Ananda, I would not have cross-examined him so much. May Ven. Ananda please forgive me." #97667 From: "connie" Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:40 am Subject: ADL & Perfections audio nichiconn Dear Friends, The audio chapter files of Lodewijk reading TA Sujin's "The Perfections Leading to Enlightenment" and Beverly Westheimer reading Nina's "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" are available on our archives page - dhammastudygroup.org - enjoy, connie #97668 From: Dieter Möller Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:19 am Subject: Re: The 10 future Buddhas! moellerdieter Dear Venerable Samahita ( Howard , Azita and all), you wrote ' Buddha Gotama foretold the next Buddha Metteyya in DN 26 (iii 77)' may I ask where in the Sutta - respectively Vinaya- Pitaka nine further future Buddhas are mentioned besides your points 4: The earth regenerates during each big bang. (as do the countries) 5: ALL Sammasam-Buddhas and Pacceka-Buddhas arise in middle India ' 6: The next 10 Buddhas is standard Theravada and neither Mahayana nor superstition. U may advantageously reconsider ur level of faith!' The question of standard Theravada is usually in reference to DN 16 the 4 Great References (transl. by Sister Vajira & Francis Story) 8-11. Then the Blessed One said: "In this fashion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu might speak: 'Face to face with the Blessed One, brethren, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a community with elders and a chief. Face to face with that community, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name live several bhikkhus who are elders, who are learned, who have accomplished their course, who are preservers of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with those elders, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a single bhikkhu who is an elder, who is learned, who has accomplished his course, who is a preserver of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with that elder, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation.' "In such a case, bhikkhus, the declaration of such a bhikkhu is neither to be received with approval nor with scorn. Without approval and without scorn, but carefully studying the sentences word by word, one should trace them in the Discourses and verify them by the Discipline. If they are neither traceable in the Discourses nor verifiable by the Discipline, one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is not the Blessed One's utterance; this has been misunderstood by that bhikkhu -- or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' In that way, bhikkhus, you should reject it. But if the sentences concerned are traceable in the Discourses and verifiable by the Discipline, then one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is the Blessed One's utterance; this has been well understood by that bhikkhu -- or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' And in that way, bhikkhus, you may accept it on the first, second, third, or fourth reference. These, bhikkhus, are the four great references for you to preserve." I think it is up to further elaboration from you to avoid the impression of your misunderstanding. with Metta Dieter #97669 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The 10 future Buddhas! kenhowardau Hi Howard, I'm not very interested in concepts or stories. Even stories told in the suttas don't interest me very much in their own right. I am more interested in the dhammas they indirectly describe. But, even so: ------- Ven S: > > ALL Sammasam-Buddhas and Pacceka-Buddhas arise in middle India. Howard: > I consider that to be nonsense, and I entirely disbelieve it. ------- I wonder if that is the right attitude to take. We've discussed it a few times over the years, and I have always given the example of the parallel universe theory. (As I understand the theory, the possibility of there being just a single universe is extremely unlikely. Much more likely is that there is an infinitely large number of universes, each a slight variation of our own. And for every one of those universes there is an infinitely large number of universes that are slight variations of it (and so on ad infinitum.) The parallel universe theory might not be a helpful one from our perspective, but I don't think any scientifically minded person would call it nonsense and entirely disbelieve it. (The same applies to the Big-Bang-Big-Crunch theory.) More to the point, the same appluies the 'Buddhas originating only from India' theory. Until it contradicts what we know to be true shouldn't we just leave the possibility open? We could follow examples from the suttas and simply say, "Maybe so, . . . maybe so." Ken H #97670 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:36 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Metta and ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Sarah (and Howard), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > .... > J: >This sutta is a description of the Recollection of Peace (Nibbana) as > detailed in the Vism. According to the Vism., it can lead to mundane jhana. > ... > S: I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. Perhaps you could give me the Vism ref. > ... James: I am at work and don't have my copy of the Vism. with me. But, if you look in the table of contents for "Recollection of Peace", I'm sure you will find it. It is the last in the section on the recollections. > >The object of this meditation is the 'qualities of nibbana', not actual > nibbana itself, so the practitioner is still percipient but is not percipient of nama or rupa. > ... > S: Nibbana is the object. The commentary specifies that in this context it is referring to the phala samapatti cittas which have the reality of nibbana as object. > ... James: Well, okay, if the commentary states that then okay. This is one of those borderline suttas which could go either way to me. I don't have a vested interest in one side or the other. Metta, James #97671 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:15 pm Subject: Words as teachings or visible object (was: Nature of anicca, dukkha, anatta) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > (If I understand you), there can be wise or unwise thinking about the concepts or 'wholes'. Like now as we think about the words on the screen, there can be reflection with pa~n~naa about how really there is only visible object seen or there can be ignorance and attachment. ... "So, it can be wise reflection with pa~n~naa of pariyatti which 'knows concept as merely concept'. For example, now, there can be wise reflecting on how all that's seen is visible object and that the words, labels and so on are just concepts. This is pariyatti with pa~n~naa." If 'words on the screen' as visible object is the realization of their status, as opposed to ignorance and attachment to the concepts they represent, what is the status of words seen as the repository of Dhamma and the vehicle of "wise reflection" on the Buddha's teaching, Abhidhamma, etc.? If one must be in delusion or attachment to see the concepts in words, then seeing them as teachings would also be such. Is it really a greater exercise of panna to see sutta, for instance, as "mere words on the page" as opposed to seeing them as teachings, which must surely deal in a secondary level of conceptualization? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #97672 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:25 pm Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Scott, > I wonder whether I shall have another go at explainign about > pariyatti. ... > Certainly, there is a difference when direct awareness and > understanding arise and the object is a characteristic of a reality > that appears now. However, also a beginning understanding is still > pa~n~naa. Do not worry too much about concepts. > We read:< in the ultimate sense there is only mentality-materiality. > The vision of one who sees in this way is called correct vision.> > These words can gain in meaning in the course of many years, even > many lives, and one day direct awareness and understanding can arise, > provided we do not cling. We do not really mind when this happens, it > is beneficial to study so that there will be more correct understanding. > This is our aim: more understanding, and it can grow. But it has to > begin from scratch. If there were no pa~n~naa of the level of > pariyatti, how could it grow into pa~n~naa of pa.tipatti? > > I do not know whether this helps. > Nina. Well it is interesting to me, as it points out, I think, that it doesn't matter as much what the object of awareness is; it is the quality of the awareness itself that is more important. If one is at a level where a lot of concept is arising, then the important thing is to know 'concept as concept,' rather than worry about the fact that concept is the object rather than a more actual reality. As I read you, if one is aware of concept as concept, and accepts concept as object in order to see it clearly, then that can be a kusala awareness which can give rise to panna on the pariyatti level; whereas if one is rejecting concept and desiring a different object of awareness, that would be akusala and defeat the purpose; and it is not going away from the concept towards a reality - it is attachment to another concept, one of which object is sufficient, rather than discerning the one that is there. So the concept that was there is not seen clearly; and the concept of desiring another object remains undisclosed. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #97673 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep, part 1 --- On Tue, 28/4/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >Thanks for including me in this post, even though it is obviously beyond my limited understanding. :-) .... S: :-) Likewise.... .. >I am still waiting desperately for someone to explain how this "threshing" and "beating" takes place, leaving aside how tough all this abuse must be on the poor dhamma. :( They thresh it, beat it, turn it over and thresh it and beat it again. This seems akusala to me. .... S: :-) Desperately seeking would be pretty akusala, but the function of vitakka as 'thrashing' its object is very, very common and need not be akusala! Yes, no wonder dhammas are said to be 'oppressed' - arising, being thrashed and more and then falling away instantly:-). Think of a citta (a moment of consciousness) experiencing its object, but only with the assistance of other factors to contact, focus on, lay hold of/thrash, feel, attend to and so on. Apart from a few specific cittas, mainly the sense experiencing cittas such as seeing and hearing which don't need the assistance of vitakka to direct (or lead) the citta onto its object, all other cittas do need this assistance. In the Atthasalini, the simile is given of someone wanting to enter the king's palace, but needing the assistance of a someone close to the king to do this. I need to get a drink after just returning from the beach, so will post this and get back to the rest in a minute. Metta, Sarah ======== #97674 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri May 1, 2009 12:01 am Subject: Cittas and cetasikas (was, Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Robert E (97459) > ---------------------- > My God, you are quick on the uptake. No sooner do I reply to a post [at 4 am in the morning having 'Buddhist Philosophy-based Insomnia'] than you send me a new one in the early morning of the next day. > ---------------------- Just trying to give you something useful to occupy yourself with during your insomnia ;-)) > ---------------------- > Joking aside, I appreciate the exchange. > ---------------------- And me too ... > ---------------------- > I think the point that may be disputed is not whether cetasikas take the same object as citta, but the mechanics of how this occurs. I don't think it is Theravadin orthodoxy that a discrete citta arises for each experient that arises and that the cetasikas are aligned one at a time around a single quality such as hardness and that this is the level of experience that forms a dhamma. I think the way in which this is described is Abhidhamma orthodoxy, rather than for the whole of the Theravadin community. Some take this as doctrine and others not. > ---------------------- Without wanting to get into a debate as to what is or is not Theravadin orthodoxy, here's a passage from CMA on the relationship between citta and cetasika: Ch 11, Compendium of Mental Factors Par. 1 <<< The fifty-two states associated with consciousness that arise and cease together (with consciousness), that have the same object and base (as consciousness), are known as mental factors. Guide to #1: "That arise and cease together (with consciousness)": The first verse defines the mental factors by way of four characteristics that are common to them all: 1) arising together with consciousness (ekuppaada) 2) ceasing together with consciousness (ekanirodha) 3) having the same object as consciousness (ekaalambana) 4) having he same base as consciousness (ekavatthuka) >>> > ---------------------- > > I have no idea as to the mechanics of the matter, as this is not explained in any of the texts I've read. > > Well, that is interesting, in so detailed a teaching. That is too bad. > > That is like saying that we know which pipes are connected in the plumbing but we have no idea how they get put together. > ---------------------- Whether that's a bad thing or not depends on the objective. > ---------------------- > > Investigation would have to begin, I think, by finding out what the texts have to say on the subject. There is simply no way that a matter as detailed as this (cetasikas arising together with the citta and thus simultaneously) could be investigated by direct experience. > > Then how was it determined in the first place? I assume an arahant could directly experience this taking place and thus was able to write it down? > ---------------------- It is capable of verification by direct experience, but it requires panna of a sufficiently high level. Thus, not capable of investigation by the likes of you and me ;-)) is what I meant. Jon #97675 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri May 1, 2009 12:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep (& Scott), part 2 [referring to the quote Scott gave on pa~n~naa and vitakka cetasikas..] --- On Tue, 28/4/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >Below, I have separated out some parts of this wonderful quote - and I mean it, because it is such a clear description of how a dhamma is known - and hope you can direct me to some explanation of how they take place. They don't seem "single-moment" descriptors at all: .... S: Before I start, keep in mind as Nina, Ken H, Scott and others have been stressing, that whatever similes or conventional descriptions are given, we are talking about one citta at a time accompanied by a minimum of 7 cetasikas, all experiencing the same object momentarily: > >Scott: In the Sammohavinodanii, p. 111: > > >"Also as regards Right View and Right Thinking, understanding cannot of its own nature determine an object as 'impermanent, painful, and no-self', but >with applied thought giving [assistance] by repeatedly beating [upon an object] it can. >Okay, applied thought gives assistance by repeatedly beating. Sounds like more than one moment, yes? ... S: There have to be countless cittas (over lifetimes)accompanied by vitakka (and vicara)and pa~n~naa before the pa~n~naa will be of sufficient strength to directly understand the ti-lakkhana. The pa~n~naa needs the vitakka to 'direct' it over and over again. This is why vitakka (samma sankappa) is also classified under the 'understanding' section of the eightfold path factors. ... >Also, looking into the nature of the three characteristics is dependent on understanding its "mode of change" - I forget the right word - and this is something that is comparing its former state to its present state is it not? ... S: No, I don't think so. It is directly understanding that characteristic of a particular dhamma when it's clearly known. For example, in the beginning, visible object is just known as visible object, the rupa which doesn't experience anything. As pa~n~naa grows (*a lot!*), it can directly understand its arising and falling away. In other words, it is a more developed, more precise understanding of that same reality, from the 3rd stage of insight. ... >>Quote: How? Just as a money-changer, having had a coin placed in his hand and being desirous of looking at it on all sides equally, cannot turn it over with the power of the eye only, but by turning it over with his fingers he is able to look at it on all sides; >turning it over and looking at all sides - can this happen in a single moment? .... S: Don't take the simile too literally. It's just explaining how pa~n~naa needs the 'extra fingers' to assist it understand the object. It cannot perform its function on its own. ... >>Quote: likewise understanding cannot of its own nature determine an object as impermanent, etc., but with applied thought with its characteristic of focusing the mind and its function of striking and threshing, as it were beating and turning over, it can take what is given and determine it. ... >applied thought, focusing the mind striking and threshing beating and turning over take what is given and determine it >Is there any way imaginable that this kind of action - applying, striking and threshing, beating and turning over, taking and determining - can take place in a single moment? .... S: Yes. Just as seeing needs contact (phassa) to experience visible object, so most other cittas, including those accompanied by pa~n~naa, need vitakka to direct them onto their objects. Very momentary:-) ... >It goes against the whole sense of this function as one that is investigating and looking into the object further in order to see its nature as impermanent etc. ... S: These are just similes and metaphors given to indicate that vitakka assists the citta 'investigate' or 'enter the palace'. forget the similes if they don't help. Actually, I remember K.Sujin saying she doesn't find similes helpful, so you'd be in good company.....if they don't help the understanding of dhammas, let them go! More to come! Metta, Sarah ====== #97676 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri May 1, 2009 12:15 am Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E (97459) > ---------------------- > > If you mean commentaries to individual suttas, there are many available from BPS ("Wheel" series, etc) and also from Wisdom, Amazon and the like. For example, "The Way of Mindfulness" is the > > Satipatthana Sutta and its commentary. > > Well I would be interested in this. Thank you. The commentary on Satipatthana Sutta would be a good place to start. Let's see if I can get permission to add yet another book to my Buddhist library. > ---------------------- Actually, this is also available on-line for downloading (although a printed copy is much easier to read and refer to, I find): http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wayof.html > ---------------------- > > If you'd like an overview of the whole Theravada perspective, you might like to consider something like Visuddhimagga or the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, both of which are in effect compilations of all 3 pitakas and their commentaries. > > I think the Sangaha is online, and I think I have a downloaded copy of the Vism as well. I will have to learn to read.... > ---------------------- I think you may be mistaking something else for the Vism, which is not available for downloading. It is a hefty tome, and not exactly readable in the way the suttas are. But it's an excellent reference work, with lots of cross-references to sutta passages for the detail it gives. > > Hope this is helpful. > > Indeed, I appreciate it. And a very nice exchange for a Sunday. Now, off to battle sloth and torpor...... Talk to you soon. > ---------------------- My suggestions for first and second purchase would be CDB (translation of SN) and CMA (translation of Abhidhammattha Sangaha). Others will have different choices ;-)) Jon #97677 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri May 1, 2009 12:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep (& Scott), (Actually, my birthday, so a few tel. and other interruptions this end on a really beautiful sunny day and holiday here.....;-)) part 3 --- On Tue, 28/4/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >Therefore Right View only is included here in the understanding group as being of the same kind, but Right Thinking is included because of its action [of assisting]." > > >Scott: Right View is pa~n~naa cetasika. Right Thinking is vitakka cetasika. The above shows a bit of how conascent mental factors perform separate but coordinated functions, according to characteristic, .... S: Yes, and also why Right Thinking is included in the understanding group. ... >> within the whole of the moment of consciousness and directed at the same object. >Is there any reason why this cannot take place in successive moments? ... S: The cetasikas perform their various functions at a moment of consciousness. Of course, there are also successive moments when they continue to perform their functions (7 at a stretch). When we're talking about right understanding, we're referring to the 7 javana cittas in a sense door or mind door process. ... >Many of the operations of consciousness depend on accumulations. Why can't this be a process in which understanding is accumulated through Right Thought? ... S: You're right that these same javana cittas depend on accumulations. They are accumulated whenever they arise and condition further such javana cittas with understanding in future. At the same time that the understanding accumulates, so do the other accompanying factors, such as samma sankappa/vitakka (Right Thought). We can't however refer to right understanding being accumulated 'through' Right Thought unless you're referring to pariyatti (right conceptual understanding) as condition for direct understanding. This, however, is a different context. Please let us know what is not clear or doesn't make sense in this thread. Metta, Sarah ======= #97678 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri May 1, 2009 12:25 am Subject: Cittas and cetasikas (was, Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi again Robert E > Without wanting to get into a debate as to what is or is not Theravadin orthodoxy, here's a passage from CMA on the relationship between citta and cetasika: > > Ch 11, Compendium of Mental Factors > Par. 1 > > <<< > The fifty-two states associated with consciousness that arise and cease together (with consciousness), that have the same object and base (as consciousness), are known as mental factors. > > Guide to #1: > "That arise and cease together (with consciousness)": > The first verse defines the mental factors by way of four characteristics that are common to them all: > > 1) arising together with consciousness (ekuppaada) > 2) ceasing together with consciousness (ekanirodha) > 3) having the same object as consciousness (ekaalambana) > 4) having he same base as consciousness (ekavatthuka) > >>> Below are some more passages on this subject, courtesy of posts by Han (from CMA) and Sarah (Atthasalini). Jon CMA "The cetasikas are mental phenomena that occur in immediate conjunction with citta or consciousness, and assist citta by performing more specific tasks in the total act of cognition. The mental factors cannot arise without citta, nor can citta arise completely segregated from the mental factors. But though the two are functionally interdependent, citta is regarded as primary because the mental factors assist in the cognition of the object depending upon citta., which is the principal cognitive element. The relationship between citta and the cetasikas is compared to that between a king and his retinue. Although one says "the king is coming", the king does not come alone, but he always comes accompanied by his attendants. Similarly, whenever a citta arises, it never arises alone but always accompanied by its retinue of cetatsikas." [page 76 of CMA] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/83296 Atthasalini, Analysis of Terms: "But consciousness does not arise singly. Just as in saying, `the king has arrived,' it is clear that he does not come alone without his attendants, but comes attended by his retinue, so this consciousness should be understood to have arisen with more than fifty moral (mental) phenomena (pa.n.naasakusaladhammehi). But it may be said that consciousness has arisen in the sense of a forerunner (pubba"ngama.m). For in worldly phenomena consciousness (lokiya dhamma.m) is the chief, consciousness is the principal, consciousness is the forerunner. In transcendental phenomena (lokuttara.m dhamma.m), however, understanding is the chief, understanding is the principal, understanding is the forerunner." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/46575 #97679 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Fri May 1, 2009 12:40 am Subject: Fixed Views christine_fo... Hello all, Every weekend when I go to the Dhammagiri Forest Monastery, Kholo, we recite the Karaniya Metta Sutta - this version: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.amar.html I'm wondering exactly what is meant by "fixed views" at the end of the Sutta: "This is said to be the sublime abiding. By not holding to fixed views, The pure-hearted one, having clarity of vision, Being freed from all sense desires, Is not born again into this world." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.amar.html It reminds me of the sutta where Ven. Ananda is answering questions put by Kokanuda the wanderer: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.096.than.html which has always been a little unclear to me. Thoughts? metta Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- #97680 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri May 1, 2009 12:53 am Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Hi Rob Ep (& Scott), > > (Actually, my birthday, so a few tel. and other interruptions this end on a really beautiful sunny day and holiday here.....;-)) > Happy Birthday! While being an ancient, Theravada dinosaur, you still look pretty good! :-)) Metta, James #97681 From: "sprlrt" Date: Fri May 1, 2009 1:32 am Subject: Re: Five sense doors, its objects, and its consciousness sprlrt Hi Sarah, happy birthday, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Hi Alberto, > > Thanks for all the good detail. May I ask which texts you are finding most your detail in? For example, I'm interested to read about the 'single kamma' conditioning as you suggest as opposed to different kamma conditioning each single sense consciousness. It makes sense and is along the lines I've heard. > Can't give you a textual reference straight away. I think that, were it more than one single kamma conditioning the arising & falling of upadinna/kammaja rupa (eyes, ears, nose, tongue and body sense) in one's single lifetime, one's pasadas would change unpredictedly from that of a human being to that of an animal etc. And our bhavanga/life-continuum would also unpredictedly change from sahetuka kusala-vipaka citta, the result of (strong) past kusala kamma arising with alobha and adosa and possibly with panna too, to ahetuka (kusala or akusala) vipaka, without any of the three roots that distinguish humans bhumi/plane of existance and other sugati/happy ones from that of animals, dugati/unhappy ones. Alberto #97682 From: "Scott" Date: Fri May 1, 2009 4:18 am Subject: Re: Sangiiti Sutta Fours (9) scottduncan2 Dear Friends, Following on from #97499 Fours (6-8) (cy: #97549, #97560): CSCD 309. <. <. <. <. Walshe DN 33.1.11(9) 'Four Ariyan lineages (ariya-va'msa). Here, a monk (a) is content with any old robe, praises such contentment, and does not try to obtain robes improperly or unsuitably. He does not worry if he does not get a robe, and if he does, he is not full of greedy, blind desire, but makes use of it, aware of [such] dangers and wisely aware of its true purpose. Nor is he conceited about being thus content with any old robe, and he does not disparage others. And one who is thus skilful, not lax, clearly aware and mindful, [iii 225] is known as a monk who is true to the ancient, original (agga~n~ne) Ariyan lineage. Again, (b) a monk is content with any alms-food he may get ... Again, (c) a monk is content with any old lodging-place ... And again, (d) a monk, being fond of abandoning (pahaana), rejoices in abandoning, and being fond of developing (bhaavanaa), rejoices in developing, is not therefore conceited...And one who is thus skilful, not lax, clearly aware and mindful, is known as a monk who is true to the ancient, original Ariyan lineage. Olds [4.9] Four Old Time Ways of the Aristocrats: Here friends a beggar is content having anywhich robe, speaks well of contentment with anywhich robe, does not accept un-essential or unseemly robes[4.9.1]; not obtaining robes he is not dissatisfied, attaining robes he accepts and uses them without greed and infatuation, thus he guiltlessly enjoys the use thereof perceiving the possible dangers, wise to the ways things work out. Furthermore, being content having anywhich robe, he neither puts himself above nor puts down others, nor is he self satisfied at being of such respectable behavior. He indeed is one who may be called one of the Ancient, Old-Time Aristocrats. Again, friends a beggar is content having any lump-dole'd'inni-bowl, speaks well of contentment with any food put in the bowl, does not accept un-essential or unseemly food; not obtaining food he is not dissatisfied, attaining food he accepts and uses it without greed and infatuation, thus he guiltlessly enjoys the use thereof perceiving the possible dangers, wise to the ways things work out. Furthermore, being content with any handouts, he neither puts himself above nor puts down others, nor is he self-satisfied at being of such respectable behavior. He indeed is one who may be called one of the Ancient, Old-Time Aristocrats. Again, friends a beggar is content having any sit'n'sleep'n-spot, speaks well of contentment with any place to sit and sleep, does not accept un-essential or unseemly dwelling places; not obtaining lodging he is not dissatisfied, attaining shelter he accepts and uses it without greed and infatuation, thus he guiltlessly enjoys the use thereof perceiving the possible dangers, wise to the ways things work out. Furthermore, being content with any sit'n'sleep'n-spot, he neither puts himself above nor puts down others, nor is he self-satisfied at being of such respectable behavior. He indeed is one who may be called one of the Ancient, Old-Time Aristocrats. Again, friends, a beggar taking pleasure in letting go, enjoying letting go, taking pleasure in advancement, enjoying advancement and furthermore, taking pleasure in letting go, enjoying letting go, taking pleasure in advancement, enjoying advancement, he neither puts himself above nor puts down others, nor is he self-satisfied at being of such respectable behavior. He indeed is one who may be called one of the Ancient, Old-Time Aristocrats. RD's [225][4.9] Four Ariyan lineages. Herein, brethren, a brother is content with whatever robes [he may have], commends contentment of this kind, and does not try togain robes in improper unsuitable ways. And he is not dismayed if he gain no robe, but when he has gained one,he is not greedy, nor infatuated nor overwhelmed; he wears it heedful lest he incur evil and understanding its object. Finally, by this contentment as toany garment, he heither is puffed up nor disparages others. Now he that is expert, not slothful, heedful, mindful, is called, brethren, a brother who is true to the ancient distinguished lineage of the Ariyans. The same is he who is similarly content with his alms, and withhis lodging. Lastly, bethren, the brother who, having the love both of eliminating on the one hand, and of developing on the other, loves both to eliminate and to develop, in loving both, neither is puffed up, nor disparages others. He that is herein expert, not slothful, heedful, mindful, is called a brother who is true to the ancient distinguished lineage of the Ariyans. **olds: [4.9] Cattaaro ariya-va.msaa. ariya-va'nsaa: Walshe and Rhys Davids: Ariyan Lineages. PED: 1. a bamboo (mo: count the links); 2. race, lineage, family; 3. tradition, hereditary custom, usage, reputation; 4. dynasty; 5. a bamboo flute, fift; 6. a certain game (MO: some guesses have been: playing a toy flute, a game called tip-cat where you hit a stick with a stick trying to keep it moving along end on end, possibly pick-up-sticks, possibly walking on stilts, or balancing a bamboo pole in the air endwise) [4.9.1] Such as robes made of silk that involve the death of many creatures, very fine robes, or robes offered as a consequence of pressure (hints) either applied by someone else or by the beggar himself at an earlier time. Sincerely, Scott, connie, Nina. #97683 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri May 1, 2009 4:29 am Subject: Re: Fixed Views jonoabb Hi Chris --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > Hello all, > > Every weekend when I go to the Dhammagiri Forest Monastery, Kholo, we recite the Karaniya Metta Sutta - this version: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.amar.html > > I'm wondering exactly what is meant by "fixed views" at the end of the Sutta: > > "This is said to be the sublime abiding. > By not holding to fixed views, > The pure-hearted one, having clarity of vision, > Being freed from all sense desires, > Is not born again into this world." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.amar.html The term "fixed views" here seems to be a translation of the Pali "ditthi" and so refers to wrong view. In the commentary to this stanza (Paramatthajotika, trans. by Nanamoli as "The Illustrator of Ultimate Meaning") it explains that "lovingkindness is near to [wrong] view of self because it thas creatures for its object". It then explains that the person who understands nama as nama and rupa as rupa avoids falling into wrong view, and eventually attains enlightenment. So these lines are a referecne to the development of insight. Hope this makes sense. Jon #97684 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri May 1, 2009 1:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The 10 future Buddhas! upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 4/30/2009 6:24:28 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, I'm not very interested in concepts or stories. Even stories told in the suttas don't interest me very much in their own right. I am more interested in the dhammas they indirectly describe. But, even so: ------- Ven S: > > ALL Sammasam-Buddhas and Pacceka-Buddhas arise in middle India. Howard: > I consider that to be nonsense, and I entirely disbelieve it. ------- I wonder if that is the right attitude to take. We've discussed it a few times over the years, and I have always given the example of the parallel universe theory. (As I understand the theory, the possibility of there being just a single universe is extremely unlikely. Much more likely is that there is an infinitely large number of universes, each a slight variation of our own. And for every one of those universes there is an infinitely large number of universes that are slight variations of it (and so on ad infinitum.) The parallel universe theory might not be a helpful one from our perspective, but I don't think any scientifically minded person would call it nonsense and entirely disbelieve it. (The same applies to the Big-Bang-Big-Crunch theory.) ------------------------------------------- Boy, for someone who's not interested in stories! In any case, Ken, I would make two points: 1) I see no hint at all that a parallel-universe notion is implied. And multiple big bangs (the "breath of Brahma") was the cosmology of the time. Also, trotting out the parallel universe story as an explanation is as good as nothing, because it can provide an explanation of virtually anything one can concoct. 2) "The right attitude to TAKE"??? Ken, are you suggesting control? In any case, it is simply the truth that I am telling when I say that I do not believe that the earth and all it's countries (the same land masses as now) will be recreated again and again with each new big bang, with the same languages being spoken(!) (even assuming that the multiple big-bang theory is a correct story), and I do not believe that Buddhas will appear only in "the India of the time." Note, though, that I don't say that I KNOW what is the case, and I do not say that these claims are false. I say that I don't believe them, a simple statement of fact. Should I say that I DO believe it when I do NOT? I also don't believe that the first people appeared in the Garden of Eden or that the ten commandments were handed down by a thunder god on Mount Sinai or that the wonderful teacher called "Jesus of Nazareth" was the "only begotten son of God." Every religion in the world, with the exception of Buddhism (and somewhat also Judaism) says that one must believe, and chastises as infidels those who do not. Even that kind man Jesus spoke of "Ye with little faith"! --------------------------------------------- More to the point, the same appluies the 'Buddhas originating only from India' theory. Until it contradicts what we know to be true shouldn't we just leave the possibility open? ------------------------------------------------------ I am foreclosing no possibilities. --------------------------------------------------- We could follow examples from the suttas and simply say, "Maybe so, . . . maybe so." ---------------------------------------------------- Maybe so, sure, unless a physical or logical impossibility. However, it is also *possible* that I was an adopted Martian child and that Zoroastrianism was the only true religion in the world - but I don't believe these to be the case. --------------------------------------------------- Ken H =========================== With metta, Howard Safeguarding the Truth /There are five things that can turn out in two ways in the here-&-now. Which five? Conviction, liking, unbroken tradition, reasoning by analogy, & an agreement through pondering views. These are the five things that can turn out in two ways in the here-&-now. Now some things are firmly held in conviction and yet vain, empty, & false. Some things are not firmly held in conviction, and yet they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. Some things are well-liked... truly an unbroken tradition... well-reasoned... Some things are well-pondered and yet vain, empty, & false. Some things are not well-pondered, and yet they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. In these cases it isn't proper for a knowledgeable person who safeguards the truth to come to a definite conclusion, 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless." "If a person has conviction, his statement, 'This is my conviction,' safeguards the truth." "If a person likes something... holds an unbroken tradition... has something reasoned through analogy... has something he agrees to, having pondered views, his statement, 'This is what I agree to, having pondered views,' safeguards the truth."/ (Selected from the Canki Sutta, MN 95) #97685 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri May 1, 2009 5:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The 10 future Buddhas! buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ---------------------------------------------------- > Maybe so, sure, unless a physical or logical impossibility. However, > it is also *possible* that I was an adopted Martian child Okay, now I totally believe that one; and it explains so much!! :-)) Metta, James #97686 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri May 1, 2009 1:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The 10 future Buddhas! upasaka_howard Hi, James - > Maybe so, sure, unless a physical or logical impossibility. However, > it is also *possible* that I was an adopted Martian child Okay, now I totally believe that one; and it explains so much!! :-)) ---------------------------------------- LOLOL!!!! -------------------------------------- Metta, James ====================== Klaatu barada nikto! With Martian metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97687 From: "connie" Date: Fri May 1, 2009 8:17 am Subject: Re: effort nichiconn dear hoping to read the Visuddhimagga, If you read English &/or Chinese, you might want to take a look at thepathofpurification.blogspot.com -- just below the image of the front cover. Please consider listening to the lectures as well. peace, connie RE: > I think the Sangaha is online, and I think I have a downloaded copy of the Vism as well. I will have to learn to read.... > ---------------------- JA: I think you may be mistaking something else for the Vism, which is not available for downloading. It is a hefty tome, and not exactly readable in the way the suttas are. But it's an excellent reference work, with lots of cross-references to sutta passages for the detail it gives. #97688 From: "szmicio" Date: Fri May 1, 2009 1:46 pm Subject: characteristic of thinking szmicio Dear friends, We are so attached to outer world of people and things. Best wishes Lukas #97689 From: "gazita2002" Date: Fri May 1, 2009 3:40 pm Subject: Re: The 10 future Buddhas! gazita2002 hallo Bhante, Howard and others, As you suggest, dry intellectualism is pointless and just leads to the same. Unless there is deep knowledge of presently arising dhammas: citta, cetasika and rupa then there will be endless speculation of the past, the future and even the present. the present is conditioned by the past and the future will also be conditioned by the past and the present [which very quickly becomes the past due to anicca] there will be future Buddhas, which in reallity are citta, cetasika and rupa, I have no doubt, and I must admit that I do have a big wish to be in the front row to listen to these Buddhas. :-) patience, courage and good cheer, azita #97690 From: "gazita2002" Date: Fri May 1, 2009 3:52 pm Subject: Re: characteristic of thinking gazita2002 hallo Lukas, Nice comment and I want to add that we are also very attached to the inner world of 'me, mine and myself'. I think its true to say that the biggest attachment is to our very own existence. I believe its only at the time of arahant that all attachment to self is extinguished. If there were no attachment to 'me,mine,myself' then the outer world of people and things would be of no concern. Patience, courage and good cheer azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "szmicio" wrote: > > Dear friends, > > We are so attached to outer world of people and things. > > Best wishes > Lukas > #97691 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri May 1, 2009 4:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The 10 future Buddhas! kenhowardau Hi Howard, I would like to make clear that I was not recommending the Parallel Universe theory or the Big Bang theory as ways of explaining the Dhamma. Without any reference to Buddhism at all, I just meant that reasonable people would not dismiss those theories as "nonsense that they entirely disbelieved." After all, there are top-level physicists who take them very seriously, so who are we to dismiss them? Having made (or tried to make) that point I then carried it over to Dhamma study. There is no need to reject or accept conventional stories told in the suttas. Only dhammas can be understood as ultimately real or ultimately unreal - ultimately true or ultimately false. Stories about people and places are just stories. Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > Boy, for someone who's not interested in stories! In any case, Ken, I > would make two points: > 1) I see no hint at all that a parallel-universe notion is implied. > And multiple big bangs (the "breath of Brahma") was the cosmology of the > time. Also, trotting out the parallel universe story as an explanation is as > good as nothing, because it can provide an explanation of virtually anything > one can concoct. #97692 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri May 1, 2009 4:29 pm Subject: Understand the 3 Basics! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: What is Right Understanding of the 3 Facts! The Blessed Buddha once said: It is impossible, Bhikkhu and Friends, and cannot ever happen, that one possessed of right understanding should ever regard any phenomenon as really permanent ... or any phenomenon as lasting happiness ... or any state as an identical, same, and own self... But it is quite possible, that the ordinary worldling may indeed have, entertain and act upon such naive and distorted beliefs...! <...> Source: Numerical Discourses of the Buddha. Anguttara Nikaya AN 15:1-3 http://What-Buddha-Said.net/Canon/Sutta/AN/Index.Numerical.htm Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄhita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Understand the 3 Basics! #97693 From: "bhikkhu.samahita" Date: Fri May 1, 2009 4:45 pm Subject: Re: The 10 future Buddhas! bhikkhu.sama... Hey gazita2002 who wrote: > there will be future Buddhas, which in reality are > citta, cetasika and rupa, The Buddhas range cannot be imagined! They 'are' - not of this world - They 'are' beyond that... Out of range so to speak! Immeasurable... Samahita ;-) #97694 From: "bhikkhu.samahita" Date: Fri May 1, 2009 5:12 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The 10 future Buddhas! bhikkhu.sama... > Howard: > > Apparently 1) that it is all already determined who > > they are - so, no new Buddha's-to-be coming up for trillions > upon trillions of years, Not so, friends! Bodhisattas are generated any time one qualified male makes the bodhisatta wish in front of a Sammasambuddha. So Bodhisattas are generated continuously. Many more that 10 are waiting in line for their turn to bloom into enlightenment... When Gotama Buddha made his wish at Buddha Dipankara's feet, there were 23 Buddhas in line before he awakened! They were named: Kondañña, Mangala, Sumana, Revata, Sobhita, AnomadassÄ«, Paduma, NÄrada, Padumuttara, Sumedha, SujÄta, PiyadassÄ«, AtthadassÄ«, DhammadassÄ«, Siddhattha, Tissam, Phussa, VÄ«passÄ«, SikhÄ«, VessabhÅ« and in this same universe: # Kakusandha # KonÄgamana # Kassapa The lives of these are all described in the Canonical Buddhavamsa: The Chronicle af past Buddhas. http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/b/buddhavamsa.htm The qualifications to be a Boddhisatta are that one is: * (1) a human being, * (2) a male, * (3) sufficiently developed to become an arahant in that very birth, * (4) a recluse at the time of the declaration, * (5) he should declare his resolve before a Buddha, * (6) should be possessed of attainments such as the jhÄnas, * (7) be prepared to sacrifice all, even life, and * (8) his resolution should be absolutely firm and unwavering. For details see: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/b/bodhisatta.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/b/buddha.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/d/diipankara.htm The next Buddha, which is the last in this universe is Metteyya: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/me_mu/metteyya.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/Metteyya/arimet00.htm #97695 From: "szmicio" Date: Sat May 2, 2009 12:28 am Subject: Re: characteristic of thinking szmicio Dear Azita > Nice comment and I want to add that we are also very attached to the inner world of 'me, mine and myself'. L: In Visuhimagga there was said: "Inner jungle, outer jungle, people are entangled in the jungle, And so I ask [the] Gotama, who could clear away this jungle? (S.i,13) This was the question asked. The precis is that the tangled jungle is the name of ta.nhaa [craving], with its entangling network. Truly, ta.nhaa is called tangled because it is like a jungle; a network of branches as in a bamboo cluster tangle bound since it arises again and again in ara.mma.nas [objects] such as the ruupa, evolving with both the superior and inferior ones. Therefore, ta.nhaa is called both inner and outer jungle since it arises both for one's own and others' belongings, both in one's own and others' beings, both at the inner and outer aayatanas. Thus, beings in the three worlds are entangled by the jungle. The word people intends all beings; bound, entangled by the jungle of ta.nha which is like a jungle: like a bamboo entangled in the bamboo cluster, for example. Likewise, people are entangled. Therefore, I ask the Gotama this question. He addressed the Buddha by his clan name, the Gotama. Who could clear away this entangled jungle, he asked: who could, who is capable of clearing this jungle that entangles beings in all three perpetual [planes of] existences? Thus questioned by the devaputta, the Buddha, whose ~naana [knowledge] penetrates all dhammas unimpeded, who is the deva of devas, deva over devas, sakka over sakkas, brahma over brahmas; fearless with the four vesaara.jjhanas [confidences], possessor of dassabala~nanas [10 supramundance powers], with unobstructed ~nanas and samantachakkhu [all seeing, omniscience], answered the devaputta with this gaathaa [verse]: The bhikkhu who is wise, diligent, governed by pa~n~na, and unwavering in his siila while he develops the citta and pa~n~na, would be able to clear away this tangled jungle." L: Of course there are futher explanations about that. Bhikkhu means the one who knows the bounds and dangers of samsara. dilligent points out a kind of dhammas which arise on conditions. When there is satipatthana, there are always dhammas of diligent, and those are called right effort. "He develops citta and panna" means also dhammas which do their own work. Those all are conditions for clear away this tangle jungle. Buddha knew about it and pointed us the way. That's ekayano maggo. The way of panna and awarness in daily life. Maybe anyone else can say something about indriyasamvarasiila? My best wishes Lukas #97696 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat May 2, 2009 4:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Dear Scott & all, part 1 As usual, you raise many good and deep issues... --- On Thu, 30/4/09, Scott wrote: >A 'thought', as I understand it, in its structure and as its given to experience, seems formed, whole, coherent, having meaning. It seems to be in the form of words, almost as if it is 'heard' or 'being read' in the mind. ... S: Yes, this is a good description of what is conventionally meant as 'a thought'. .... >In the same way that the experience of visible object, which is said to arise and be given to seeing consciousness one at a time, and to fall away is part of a rapid sequence of alternating dhammaa, including bhavanga, so too, I imagine, the 'thought' through the mind-door. Whereas the 'world' seems continuous and made up of coherent visible structures, people, animals, movement, sounds, smells, etc., so too 'thought' seems at least semi-continuous. .... S: Yes, as it seems. In fact what is experienced by those cittas through the mind-door is a momentarily experienced concept. ... >Does the 'thought' arise in the form we experience it? I'd suggest that a 'thought', like any other dhamma of experience, and Sarah I think you have said this, is not the whole it seems to be, but rather is part of a much more complex series of dhammaa: ... S: No, not as we think we experience it - this is a concept, a long story about the throught. In fact vitakka (and other cetasikas) touch upon the object very briefly (and even in the sense door process). Because of many, many mind-door experiences and moments of vitakka 'thinking' or directing citta onto its objects, concepts, we have the idea of thinking of people and animals as if this happened with one 'hit' of thinking. Only by directly understanding the characteristics of such thinking cittas and cetasikas (and other realities, such as seeing and hearing), can it be known what is really meant by 'thinking' and 'thought' in the Dhamma. .... >Scott: Is the coherence of a 'thought' as illusory as the apparent coherence of the rest of the external world? ... S: Yes....a long story about a thought. An illusion about an illusion! .... >Scott: Given that pa~n~naa is not present permanently, but rather, in relation to an experienced thought about the world, has already arisen and fallen away, what is it that makes the reflection 'wise' as opposed to 'unwise'? How does a right thought about dhamma relate to pa~n~naa? ... S: 'Wise' according to the sobana cetasikas which arise with the citta which 'thinks' or experiences the ideas about the world. If there is sati and other sobhana cetasikas, there is wise reflection. Usually it refers to those cittas with pa~n~naa. So pa~n~naa and vitakka in particular, assist the citta to 'think wisely' about the object. For example, there can be a 'right' or 'wrong thought' about people now as we write. It depends on whether the citta and cetasikas are kusala or akusala. ... >Sarah, you suggest: Sarah: "...there can be wise or unwise thinking about the concepts or 'wholes'. Like now as we think about the words on the screen, there can be reflection with pa~n~naa about how really there is only visible object seen or there can be ignorance and attachment. Of course, kusala and akusala cittas follow each other rapidly in succession." Scott: Here, 'reflection with pa~n~naa' implies that pa~n~naa is present as part of the moment of reflection. How does this then come to be a 'thought' about Dhamma such as you or I experience in a day? .... S: It depends on accumulated sa~n~naa, vitakka, sati, pa~n~naa and so on. This is why sa~n~naa is given as the proximate cause of sati. If there is no right remembrance of Dhamma, there is no wise reflection of it. Back again to natural decisive support condition. .... to be contd. Metta, Sarah ====== #97697 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat May 2, 2009 4:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Dear Scott (Connie, Alberto, Lukas, Ken H & all), part 2 --- On Thu, 30/4/09, Scott wrote: .... >Consider the following, from the Sammohavinodani (p.p. 140-141); this is from a section discussing the Noble Eightfold Path, and seems to be distinguishing mundane from supramundane 'thinking': >"...Then, at the moment of insight, thinking which is associated with insight arises in him effecting the destroying and the cutting away of the foundation of applied thought of sense desire through substitution by opposing qualities. Pursuing insight, he reaches the path...Thus, these, namely, thinking of renunciation and so on, are multiple in the prior stage because of the multiplicity of arising through insight and jhaana. But at the moment of the path, profitable thinking arises singly fulfilling the path factor by accomplishing non-arising because of the cutting away the foundation of the unprofitable thinking which had arisen in the three instances. This is Right Thinking." >Scott: What is the 'thinking' referred to in the above? How do you understand the notion of 'multiplicity' versus 'singly'? Again, what is a 'thought'? What is 'adverting' - is it 'thinking about'? What is the relation of the moment to the experienced 'whole thought'? Thanks for the discussion. .... S: I take 'thinking' in the above to be referring to samma sankappa, right thinking (vitakka cetasika) of the eightfold path. In this context, 'applied thought' refers to vitakka cetasika, so 'applied thought of sense desire' refers to akusala vitakka, the opposite of samma sankappa. At the moment of magga citta, when defilements are eradicated stage by stage, the factors, including samma sankappa, arise singly. This is in contrast to the multiple moments of samma sankappa arising in the development of insight and jhaana (of course not as the development of the path in the case of jhaana.) I can't see 'adverting' in the passage, so I'd need to know whether you are referring to one of the 3 kinds of manasikaara or something else. As for the relation of 'the moment to the 'whole thought'', in fact there's only ever a moment of experiencing an object, as you know. 'c-o-m-p-u-t-e-r' - many cittas, many mind-door processes, many moments of vitakka involved in the experience as we know it. There are a few topics in these two posts - pls feel free to break them up further. I'll be glad to hear yours and others' further comments. Metta, Sarah ======= #97698 From: "szmicio" Date: Sat May 2, 2009 9:01 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) szmicio Dear Sarah an friends > S: I take 'thinking' in the above to be referring to samma sankappa, right thinking (vitakka cetasika) of the eightfold path. In this context, 'applied thought' refers to vitakka cetasika, so 'applied thought of sense desire' refers to akusala vitakka, the opposite of samma sankappa. L: There are cittas which experience concepts almost all the time. But we tend to take it for ourselves, for our thinking. There is moha and ditthi.Can you say more about ditthi and moha in daily life? There is also vitaka that hits its object. No one can think or choose what he thinks. That's imposible to think when vitaka doest hit an object. Best wishes Lukas #97699 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Sat May 2, 2009 10:41 pm Subject: Re: Fixed Views christine_fo... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Chris > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > > > Hello all, > > > > Every weekend when I go to the Dhammagiri Forest Monastery, Kholo, we recite the Karaniya Metta Sutta - this version: > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.amar.html > > > > I'm wondering exactly what is meant by "fixed views" at the end of the Sutta: > > > > "This is said to be the sublime abiding. > > By not holding to fixed views, > > The pure-hearted one, having clarity of vision, > > Being freed from all sense desires, > > Is not born again into this world." > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.amar.html > > The term "fixed views" here seems to be a translation of the Pali "ditthi" and so refers to wrong view. > > In the commentary to this stanza (Paramatthajotika, trans. by Nanamoli as "The Illustrator of Ultimate Meaning") it explains that "lovingkindness is near to [wrong] view of self because it thas creatures for its object". > > It then explains that the person who understands nama as nama and rupa as rupa avoids falling into wrong view, and eventually attains enlightenment. > > So these lines are a referecne to the development of insight. > > Hope this makes sense. > > Jon > Hello Jon, Thank you for your response. Here is the Pali from the particular verse in the Metta sutta: 152. Diá¹­á¹­hiñca anupagamma sÄ«lavÄ dassanena sampanno KÄmesu vineyya gedhaṃ nahi jÄtu gabbhaseyyaṃ punaretÄ«ti. I'm wondering if it could mean "Ditthin (adj. -- n.) one who has a view, or theory, a follower of such & such a doctrine Ud 67 (evaÅ‹Ëš+evaÅ‹ vÄdin)" ~ that is, strongly adhered to views rather than simply meaning Wrong View? metta Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- #97700 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun May 3, 2009 1:25 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) kenhowardau Hi Sarah, ------------- <. . .> S: > Well put - yes, we shouldn't wonder that the Dhamma is deep and subtle... -------------- "Knowable only to the wise" is one way the suttas describe it, isn't it? And even when does it becomes know to the wise, it still remains deep and subtle by nature. I think on one occasion Ananda was rebuked by the Buddha for suggesting that it became easy. --------------------------- S: > Congratulations on the job - that was a long surfing holiday you took.... May we ask what your new title is? Does it mean we may get to see you in Bangkok next year? ---------------------------- Thanks. It's hard to explain. I was helping some friends to set up a home insulation business. There was a position created that was easy, well paid and (best of all) short term. And they offered it to me! What was supposed to be a simple task of measuring and quoting has, in practice, taken on responsibilities for sales, advertising, administration . . . Oh to be back in the surf! Ken H #97701 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun May 3, 2009 4:11 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Ken. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: Rob E. wrote: ...For instance, you cannot at > all explain how something can "repeatedly take place" in a single > moment, > ------------------------------------- > > I did try to explain, but you rejected my explanation. I have also tried > to explain how anicca was an inherent characteristic of [momentary] > dhammas. You've rejected that explanation and insisted anicca was a > concept deduced after a series of observations. > > --------------------------- > --------------------------- > > Let's take the example of "tenacity." I believe it is real. I am not > sure which paramattha dhamma could be called tenacity, but I believe one > of them could be. Therefore I believe tenacity to be a conditioned > paramattha dhamma, and, by definition, momentary. You, on the other > hand, would argue that tenacity could only be a concept deduced after a > series of observations E.g., (1) a person might be observed to be > holding an opinion . . . (2) still holding that opinion . . . (3) still > holding that opinion! Gosh, that's tenacity! Well, tenacity isn't a "reality," it is a concept used to describe a succession of events. To take human conceptualizations of the way we interpret events in the world, and to somehow magically turn them into paramatha dhammas because you "believe so," is nonsensical. I can make up a number of concepts and decide they are dhammas if I like, but there's no reason to think I am correct. Is "stick-to-itiveness" a cetasika that arises in the moment? It's similar to tenacity but a little different. Well, it is just another slightly different concept. You are taking human ideas and attributing some kind of ultimate status to them without any rhyme or reason. Because you say so? In fact tenacity is a fine example. It does take place over time. You believe you have "explained" to me how such a thing is possible, in the case of anicca, but you did not explain it. An explanation lays out the mechanics of something. You don't seem to know the difference between a claim and an explanation. When you claim something, you then have to give evidence. But you don't have to do that, because you have your default interpretation of the "holy word" of the Abhidhamma. Belief in a system is no substitute for evidence. Anicca is not a weird idea, it is one that makes sense. It means that things are temporary and thus undependable and unsatisfying. There's nothing esoteric about that; it's a fine and astute observation of the Buddha and a philosophical stand on reality. If you contemplate anicca in this way you realize that life is not worth clinging to; it is going to change on you and can't be depended on. That's a pretty good start! Then you can eventually see this more and more directly with panna. All fine! But then you come along and insist on changing this fine and understandable doctrine - true on its face - into an esoteric object that doesn't make any sense. It MUST appear in the moment as an 'inherent characeristic,' even though you have no idea what that means or how it would appear or what it would appear as. How does the "temporariness" of dhammas appear in "one moment." You have no idea! But that won't stop you from claiming it. How absurd. I have a lot of respect for the wisdom of the Abhidhamma, but I don't much care for it as a dogma, or as a substitute for intelligence. There is no reason to make higher understanding the enemy of reason, none at all. I gave a perfectly workable explanation of how characteristics that appear 'over time' can fit into the "single moment" nature of ultimate realities, and it doesn't violate anything in the text, which never states that anicca is known by panna in a single moment - show me where it does - or that the "turning over" and "beating" function of the "knowing" cetasika that assists panna takes place "in a single moment." The text doesn't claim this at all. My explanation which makes use of the accumulation and passing along of information from one citta to the next - a normal and acknowledged part of the pattern of single cittas that arise in a sequential group - to allow vicara or vipaka to take several strikes at the dhamma during its changing cycle and report those changes to the citta of the moment, which passes it on to the next. This kind of thing takes place in Abhidhamma explanation all the time, yet you reject the idea for no good reason, even though the text says clearly that it is the observation of the element of change of the dhamma that allows panna to understand anicca directly. The element of change is the difference registered in the dhamma from one point of time to the next. The Abhidhamma speaks about the changing nature of the dhamma as it rises, persists and then falls away, and that it is this changing nature of the dhamma that demonstrates anicca. So why not use your common sense and look at this pattern and the repeated strikings at the object in a way that does justice to the obvious meaning of the Abhidhamma itself? Instead you use a superficial clinging to the idea that EVERYTHING must be there in each single moment, which I don't believe is ever stated in either the Abhidhamma or the commentaries. If you think I am overgeneralizing, then find me a single statement that says that anicca is present in all its glory in one moment and totally discerned by one single citta. I doubt you will find it, as it contradicts the texts we have been recently citing. > I think your approach to the Abhidhamma will have the same consequences > no matter which conditioned dhamma is considered. It will not allow you > to see how a dhamma could be a reality existing for just one moment. I don't think you will ever be able to see the actuality of how these processes take place as long as you cling to the idea that the single moment contains everything at once, even though the whole system of Abhidhamma rests on how accumulations are developed from one citta to the next and how various functions arise in patterns of cittas with corresponding cetasikas and *not* on any one single citta. Your view of the single citta is superficial and doesn't take account of the beauty of the patterns of rising and falling, communicating and cooperating patterns of cittas and cetasikas. > I'd better post this now and try to respond to the rest of your message > later. I seem to have gone from one extreme to another - lazy > beachcomber to non-stop worker. > > Time is money! :-) Ha ha, well that is true. But it's also true that money is temporary, while beach combing is forever! :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #97702 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun May 3, 2009 4:27 am Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: :-) Desperately seeking would be pretty akusala, but the function of vitakka as 'thrashing' its object is very, very common and need not be akusala! Yes, no wonder dhammas are said to be 'oppressed' - arising, being thrashed and more and then falling away instantly:-). :-) > Think of a citta (a moment of consciousness) experiencing its object, but only with the assistance of other factors to contact, focus on, lay hold of/thrash, feel, attend to and so on. Apart from a few specific cittas, mainly the sense experiencing cittas such as seeing and hearing which don't need the assistance of vitakka to direct (or lead) the citta onto its object, all other cittas do need this assistance. In the Atthasalini, the simile is given of someone wanting to enter the king's palace, but needing the assistance of a someone close to the king to do this. Thank you, that is helpful; though I am still wanting an understanding of how the "beating" function takes place in time - whether its findings are passed along from one citta to the next... > I need to get a drink after just returning from the beach, so will post this and get back to the rest in a minute. Duly noted; I am sorry you are suffering on the beach, while I am content here at my desk among my piles of "accumulations" which I am sorting out. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #97703 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun May 3, 2009 4:36 am Subject: Cittas and cetasikas (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > Guide to #1: > "That arise and cease together (with consciousness)": > The first verse defines the mental factors by way of four characteristics that are common to them all: > > 1) arising together with consciousness (ekuppaada) > 2) ceasing together with consciousness (ekanirodha) > 3) having the same object as consciousness (ekaalambana) > 4) having he same base as consciousness (ekavatthuka) > >>> This is a good piece of information, thanks. > > > ---------------------- > > > I have no idea as to the mechanics of the matter, as this is not explained in any of the texts I've read. > > > > Well, that is interesting, in so detailed a teaching. That is too bad. > > > > That is like saying that we know which pipes are connected in the plumbing but we have no idea how they get put together. > > ---------------------- > > Whether that's a bad thing or not depends on the objective. I suppose. But if you want to know how things work, you need to have a view of the mechanism, do you not? This pariyatti business is beginning to seem rather thready to me. I mean, to have a decent intellectual understanding of something you have to have a vision of how the whole thing works, don't you? I hope I'm not going to wind up with the impression that the "glue" that holds the whole works together is just a lot of faith with a spotty amount of actual understanding.... > > ---------------------- > > > Investigation would have to begin, I think, by finding out what the texts have to say on the subject. There is simply no way that a matter as detailed as this (cetasikas arising together with the citta and thus simultaneously) could be investigated by direct experience. > > > > Then how was it determined in the first place? I assume an arahant could directly experience this taking place and thus was able to write it down? > > ---------------------- > > It is capable of verification by direct experience, but it requires panna of a sufficiently high level. Thus, not capable of investigation by the likes of you and me ;-)) is what I meant. Hmn...Well I appreciate your including me in the same group as yourself. I mean, I may be too ignorant to know a cetasika when I see one, but at least I'm not completely oblivous. Or am I..... Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #97704 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun May 3, 2009 4:43 am Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: These are just similes and metaphors given to indicate that vitakka assists the citta 'investigate' or 'enter the palace'. forget the similes if they don't help. Actually, I remember K.Sujin saying she doesn't find similes helpful, so you'd be in good company.....if they don't help the understanding of dhammas, let them go! Well....It seems to me that the wise writers of these commentaries would not use so many similes with a consistent sort of action implied if it was totally off the mark, and not at all relevant. I would really like to see a detailed description of how vitakka works; you know, the kind they have for the dhamma - seven cittas of this, seven of that - something that is precise enough to remove doubt about the process. Something like that must exist somewhere..... I mean, as you say, lifetimes of cittas are necessary to develop the panna to go from level A to level B, etc., so there is a process of investigating and growing wiser and clearer that is passed along. I don't see why vitakka can't do the same with its repeated beatings and turnings. I'd like to find out in any case. I have an instinctive idea of how this can work, but I can't convince anyone I'm right. :( Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #97705 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun May 3, 2009 4:53 am Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (97459) > > ---------------------- > > > If you mean commentaries to individual suttas, there are many available from BPS ("Wheel" series, etc) and also from Wisdom, Amazon and the like. For example, "The Way of Mindfulness" is the > > > Satipatthana Sutta and its commentary. > > > > Well I would be interested in this. Thank you. The commentary on Satipatthana Sutta would be a good place to start. Let's see if I can get permission to add yet another book to my Buddhist library. > > ---------------------- > > Actually, this is also available on-line for downloading (although a printed copy is much easier to read and refer to, I find): > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wayof.html Well thank you very much! This looks like it will be a good work for me to go through. Of course I will have to recall how to read, and then practice.... > > ---------------------- > > > If you'd like an overview of the whole Theravada perspective, you might like to consider something like Visuddhimagga or the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, both of which are in effect compilations of all 3 pitakas and their commentaries. > My suggestions for first and second purchase would be CDB (translation of SN) and CMA (translation of Abhidhammattha Sangaha). Others will have different choices ;-)) Thank you for the suggestions. I may wait a bit before getting more material, as I am somewhat overwhelmed, but I appreciate the suggestions for the future. I have taken a look at the Sangaha online, and for now will consult the online version. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #97706 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun May 3, 2009 5:01 am Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > (Actually, my birthday, so a few tel. and other interruptions this end on a really beautiful sunny day and holiday here.....;-)) Happy Birthday, how nice! > S: You're right that these same javana cittas depend on accumulations. They are accumulated whenever they arise and condition further such javana cittas with understanding in future. At the same time that the understanding accumulates, so do the other accompanying factors, such as samma sankappa/vitakka (Right Thought). We can't however refer to right understanding being accumulated 'through' Right Thought unless you're referring to pariyatti (right conceptual understanding) as condition for direct understanding. This, however, is a different context. Hmn....well I am happy to hear about the javana cittas working in groups of 7 and accumulating understanding, as well as vitakka and other factors. That gives a bit of the structure of what I was thinking of. Thanks. On the working of vitakka w/panna, how would the repeated actions of vitakka accumulate? Is there a way for me to get a better picture of this? The image I have of it is that vitakka takes a hit at the dhamma and feeds its finding to panna at that moment, then in a successive moment hits at the dhamma again and adds this to the current moment of panna; ie, there's been an accumulation passed on of a bit more knowledge to panna between the first arisen vitakka factor and the next. Would that make sense of the operation? Thanks, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #97707 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat May 2, 2009 11:44 pm Subject: Divine Guiding! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: The 10 Contemplations is Daily Buddhist Routine! The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus & friends: There is one contemplation, which when often practised and developed leads to the complete turning away from the world, to detachment, to stilling, to ceasing, to Peace , to final penetrating knowledge, to Enlightenment , and thus to NibbÄna ... Any Noble Disciple, who by progress have understood the Dhamma, dwells frequently in this state. Which is that unique contemplation? The Noble Disciple contemplates on the divine beings : There are the divine beings on the plane of the Four Great Kings, the divine beings of the World of the Thirty-three, Yama World , the Content Devas , those enjoying own creation, those with power over others creations, those of the Brahma world, and those still far above them... Now, such faith, morality, knowledge, generosity, concentration & understanding, which these divine beings acted upon & which made them re-appear on a divine plane after leaving this world, such good qualities as these, are also found in me! When a fine Noble Disciple reflects thus, his mind is neither obsessed by any greed, nor by any hate, nor by any confusion! Uplifted and elated is his mind, and this makes the Noble Disciple gain further deeper understanding of the Dhamma, and thus makes the Noble Disciple delight in the Dhamma! Being delighted, there arises rapturous joy in him. Being filled with rapture and joy, he is inwardly satisfied and he becomes quite calm. Being calmed makes him enjoy bliss & happiness and the mind of the Happy One becomes collected, condensed and concentrated... Of this Noble Disciple, friends, it is said that among many misguided humans, among suffering humankind, he lives freed from suffering! And as one who has entered the stream to NibbÄna , he cultivates his contemplation. When, friends, a Noble Disciple has reached the fruit of understanding the Dhamma, he dwells often in this state! Source: AN 6:10 <..> Have a nice divine day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄhita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Divine Guiding! #97708 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun May 3, 2009 8:46 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) kenhowardau Hi Robert E, ---------- <. . .> RE: > Well, tenacity isn't a "reality," it is a concept used to describe a succession of events. To take human conceptualizations of the way we interpret events in the world, and to somehow magically turn them into paramatha dhammas because you "believe so," is nonsensical. I can make up a number of concepts and decide they are dhammas if I like, but there's no reason to think I am correct. Is "stick-to-itiveness" a cetasika that arises in the moment? It's similar to tenacity but a little different. Well, it is just another slightly different concept. You are taking human ideas and attributing some kind of ultimate status to them without any rhyme or reason. Because you say so? ---------------- Don't hold back, Rob. :-)　 I should have chosen a different word. "Effort" for example - in particular "the effort to maintain wholesome states" - would have been a good one. "Patience" would have been another good one. The texts make clear which paramattha dhammas perform those functions (viriya and panna repectively) in their single-moment existences. You will object, "What sort of maintaining lasts for only a single moment? What sort of patience lasts for only a single moment?" But that's the way it is. :-) ------------------------ RE: > In fact tenacity is a fine example. It does take place over time. You believe you have "explained" to me how such a thing is possible, in the case of anicca, but you did not explain it. An explanation lays out the mechanics of something. You don't seem to know the difference between a claim and an explanation. When you claim something, you then have to give evidence. But you don't have to do that, because you have your default interpretation of the "holy word" of the Abhidhamma. --------------------- That's your opinion, and you are entitled to it. -------------------------- R: > Belief in a system is no substitute for evidence. Anicca is not a weird idea, it is one that makes sense. It means that things are temporary and thus undependable and unsatisfying. There's nothing esoteric about that; it's a fine and astute observation of the Buddha and a philosophical stand on reality. If you contemplate anicca in this way you realize that life is not worth clinging to; it is going to change on you and can't be depended on. -------------------------- Anicca, as taught by the Buddha, is fundamentally different from anicca (or impermanence) as it was known before he taught. (Or as it is still known to people who have not learnt the Dhamma.) That's the effect that anatta has on the world; everything must be fundamentally different from the illusory world (of atta). ------------------------------------- R: > That's a pretty good start! Then you can eventually see this more and more directly with panna. All fine! But then you come along and insist on changing this fine and understandable doctrine - true on its face - into an esoteric object that doesn't make any sense. It MUST appear in the moment as an 'inherent characeristic,' even though you have no idea what that means or how it would appear or what it would appear as. How does the "temporariness" of dhammas appear in "one moment." You have no idea! But that won't stop you from claiming it. How absurd. ---------------------------- I think I do have an idea. And so do all the other Abhidhamma enthusiasts at DSG. I am not alone in this! :-) ------------------------------------- RE: > I have a lot of respect for the wisdom of the Abhidhamma, but I don't much care for it as a dogma, or as a substitute for intelligence. There is no reason to make higher understanding the enemy of reason, none at all. I gave a perfectly workable explanation of how characteristics that appear 'over time' can fit into the "single moment" nature of ultimate realities, and it doesn't violate anything in the text, which never states that anicca is known by panna in a single moment - show me where it does - or that the "turning over" and "beating" function of the "knowing" cetasika that assists panna takes place "in a single moment." The text doesn't claim this at all. ------------------------------------- The texts most definitely do claim that all of reality (the loka) exists in a single moment. But I won't go into that just now. I would rather try to convince you of the significance of realities. If there were no realities (paramattha dhammas) there would be no absoultely real good or evil, right or wrong, pleasant or unpleasant, sweet or sour, hard or soft, tenacious or vacillating, . . . All of those things would be mere matters of opinion. That's enough to convince me that the Abhidhamma is the only teaching worth knowing. I couldn't be interested in a world in which right and wrong were just matters of opinion. What good would that be to anyone? -------------------------------- R: > My explanation which makes use of the accumulation and passing along of information from one citta to the next - a normal and acknowledged part of the pattern of single cittas that arise in a sequential group - to allow vicara or vipaka to take several strikes at the dhamma during its changing cycle and report those changes to the citta of the moment, which passes it on to the next. This kind of thing takes place in Abhidhamma explanation all the time, yet you reject the idea for no good reason, even though the text says clearly that it is the observation of the element of change of the dhamma that allows panna to understand anicca directly. --------------------------------- Your explanation is different from the Abhidhamma's, in which the whole world begins, persists and ends in a single moment. If there is no 'repeated striking' that begins, persists and ends in a single moment then there is no repeated striking at all. --------------------- RE: > The element of change is the difference registered in the dhamma from one point of time to the next. The Abhidhamma speaks about the changing nature of the dhamma as it rises, persists and then falls away, and that it is this changing nature of the dhamma that demonstrates anicca. So why not use your common sense and look at this pattern and the repeated strikings at the object in a way that does justice to the obvious meaning of the Abhidhamma itself? Instead you use a superficial clinging to the idea that EVERYTHING must be there in each single moment, which I don't believe is ever stated in either the Abhidhamma or the commentaries. If you think I am overgeneralizing, then find me a single statement that says that anicca is present in all its glory in one moment and totally discerned by one single citta. I doubt you will find it, as it contradicts the texts we have been recently citing. ------------------------ The citations are the same, but our understandings of them are different. -------------------------------- <. . .> RE: > I don't think you will ever be able to see the actuality of how these processes take place as long as you cling to the idea that the single moment contains everything at once, even though the whole system of Abhidhamma rests on how accumulations are developed from one citta to the next and how various functions arise in patterns of cittas with corresponding cetasikas and *not* on any one single citta. Your view of the single citta is superficial and doesn't take account of the beauty of the patterns of rising and falling, communicating and cooperating patterns of cittas and cetasikas. ----------------------- I think I know what you are talking about: Howard sometimes refers to them as "complex networks of interrelated namas and rupas." And you are right, I don't believe in them. :-) Ken H #97709 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun May 3, 2009 9:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The 10 future Buddhas! sarahprocter... Dear Friends, I'd like to also requote a couple of passages from my earlier messages: S: >Universal Buddhas only arise in the human realm and only one in each Buddha era. Therefore, there will be no Metteya Buddha until the teachings of Gotama have become completely extinct. I think you may be interested to read the following and also ch 69 on 'World Cycles' from the same text (too much to quote in one post): http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/bits/index.htm http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/bits/bits002.htm "§ 2. A LIST OF FORMER BUDDHAS. Translated from the Introduction to the Jaataka (i.4328). Now in the same world-cycle that saw Diipamkara, The One Possessing the Ten Forces, there were also three other Buddhas; but as none of them prophesied concerning the Future Buddha, I have not mentioned them. In the Commentary, however, all the Buddhas are mentioned from the beginning of that world-cycle on, as follows:-- 247. "Tanhamkara, Medhamkara, And also Saranamkara, Dîpamkara, the Buddha great, Konda~n~na, of all men the chief, 248. "Ma~gala, and Sumana too, Revata, Sobhita, the sage, Anomadassi, Paduma, Nârada, Padumuttara, 249. "Sumedha, and Sujaata too, Piyadassi, the glorious one, Atthadassi, Dhammadassi, Siddhattha, guide of every man, 250. "Tissa, Phussa, the Buddha great, Vipassi, Sikkhi, Vessabhuu, Kakusandha, Konaagamana, Kassapa also, guide for men,-- 251. "All these aforetime Buddhas were, Tranquil, from every passion free. And like the sun, the many-rayed, They chased away the darkness dense, And having flamed like tongues of fire, Became extinct with all their train." Our Future Buddha, in his passage through four immensities and a hundred thousand world-cycles to the present time, p. 33 [J.i.4415 has made his wish under twenty-four of these Buddhas beginning with Dîpamkara. But since Kassapa, The Blessed One, there has been no Supreme Buddha excepting our present one. Accordingly, our Future Buddha has received recognition at the hands of twenty-four Buddhas beginning with Diipamkara." ***** "§ 3. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF A FUTURE BUDDHA. Translated from the Introduction to the Jaataka (i.4420). "A human being, male of sex, Who saintship gains, a Teacher meets, As hermit lives, and virtue loves, Nor lacks resolve, nor fiery zeal, Can by these eight conditions joined, Make his most earnest wish succeed," These eight conditions were all united in him when he made his earnest wish at the feet of Diipamkara, saying,-- "Come now! I'll search that I may find Conditions which a Buddha make." Thereupon, putting forth a strenuous effort,--as it is said,-- "And then I searched, and found the First Perfection, which consists in alms,"-- he discovered, not only the perfection which is called alms, but also all the others that go to make a Buddha. And in fulfilling them he reached his Vessantara existence.1 In so doing, all the blessings celebrated in the following stanzas as belonging to Future Buddhas who make the earnest wish were attained by him:-- p. 34 [J.i.4429 252. "Such men in every virtue trained, And destined for the Buddhaship, In all their weary rounds of birth, Though cycle-millions come and go, 253. "Are never born inside of hell, Nor in the intermundane voids. They never share the Manes' thirst, Their hunger or ferocity, And though sometimes of low estate, Are never of the insect class. 254. "When they appear among mankind, 'T is not as blind from birth they come, Deafness they never have to bear, Nor dumbness have they to endure. 255. "They're never of the female sex, Nor as hermaphrodites appear, As eunuchs are they never classed, Those destined for the Buddhaship. 256. "From all the five great crimes exempt, And pure in all their walks in life, They follow not vain heresy, For well they know how karma works. 257. "Though in the heavens they may be born, Yet ne'er 'mongst those perception-reft; Nor are they destined to rebirth 'Mongst dwellers in the Pure Abodes. 258. "These pleasure-abnegating men Live unattached in every birth, And ever toil to help the world; While all perfections they fulfil."< ======== Metta, Sarah ======== #97710 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun May 3, 2009 9:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The 10 future Buddhas! sarahprocter... Dear Friends, S:> A few more details on the conditions for becoming a Bodhisatta and the reasons for time, place and family for the birth of the future Buddha: ***** Conditions for becoming a Bodhisatta: http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/bits/bits001.htm Jaataka, vol. i., p. 14, l. 20: 1.- human being 2.- male 3.- only one who is capable of enlightenment in the life he makes the wish 4.- wish only in the presence of a living Buddha 5.- only a recluse or monk (not a layman) 6.- only one who has attained all jhanas and powers 7.- firm resolve and 'ready to sacrifice his life for The Buddhas' 8.- determination to develop paramis and qualities of a Buddha 9.- able to endure extraordinary and unbelievable hardship ***** Reasons for the time, place, family and mother of the future Buddha (last life time) http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/bits/bits004.htm 1.- right time when length of life is between 100 and 100,000 years. At the time, the lives were 100 yrs, so it was right. Longer than 100,000 yrs and it’s impossible for beings to appreciate impermanence. "Also it is not the right time when men's lives are less than a hundred years. And why is it not the right time? Because mortals are then exceedingly corrupt; and an exhortation given to the exceedingly corrupt makes no impression, but, like a mark drawn with a stick on the surface of the water, it immediately disappears. This, therefore, also is not the right time." 2.- right continent is India. Buddhas are only ever born in India. 3.- right place is the Middle Country for the same reason. (Lumbini falls in this area). "In this country are born The Buddhas, the Private Buddhas, the Chief Disciples, the Eighty Great Disciples, the Universal Monarch, and other eminent ones, magnates of the warrior caste, of the Brahman caste, and the wealthy householders. 'And in it is this city called Kapilavatthu,' thought he, and concluded that there he ought to be born." 4.- right family is the Sakkyan clan " 'The Buddhas,' thought he, 'are never born into a family of the peasant caste, or of the servile caste; but into one of the warrior caste, or of the Brahman caste, whichever at the time is the higher in public estimation. The warrior caste is now the higher in public estimation. I will be born into a warrior family, and king Suddhodana shall be my father.' Thus he decided on the family." 5.- right mother is Maha Maya "Then he made the observation concerning the mother. 'The mother of a Buddha," thought he, "is never a wanton, nor a drunkard, but is one who has fulfilled the perfections through a hundred thousand cycles, and has kept the five precepts unbroken from the day of her birth. Now this queen Mahâ-Mâyâ is such a one; and she shall be my mother.' " p. 42 [J.i.4928]< ***** Metta, Sarah ==== #97711 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun May 3, 2009 9:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Need help in Citta Yamaka sarahprocter... Dear Chew & Nina, --- On Mon, 20/4/09, Nina van Gorkom wrote: <...>>Itaresaṃ cittassa uppÄdakkhaṇe tesaṃ cittaṃ > uppajjati na nirujjhati, nirujjhissati ceva uppajjissati ca. -------- >N: ....for others at the arising of consciousness for them citta arises, does not cease, but will cease and will arise again. .... S: I like the way we're reminded of citta arising, falling and arising again, on and on until the end of the arahat's life. No possibility of a 'bardo' or 'blank period'. Cittas succeed each other by anantara paccaya. ... N:> We are reminded of the arising and ceasing of citta now, such as seeing. The moment of arising is not the moment of it ceasing, but it will cease, it is impermanent. These repetitions are very useful to remind us of the truth. We are in the cycle of birth and death, we are not arahats. Thus, there will be arising and ceasing of citta all the time. If we do not apply the Yamaka now the study of it is not very fruitful. .... S: A very good comment at the end. Yes, without the application and development of sati now, it can be referred to as just a 'valley of dry bones' like any other academic text can be. With the development of sati and pa~n~naa, it refers (as you say, Nina), to this very moment of seeing or hearing, assisting us to understand more about the realities which make up our lives, our days, these very moments of experience. The theory and practice have to be in accord. Looking forward to any further passages you care to share, Chew. Metta, Sarah ========= #97712 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun May 3, 2009 12:05 pm Subject: Re: Fixed Views jonoabb Hi Chris (97699) > ---------------------- > Thank you for your response. Here is the Pali from the particular verse in the Metta sutta: > > 152. Diá¹­á¹­hiñca anupagamma sÄ«lavÄ dassanena sampanno > KÄmesu vineyya gedhaṃ nahi jÄtu gabbhaseyyaṃ punaretÄ«ti. > > I'm wondering if it could mean "Ditthin (adj. -- n.) one who has a view, or theory, a follower of such & such a doctrine Ud 67 (evaÅ‹Ëš+evaÅ‹ vÄdin)" ~ that is, strongly adhered to views rather than simply meaning Wrong View? > ---------------------- Here is some more from the commentary to this stanza: <<< And now, since lovingkindness is near to [wrong] view of self because it has creatures for its object, he [the Blessed One] therefore completed the teaching with the following stanza But he that traffics not with views Is virtuous with perfected seeing Till, purged of greed for sense-desires He will surely come no more to any womb. He did this as a preventative against [their straying into] the thicket of [speculative] views (see M. i. 8) by showing those bhikkhus how the Noble Plane is reached through making that same loving-kindness jhana the basis for insight. >>> So what is being referred to here is the development of insight with jhana as basis. I'm not much good at Pali, but the translation you quote for "ditthin" of "one who has a view, or theory, a follower of such & such a doctrine" seems to fit. This would mean any person in whom wrong view had not been eradicated. I'm not sure about the idea of strongly adhered to views, as opposed to any instance of wrong view. But I would say it makes no practical difference, since every person who has not eradicated wrong view is potentially capable of a moment of strongly adhering to wrong view. Jon #97713 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun May 3, 2009 12:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- On Sun, 3/5/09, szmicio wrote: >L: There are cittas which experience concepts almost all the time. But we tend to take it for ourselves, for our thinking. There is moha and ditthi.Can you say more about ditthi and moha in daily life? ... S: I think you just did:-). I heard a good comment on a tape last night about how when there's awareness of a reality, such as seeing or visible object, there's no uneasiness, no concerns. These just arise on account of the thinking of various concepts, usually with moha. Ditthi only arises with particular kinds of attachment, such as when we take dhammas for ourselves. It can only be known when it arises. When there is the development of satipatthana, there's less and less concern about whether it's pleasant or unpleasant feeling being experienced, right view or wrong view - any dhamma can be known as it is, just a conditioned dhamma. ... >There is also vitaka that hits its object. No one can think or choose what he thinks. That's imposible to think when vitaka doest hit an object. .... S: Well said. Yes, no one can determine what vitakka will hit next. It's only when we think of a conventional story about 'thinking' and 'thought' that there is an idea of being able to decide what to think about or do next. Metta, Sarah p.s btw, when you have any idea of your travel plans to Bkk/Asia, pls let me know here or off-list, in case we can meet up. ========== #97714 From: "Scott" Date: Sun May 3, 2009 1:17 pm Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Regarding: S: "Yes, as it seems. In fact what is experienced by those cittas through the mind-door is a momentarily experienced concept." Scott: Thanks for the reply. There is so much in all of this. I think that the very quick and ephemeral moment of consciousness is the basic 'unit' upon which all is built. I think that when 'thought' is referred to, this is the referent. I'd like to really get precise about what 'concept' actually refers to. For example, 'house' is a concept. Is the constructed, conventionally experienced collection of concepts that go to form a phrase that is thought about (eg. 'House is a concept but does not exist in reality') also 'concept'? I'd also like more precision when it comes to understanding 'thinking'. There is the conventional notion of thinking and then there is the 'thinking' which has to be referred only to the moment. I would assume that the phrase 'momentarily experienced' refers to the fact that citta arises and falls away quickly. 'Concept' doesn't have the characteristics of rise and fall as I understand it, hence, it is 'there' to be experienced by a citta in the mind door. In what form is this concept that is momentarily experienced? Is it the momentary nature of the experience itself that delimits the concept? For example, take the word 'Dhamma'. Would this word be the sort of concept you refer to? What would be going on when one has the experience of thinking this word? I can see where there are all sorts of 'thoughts' about Dhamma that seem to come one after the other in some illusory story form and are conventionally called thinking about Dhamma. S: "No, not as we think we experience it - this is a concept, a long story about the thought..." Scott: Do you differentiate concept as 'the thought' and concept as 'a long story about the thought'? Here, it would seem, there are two sorts of concepts being referred to. S: "...In fact vitakka (and other cetasikas) touch upon the object very briefly (and even in the sense door process). Because of many, many mind-door experiences and moments of vitakka 'thinking' or directing citta onto its objects, concepts, we have the idea of thinking of people and animals as if this happened with one 'hit' of thinking. Only by directly understanding the characteristics of such thinking cittas and cetasikas (and other realities, such as seeing and hearing), can it be known what is really meant by 'thinking' and 'thought' in the Dhamma." Scott: Yes. 'Thinking and thought' refer only to the moment when it comes to the Dhamma. And a lot occurs in the moment, given that a number of dhammaa are in force at once and combine to experience an object in a very complex fashion. In the moment vitakka experiences the object according to the characteristic way it has - the recently somewhat controversial function of repeatedly touching or turning. This function is performed only in the moment, no matter what the simile gives one to imagine about many moments or dhammaa which have to last long enough to do something over and over again. S: "'Wise' according to the sobana cetasikas which arise with the citta which 'thinks' or experiences the ideas about the world. If there is sati and other sobhana cetasikas, there is wise reflection. Usually it refers to those cittas with pa~n~naa. So pa~n~naa and vitakka in particular, assist the citta to 'think wisely' about the object. For example, there can be a 'right' or 'wrong thought' about people now as we write. It depends on whether the citta and cetasikas are kusala or akusala." Scott: You refer here to 'the ideas about the world'. Are these the concepts we are considering? These can seem overly wrought and complex - such that these couldn't have arisen in the moment. Or does this refer to the thought about the world which is momentary and experiences 'the world' of the moment? When 'citta thinks wisely about the object' is this in words? I'd imagine words come later. When I have the conventional thought, 'There are only dhammaa arising and falling away according to conditions, no one does anything,' I wouldn't necessarily assume that this was wise reflection proper. You and I can agree that this statement reflects the Dhamma. S: "It depends on accumulated sa~n~naa, vitakka, sati, pa~n~naa and so on. This is why sa~n~naa is given as the proximate cause of sati. If there is no right remembrance of Dhamma, there is no wise reflection of it. Back again to natural decisive support condition." Scott: This is important, I think - the idea of accumulation as applied to the various dhammaa composing the 'thought' (in the moment). In other words, that which is given to the experience of the moment by that which has 'come to it' from past moments and within each dhamma containing accumulations according to characteristic and function - a very complex matter. Can you say more on this interaction of accumulations as it bears on the moment? This is, perhaps, one way to understand natural decisive support condition. And, speaking of conditions, what sort of condition is pa~n~natti? Well, enough for now (and this is only part I...) Sincerely, Scott. #97715 From: "Chew" Date: Sun May 3, 2009 2:21 pm Subject: Sacca Yamaka chewsadhu (View with Unicode UTF-8) NiddesavÄro PadasodhanavÄro (anuloma) 1. Dukkhaṃ dukkhasaccanti: ÄmantÄ. Dukkhasaccaṃ dukkhanti: kÄyikaṃ dukkhaṃ cetasikaṃ dukkhaṃ á¹­hapetvÄ avasesaṃ dukkhasaccaṃ, na dukkhaṃ. KÄyikaṃ dukkhaṃ cetasikaṃ dukkhaṃ dukkhañceva dukkhasaccañca. Translation: It is suffering. Is it called the truth of suffering? Yes. It is the truth of suffering. Is it called suffering? With the exception of bodily suffering and mental suffering, the remaining is the truth of suffering, but not suffering. Bodily suffering and mental suffering are both suffering and the truth of suffering. Guide 1: “It is suffering (Dukkhaṃ)†What is suffering (Dukkhaṃ) here? Suffering (Dukkhaṃ) are: - The 2 feeling of displeasure (Domanassa) of Consciousness Rooted in Ill-will or Aversion (PatighasampayuttacittÄ), and - 1 feeling of pain (Dukkha) of Immoral Resultant Consciousness without Roots (Akusala vipÄka cittÄ). Note: The suffering (Dukkhaṃ) in Sacca Yamaka only refers to dukkha-dukkha. #97716 From: "szmicio" Date: Sun May 3, 2009 2:28 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) szmicio Dear Sarah > >L: > There are cittas which experience concepts almost all the time. But we tend to take it for ourselves, for our thinking. There is moha and ditthi.Can you say more about ditthi and moha in daily life? > ... > S: I think you just did:-). I heard a good comment on a tape last night about how when there's awareness of a reality, such as seeing or visible object, there's no uneasiness, no concerns. These just arise on account of the thinking of various concepts, usually with moha. Ditthi only arises with particular kinds of attachment, such as when we take dhammas for ourselves. It can only be known when it arises. When there is the development of satipatthana, there's less and less concern about whether it's pleasant or unpleasant feeling being experienced, right view or wrong view - any dhamma can be known as it is, just a conditioned dhamma. L: Any dhamma can be an object for understanding. > >There is also vitaka that hits its object. No one can think or choose what he thinks. That's imposible to think when vitaka doest hit an object. > .... > S: Well said. Yes, no one can determine what vitakka will hit next. It's only when we think of a conventional story about 'thinking' and 'thought' that there is an idea of being able to decide what to think about or do next. L: Yes. There are just few moments in life, when we are not forgetful of realities. Panna can arise so natural and be so suprising. When going to school or being involved in our work. There can be a few moments of awarness, just by conditions. Then we see there is no Self. But there can be also thinking about realities or knowing but that's not the same as direct awarness. best wishes Lukas #97717 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun May 3, 2009 3:38 pm Subject: Cittas and cetasikas (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > CMA > > "The cetasikas are mental phenomena that occur in > immediate conjunction with citta or consciousness, and > assist citta by performing more specific tasks in the > total act of cognition. The mental factors cannot > arise without citta, nor can citta arise completely > segregated from the mental factors. But though the two > are functionally interdependent, citta is regarded as > primary because the mental factors assist in the > cognition of the object depending upon citta., which > is the principal cognitive element. The relationship > between citta and the cetasikas is compared to that > between a king and his retinue. Although one says "the > king is coming", the king does not come alone, but he > always comes accompanied by his attendants. Similarly, > whenever a citta arises, it never arises alone but > always accompanied by its retinue of cetatsikas." > [page 76 of CMA] > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/83296 > > > Atthasalini, Analysis of Terms: > > "But consciousness does not arise singly. Just as in saying, `the king has arrived,' it is clear that he does not come alone without his attendants, but comes attended by his retinue, so this consciousness should be understood to have arisen with more than fifty moral (mental) phenomena (pa.n.naasakusaladhammehi). But it may be said that consciousness has arisen in the sense of a forerunner (pubba"ngama.m). For in worldly phenomena consciousness (lokiya dhamma.m) is the chief, consciousness is the principal, consciousness is the forerunner. I don't see any problem with consciousness being assisted in performing cognitive functions by various operational factors associated with acts of perception or thought; although I hesitate to assign them separate identities as little what-nots that have independent existence which each do their jobs as discrete entities. Whether or not you divide them up that way, the functions themselves do take place and are registered by consciousness. > In transcendental phenomena (lokuttara.m dhamma.m), however, understanding is the chief, understanding is the principal, understanding is the forerunner." Could you explain this a bit? What are transcendental phenomena and how does understanding take the lead over consciousness? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #97718 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun May 3, 2009 8:18 pm Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Ken. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > > Hi Robert E, > > ---------- > <. . .> > RE: > Well, tenacity isn't a "reality," it is a concept used to describe > a succession of events. To take human conceptualizations of the way we > interpret events in the world, and to somehow magically turn them into > paramatha dhammas because you "believe so," is nonsensical. I can make > up a number of concepts and decide > they are dhammas if I like, but there's no reason to think I am correct. > Is "stick-to-itiveness" a cetasika that arises in the moment? It's > similar to tenacity but a little different. Well, it is just another > slightly different concept. You are taking human ideas and attributing > some kind of ultimate status to them without any rhyme or reason. > Because you say so? > ---------------- > > Don't hold back, Rob. :-) I'll try to be more expressive in the future. > > I should have chosen a different word. "Effort" for example - in > particular "the effort to maintain wholesome states" - would have been a > good one. "Patience" would have been another good one. The texts make > clear which paramattha dhammas perform those functions (viriya and panna > repectively) in their single-moment existences. > > You will object, "What sort of maintaining lasts for only a single > moment? What sort of patience lasts for only a single moment?" But > that's the way it is. :-) Yah; because 'you say so,' or someone else does. [Not the Buddha however, who never made any single-moment-existence pronouncements about such qualities, or our concepts about them, only about the nature of existence itself, which is not cut up into pieces quite so neatly.] And luckily for all, it doesn't have to make any sense, because it's magic! :-) Well, why can't effort, tenacity and patience last for a single moment? Heck, I've been patient for a single moment plenty of times. Only the next moment I lose patience. But...that's the way it is! > ------------------------ > RE: > In fact tenacity is a fine example. It does take place over time. > You believe you have "explained" to me how such a thing is possible, in > the case of anicca, but you did not explain it. An explanation lays out > the mechanics of something. > You don't seem to know the difference between a claim and an > explanation. When you claim something, you then have to give evidence. > But you don't have to do that, because you have your default > interpretation of the "holy word" of the Abhidhamma. > --------------------- > > That's your opinion, and you are entitled to it. Fine, then what's the explanation, other than "that's the way it is?" You realize that "that's the way it is" is not an explanation. I don't expect you to meet my expectations for common sense, since I am a lowly mundane being, but you should be able to explain it in terms that make sense to you, not 'no explanation at all.' > -------------------------- > R: > Belief in a system is no substitute for evidence. > Anicca is not a weird idea, it is one that makes sense. It means that > things are temporary and thus undependable and unsatisfying. There's > nothing esoteric about that; it's a fine and astute observation of the > Buddha and a philosophical stand on reality. If you contemplate anicca > in this way you realize that life is not worth clinging to; it is going > to change on you and can't be depended on. > -------------------------- > > Anicca, as taught by the Buddha, is fundamentally different from anicca > (or impermanence) as it was known before he taught. (Or as it is still > known to people who have not learnt the Dhamma.) > > That's the effect that anatta has on the world; everything must be > fundamentally different from the illusory world (of atta). yes, but you still can't say *what* the difference is. You can say "X is wrong" but you can't say on what basis "Y is different" other than another general principle, that "it's different." *What's* the difference, specifically? What are you saying is the *correct* concept of anicca? How does it work? > ------------------------------------- > R: > That's a pretty good start! Then you can eventually see this more > and more directly with panna. All fine! But then you come along and > insist on changing this fine and understandable doctrine - true on its > face - into an esoteric object that doesn't make any sense. It MUST > appear in the moment as an 'inherent characeristic,' even though you > have no idea what that means or how it would appear or what it would > appear as. How does the "temporariness" of dhammas appear in "one > moment." You have no idea! But that won't stop you from > claiming it. How absurd. > ---------------------------- > > I think I do have an idea. And so do all the other Abhidhamma > enthusiasts at DSG. I am not alone in this! :-) Fine, explain it to me. What's the idea? I am not oblivious to an explanation, I just haven't gotten one. Just explain it and if it is something other than "it just is" I will consider it seriously. > > ------------------------------------- > RE: > I have a lot of respect for the wisdom of the Abhidhamma, but I > don't much care for it as a dogma, or as a substitute for intelligence. > There is no reason to make higher understanding the enemy of reason, > none at all. I gave a perfectly workable explanation of how > characteristics that appear 'over time' can fit into the "single moment" > nature of ultimate realities, and it doesn't violate anything in the > text, which never states that anicca is known by panna in a single > moment - show me where it does - or that the "turning over" and > "beating" function of the "knowing" cetasika that assists panna takes > place "in a single moment." The text doesn't claim this at all. > ------------------------------------- > > The texts most definitely do claim that all of reality (the loka) exists > in a single moment. Yes, but not everything all at once. One type of citta arises with certain cetasikas, then another. They accumulate skill, information, panna, from one to the next. Everything happens one moment at a time, but it is in the pattern of single moments that accumulations including panna, develop. So it is not that every quality must exist all alone in a single moment. Certain things happen over a pattern of moments, just as a dhamma lasts for a series of moments and goes through certain phases during that time, each one of which is of course composed of a single moment, but not restricted to it, as if it existed all by itself in the universe. It relates to the process it is a part of. > But I won't go into that just now. I would rather > try to convince you of the significance of realities. If there were no > realities (paramattha dhammas) there would be no absoultely real good or > evil, right or wrong, pleasant or unpleasant, sweet or sour, hard or > soft, tenacious or vacillating, . . . All of those things would be mere > matters of opinion. Well that is also another topic, because I'm not so sure that there is one version of right and wrong that is true for every situation or every culture that is agreed upon even among Buddhists or anyone else. Do you think that "right" is a characteristic that arises as an objective fact? Wholesome and unwholesome is a different story, because they relate to what progresses the path, but right and wrong, pleasant and unpleasant, etc., are interpretations. They are not objective. Sweet and sour, hard and soft, while relative, do represent objective realities - the elements of sourness appear in the world with certain characteristics; but right and wrong, dependent on human interpretation, is much more dicey. You think there are in the same category? > > That's enough to convince me that the Abhidhamma is the only teaching > worth knowing. I couldn't be interested in a world in which right and > wrong were just matters of opinion. What good would that be to anyone? Whether or not it is a world worth being in has nothing to do with whether it is true or not. Buddhism is a turn away from wishful thinking, not a support for the world you think is best. > > -------------------------------- > R: > My explanation which makes use of > the accumulation and passing along of information from one citta to the > next - a normal and acknowledged part of the pattern of single cittas > that arise in a sequential group - to allow vicara or vipaka to take > several strikes at the dhamma during its changing cycle and report those > changes to the citta of the moment, which passes it on to the next. This > kind of thing takes place in Abhidhamma explanation all the time, yet > you reject the idea for no good reason, even though the text says > clearly that it is the observation of the element of > change of the dhamma that allows panna to understand anicca directly. > --------------------------------- > > Your explanation is different from the Abhidhamma's, in which the whole > world begins, persists and ends in a single moment. If there is no > 'repeated striking' that begins, persists and ends in a single moment > then there is no repeated striking at all. Show me the quote from the Abhidhamma please, in which this is ever said. I don't see this kind of explanation anywhere. What begins persists and ends in a single moment? And how does this occur? Where is this claimed? Show me please. If a dhamma persists for 7 moments, how does the world appear and disappear in one at the same time? Please explain. > --------------------- > RE: > The element of change is the difference registered in the dhamma > from one point of time to the next. The Abhidhamma speaks about the > changing nature of the dhamma as it rises, persists and then falls away, > and that it is this changing nature > of the dhamma that demonstrates anicca. So why not use your common sense > and look at this pattern and the repeated strikings at the object in a > way that does justice to the obvious meaning of the Abhidhamma itself? > Instead you use a superficial clinging to the idea that EVERYTHING must > be there in each single moment, which I don't believe is ever stated in > either the Abhidhamma or the > commentaries. If you think I am overgeneralizing, then find me a single > statement that says that anicca is present in all its glory in one > moment and totally discerned by one single citta. I doubt you will find > it, as it contradicts the texts we have been recently citing. > ------------------------ > > The citations are the same, but our understandings of them are > different. So explain yours in as much detail as I have given you. Give me a comparative interpretation so we can compare our notes. > > -------------------------------- > <. . .> > RE: > I don't think you will ever be able to see the actuality of how > these processes take place as long as you cling to the idea that the > single moment contains everything at once, even though the whole system > of Abhidhamma rests on how accumulations are developed from one citta to > the next and how various functions arise in patterns of cittas with > corresponding cetasikas and *not* on any one single citta. Your view of > the single citta is superficial and doesn't take > account of the beauty of the patterns of rising and falling, > communicating and cooperating patterns of cittas and cetasikas. > ----------------------- > > I think I know what you are talking about: Howard sometimes refers to > them as "complex networks of interrelated namas and rupas." And you are > right, I don't believe in them. :-) I'm not interested in belief, one way or the other, my own included. I am interested in an explanation that is not nonsensical. If you can't at least say *what* it is that you believe, and how it is supposed to work,you are just enjoying your own feeling of rightness with no basis. I invite you to convince me by giving me a coherent vision of what Abhidhamma teaches, so I can believe too. What is the basic story. Everything in the world arises, persists and disappears in a single moment. Now tell me how that happens. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #97719 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun May 3, 2009 8:24 pm Subject: Description or doctrine/instruction? (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > An example of a passage that is a description rather than a general statement of doctrine would be the well-known section on anapanasati from the Satipatthana Sutta. I am pasting a copy below. Happy to discuss, if you'd like to. > > Jon > > > Satipatthana Sutta MN 10 > > "And how, O bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu live contemplating the body in the body? > > "Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty place, sits down, bends in his legs crosswise on his lap, keeps his body erect, and arouses mindfulness in the object of meditation, namely, the breath which is in front of him. > > "Mindful, he breathes in, and mindful, he breathes out. He, thinking, 'I breathe in long,' he understands when he is breathing in long; or thinking, 'I breathe out long,' he understands when he is breathing out long; or thinking, 'I breathe in short,' he understands when he is breathing in short; or thinking, 'I breathe out short,' he understands when he is breathing out short. > > "'Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe in,' thinking thus, he trains himself. 'Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe out,' thinking thus, he trains himself. 'Calming the activity of the body, I shall breathe in,' thinking thus, he trains himself. 'Calming the activity of the body, I shall breathe out', thinking thus, he trains himself. > > "Just as a clever turner or a turner's apprentice, turning long, understands: 'I turn long;' or turning short, understands: 'I turn short'; just so, indeed, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, when he breathes in long, understands: 'I breathe in long'; or, when he breathes out long, understands: 'I breathe out long'; or, when he breathes in short, he understands: 'I breathe in short'; or when he breathes out short, he understands: 'I breathe out short'. He trains himself with the thought: 'Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe in'. He trains himself with the thought: 'Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe out'. He trains himself with the thought: 'Calming the activity of the body I shall breathe in'. He trains himself with the thought: 'Calming the activity of the body I shall breathe out'. > > "Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally, or he lives contemplating the body in the body externally, or he lives contemplating the body in the body internally and externally. He lives contemplating origination-things in the body, or he lives contemplating dissolution-things in the body, or he lives contemplating origination-and-dissolution-things in the body. Or indeed his mindfulness is established with the thought: 'The body exists,' to the extent necessary just for knowledge and remembrance, and he lives independent and clings to naught in the world. Thus, also, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body." What would be the purpose of describing all these details if those so described had already attained these skills, if it is just description - redundant of what will take place anyway? Why talk about it at all, except to teach others how to do the same? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #97720 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun May 3, 2009 8:25 pm Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (97452) > > ---------------------- > > > Yes, the Patisamphidaa Magga, which is cited here from time to time and has been the subject of some series in the past. > > > > For a moment I was thrilled that you gave me a specific reference. It took my breath away for a moment. Then I became deflated again when I realized that it does not seem to exist on the internet, and I have no idea how to find a copy [in English.] Any ideas? > > ---------------------- > > My apologies, but I misspelt the name. It should be *Patisambhida* Magga (English translation by Nanamoli under the name "Path of Discrimination"). > > Many, many citations on this list. Just key "Patisambhida" into the search box on the list website (as I've just done) and you'll get any number of references. In fact, the first post I opened was one of yours which cites this text ;-)). See: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/95872 > > Also, many post references given in UP under the heading "Patisambhidaa (discriminations) & Patisambhidamagga (Path of Discrimination text)". To get there, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ > Then scroll down to the item: "Useful_Posts_March_2009.htm" > Open it and click on the letter 'P' > Then scroll down a few screens until you get to the heading. > > > Well, we are keeping each other jumping anyway. I hope it is healthy exercise. > > Yes, I think it is (keeps me out of trouble, anyway ;-)) Thank you, I will take a look. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #97721 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Mon May 4, 2009 3:14 am Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. epsteinrob --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > k: Anatta is present because it can be known and it is a characteristic that could be directly know. If not why did Buddha said it so plainly in the sutta. Form is not self, feeeling is not self. I am not the one sho say form is not self, it is Buddha who said it. Just like Buddha said Craving is the cause of suffering. He said it not me. Yes, I believe that Buddha said "form is not 'self,'" rather than "form is 'not-self.'" Anatta is not a thing, it is the absence of self. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #97722 From: "Scott" Date: Tue May 5, 2009 1:33 am Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Regarding: S: "I take 'thinking' in the above to be referring to samma sankappa, right thinking (vitakka cetasika) of the eightfold path...the factors, including samma sankappa, arise singly. This is in contrast to the multiple moments of samma sankappa arising in the development of insight and jhaana (of course not as the development of the path in the case of jhaana.)" Scott: Okay, the path is of one moment, this is clear. My reflections go to the 'multiple moments' to which you refer above. We've clarified that the inner monologue which is conventional thinking is not samma sankappa, nor can it refer to the function of vitakka cetasika. This is the superficial and illusory overlay we get lost in. I think the shorthand terminology for this, at least on the list, is 'stories'. The manner in which this narrative is connected somehow to the momentary function of vitakka cetasika is under investigation. Or, perhaps, one might need to consider the experience of an apparently consistent narrative to be a function of other mental factors, such as ignorance. S: "I can't see 'adverting' in the passage, so I'd need to know whether you are referring to one of the 3 kinds of manasikaara or something else..." Scott: Sorry about that - free association. I had a quick thought about 'adverting' but let's leave it for now. S: "...As for the relation of 'the moment to the 'whole thought'', in fact there's only ever a moment of experiencing an object, as you know. 'c-o-m-p-u-t-e-r' - many cittas, many mind-door processes, many moments of vitakka involved in the experience as we know it." Scott: When 'thinking' is 'examined', that is, when one experiences the inner monologue, and then 'thinks' about it (i.e. experiences more inner monologue that is now supposedly about the inner monologue), we can say that this is neither the moment of vitakka nor 'thinking' in the true sense. The thoughts we think all day long are no more than the scenes from life pieced together from all the seeing and hearing and tasting and smelling and being touched by things. They are just a part of this complex illusion. This, I think, does allow one to reflect on the three characteristics. If this daily inner monologue is *not* the thinking referred to in the texts, then the experience of that true thinking must be at great remove from ordinary experience. I imagine I can think about whatever I want, and this is compellingly reassuring. So, when I think about Dhamma, in the inner-monologue, conventional sense - soundless words in my head - I'm tempted to think more of these thoughts than of, say, thoughts about music or whatever else. But is this any different? The terms 'papa~nca' ('obstacle, impediment, a burden which causes delay, hindrance, delay...illusion, obsession, hindrance to spiritual progress') and 'papa~nceti' ('to have illusions, to imagine, to be obsessed') come to mind. Do you think these terms are helpful in clarifying this further? To play the Paa.li play-on-words game, there is 'cetiya' which is 'a tumulus, sepulchral monument, cairn'; there are 'citi' and 'cinati' (related to 'cetiya'), the former meaning 'a heap, made of bricks', the latter, 'to heap up, to collect, to accumulate.' This certainly could be a description of the thoughts that proliferate and seem so meaningful at times. So, the 'thoughts' are illusory. Somehow, as you are suggesting, these stories are not yet the concept that is object for citta and its accompanying mental factors within the mind-door. This concept is somehow as fleeting as the consciousness which has it as object. Can you say more about this? Sincerely, Scott. #97723 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue May 5, 2009 3:14 am Subject: Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Azita (and apologies for the delay in replying) (97473) > ---------------------- > azita: 'the suffering characteristic......reckoned as the oppression that consists of the rise and fall.. > How come oppressed? I can understand dhammas being dukkha because of impermanence, so would appreciate a bit more info about 'oppressed'. > ---------------------- Just guessing, but I'd say this refers to conditioned nature, namely that what arises by conditions must fall away as soon as those conditions no longer hold. This could have slightly different implications to lack of permanence. What do you think? Jon #97724 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue May 5, 2009 3:19 am Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E (97534) > ---------------------- > > However, wrong livelihood is far wider than the undertaking of one of these occupations. It is any breach of sila committed in the pursuit of one's livelihood. Thus, to my understanding, a doctor who cheats the system would be committing wrong livelihood at the instance of such cheating. > > I would agree that makes sense. However, there are no kusala moments, I would assume, if one's occupation is lying, cheating or stealing. > ---------------------- Conventionally speaking, of course, that would be so. But in terms of moment-to-moment dhammas, there may be kusala (or akusala) arising at any time. For example, stealing can be done with or without restraint as to the use of force or violence. Jon #97725 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue May 5, 2009 3:28 am Subject: Dhammas (was, Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Robert E (97581) > ---------------------- > > Vis.: XIV, 32 (talking about understanding/panna) > > Now the things classed as aggregates [khandha], bases [ayatana], elements [dhatu], faculties [indriya], truths [sacca], dependent origination [paticca-samuppada], etc., are the "soil" of this understanding, ... > > Seeing into the nature of the impersonal elements that are ordinarily taken for self is certainly of great importance. > ---------------------- Indeed, is there anything of any greater importance, would you say? Jon #97726 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue May 5, 2009 3:29 am Subject: Re: effort jonoabb Hi Connie (97687) > ---------------------- > dear hoping to read the Visuddhimagga, > If you read English &/or Chinese, you might want to take a look at thepathofpurification.blogspot.com -- just below the image of the front cover. Please consider listening to the lectures as well. > ---------------------- Thanks for bringing to my (and others') attention this copy of Nanamoli's translation of the Vism for downloading (scanned pdf file, 131,500 MB, 471 pages). I'm happy to stand corrected! Jon > JA: I think you may be mistaking something else for the Vism, which is not available > for downloading. It is a hefty tome, and not exactly readable in the way the > suttas are. But it's an excellent reference work, with lots of cross-references > to sutta passages for the detail it gives. #97727 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue May 5, 2009 3:52 am Subject: Cittas and cetasikas (was, Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Robert E (97703) > ---------------------- > > The first verse defines the mental factors by way of four characteristics that are common to them all: > > > > 1) arising together with consciousness (ekuppaada) > > 2) ceasing together with consciousness (ekanirodha) > > 3) having the same object as consciousness (ekaalambana) > > 4) having he same base as consciousness (ekavatthuka) > > >>> > > This is a good piece of information, thanks. > ---------------------- And please give some thought to the implications of it. > ---------------------- > I suppose. But if you want to know how things work, you need to have a view of the mechanism, do you not? This pariyatti business is beginning to seem rather thready to me. I mean, to have a decent intellectual understanding of something you have to have a vision of how the whole thing works, don't you? I hope I'm not going to wind up with the impression that the "glue" that holds the whole works together is just a lot of faith with a spotty amount of actual understanding.... > ---------------------- I would describe intellectual understanding/pariyatti as being an understanding of "how things are" rather that "how things work". The Buddha did not profess to teach the latter. As far as "how's" are concerned, I think what's important is how panna/the path is to be developed, rather than how what is to be known by panna comes to be (or "works"). The only knowing that is worthwhile in the ultimate sense is direct knowledge of the way things are (as opposed to how we currently understand them to be). > ---------------------- > > It is capable of verification by direct experience, but it requires panna of a sufficiently high level. Thus, not capable of investigation by the likes of you and me ;-)) is what I meant. > > Hmn...Well I appreciate your including me in the same group as yourself. > ---------------------- Not a compliment, I can assure you, so there's no need to thank me ;-)) > ---------------------- I mean, I may be too ignorant to know a cetasika when I see one, but at least I'm not completely oblivous. Or am I..... > ---------------------- Well if I am, then so are you (see what I mean?). Jon #97728 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue May 5, 2009 3:57 am Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E (97705) > ---------------------- > > Actually, this is also available on-line for downloading (although a printed copy is much easier to read and refer to, I find): > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wayof.html > > Well thank you very much! This looks like it will be a good work for me to go through. Of course I will have to recall how to read, and then practice.... > ---------------------- If as a result of reading and considering there is more understanding (at whatever level), then there has been "practice". It can happen just like that ;-)) > ---------------------- > Thank you for the suggestions. I may wait a bit before getting more material, as I am somewhat overwhelmed, but I appreciate the suggestions for the future. > > I have taken a look at the Sangaha online, and for now will consult the online version. > ---------------------- And see Connie's recent message (and my reply to her of a short time ago) for details of a downloadable version of the Vism. Jon #97729 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon May 4, 2009 11:38 pm Subject: The Highest Happiness! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: The Ten Contemplations is Daily Buddhist Routine! The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus & friends: There is one contemplation, which when often practised and developed leads to the complete turning away from the world, to detachment, to stilling, to ceasing, to Peace, to final penetrating knowledge, to Enlightenment, and thus to NibbÄna ... Any Noble Disciple who by progress have understood the Dhamma dwells frequently in this state. Which is that one contemplation? It is reflecting over the qualities of ultimate Peace like this: This is peaceful, this is sublime, namely, the stilling of all kammic construction, the leaving all behind of all substrata of any being, the complete vanishing of all sorts of craving, ceasing, NibbÄna ... Whatever, Bhikkhus & friends, there are of both conditioned & unconditioned things, dependent & independent constructions, detachment is considered the highest of them, that is, the final destruction of ego-belief, the overcoming of all desire & thirst, the rooting out of clinging, the breaking out of this long round of rebirths, the vanishing of craving, absolute release, NibbÄna ... The Buddha emphasized: NibbÄna is the Highest Happiness! Source: AN 1:16.10 + 10:60 + 4.34 <...> Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄhita, Sri Lanka * #97730 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 5, 2009 8:26 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 23. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 8. Tokyo, June 15, 1971 Dear Mr. G, You found it difficult to be aware while doing complicated things. I will quote from your letter: ‘When I do things which can be performed automatically, like shaving, eating and walking, there can be awareness. But when I do complicated things like remembering a combination of numbers in order to open a safe, there cannot be awareness. I find that a special effort is needed for awareness of nåma and rúpa. While I have to exert myself to do complicated things I have no energy left for awareness. When I, for example, study a foreign language and I make an effort to memorize the words, I exclude all other things from my mind. At such moments I could not be aware.’ Shaving, walking, eating, opening a safe, all these things we can do because there are conditions to be able to do them. If you had not been taught you would not know how to open a safe. Remembering something is nåma, arising because of conditions. If we forget something, that also depends on conditions. The more we understand that realities are only nåma and rúpa, arising because of their own conditions, the less will there be hindrances to awareness. Realities such as visible object, hardness or feeling arise already because of their own conditions and you can begin to consider their different characteristics. You should not think of having to make an effort for sati because then there is still a notion of self who is aware. Sati can arise naturally in your daily life. When there is the study with awareness of one reality at a time there is a beginning of understanding. One should not try to hold on to realities in order to study them, because they do not stay. ******* Nina. #97731 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 5, 2009 8:29 am Subject: Date of Vesak nilovg Dear Mike, James, friends, Please can someone help me and tell me the date of Vesak this month? I remember Mike made a lunar calendar. Is he reading this? Thanks, Nina. #97732 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 5, 2009 9:31 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, --- On Sun, 3/5/09, kenhowardau wrote: -- "Knowable only to the wise" is one way the suttas describe it, isn't it? And even when does it becomes know to the wise, it still remains deep and subtle by nature. I think on one occasion Ananda was rebuked by the Buddha for suggesting that it became easy. .... S: Yes, never easy....always deep and subtle... If it seems easy and a matter of following simple steps, we can be sure something is very wrong... ... ------------ --------- ------ >S: > Congratulations on the job - that was a long surfing holiday you took.... May we ask what your new title is? Does it mean we may get to see you in Bangkok next year? ------------ --------- ------- >K:Thanks. It's hard to explain. I was helping some friends to set up a home insulation business. There was a position created that was easy, well paid and (best of all) short term. And they offered it to me! >What was supposed to be a simple task of measuring and quoting has, in practice, taken on responsibilities for sales, advertising, administration . . . Oh to be back in the surf! ... S: Must be a bit of a shock to that surfer system....anyway, welcome back to the 'real' conventional world of paid responsibilities.... Isn't great to realise that the dhammas, such as seeing,visible object and sati are just the same in whichever conventional world we find ourselves at any time? Metta, Sarah ======= #97733 From: pauwels harry Date: Tue May 5, 2009 8:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Date of Vesak hpauwels... i think the 8th of may.greetings harry Op 5-mei-09, om 10:29 heeft Nina van Gorkom het volgende geschreven: > > > Dear Mike, James, friends, > > Please can someone help me and tell me the date of Vesak this month? > I remember Mike made a lunar calendar. Is he reading this? #97734 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 5, 2009 9:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Date of Vesak nilovg Dear Harry, thank you, you are very kind. Nina. Op 5-mei-2009, om 10:43 heeft pauwels harry het volgende geschreven: > i think the 8th of may.greetings harry #97735 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 5, 2009 9:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep, (*James) --- On Sun, 3/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: > >S: Think of a citta (a moment of consciousness) experiencing its object, but only with the assistance of other factors to contact, focus on, lay hold of/thrash, feel, attend to and so on. Apart from a few specific cittas, mainly the sense experiencing cittas such as seeing and hearing which don't need the assistance of vitakka to direct (or lead) the citta onto its object, all other cittas do need this assistance. In the Atthasalini, the simile is given of someone wanting to enter the king's palace, but needing the assistance of a someone close to the king to do this. ... R:> Thank you, that is helpful; though I am still wanting an understanding of how the "beating" function takes place in time - whether its findings are passed along from one citta to the next... ... S: Yes, this is just how the findings of any cittas and cetasikas are passed on - from one citta to the next. As you know, there are 24 conditions which operate, determining what arises and how. For example, you're familiar with kamma as a condition or object as a condition. One of the other most important and commonly operating conditions is called natural decisive condition. By this condition, cittas and cetasikas, such as vitakka, pass along their 'findings' as you put it. We think now about a 'computer' and this is a condition to think about 'computer' again in future. If one hasn't heard about 'computer', one won't think about it. It's just the same with the Dhamma - having heard about it, there are then conditions to reflect on it, and the understanding 'accumulates' or passes on from one citta to the next. ... >>S: I need to get a drink after just returning from the beach, so will post this and get back to the rest in a minute. >Duly noted; I am sorry you are suffering on the beach, while I am content here at my desk among my piles of "accumulations" which I am sorting out. ... S: Yes, it was rather a tough weekend at the beach, knowing good folk like yourself were sorting out their accumulations at their desks...:-) Anyway, hope you got them sorted out. Let us know if you need any more help with the indexing and filing... Metta, Sarah p.s thanks to you and all for the good wishes. *James, that was a funny and cute one! ======== #97736 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 5, 2009 10:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep, --- On Sun, 3/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >> S: These are just similes and metaphors given to indicate that vitakka assists the citta 'investigate' or 'enter the palace'. forget the similes if they don't help.... ... R:> Well....It seems to me that the wise writers of these commentaries would not use so many similes with a consistent sort of action implied if it was totally off the mark, and not at all relevant. ... S: I have no doubt that they're always relevant, but it depends on those accumulations (again!) as to whether they help us understand the dhammas involved at the time. Sometimes they may lead to more proliferation and take us further away from the Truths of momentary arising dhammas. ... >I would really like to see a detailed description of how vitakka works; you know, the kind they have for the dhamma - seven cittas of this, seven of that - something that is precise enough to remove doubt about the process. Something like that must exist somewhere... .. .... S: I recommend you read the chapter on Vitakka (ch 8) in 'Cetasikas' by Nina. It's very detailed. http://www.scribd.com/people/documents/1746908-alanweller?page=1 Also, if you want the numbers, from CMA: "Initial Application (Vitakka) arises in fifty-five types of consciousness: in all types of sense-sphere consciousness except the two sets of five-fold sense consciousness (54-10=44); and also in the eleven types of first jhaana consciousness (44+11=55)." What this means is that in our day-to-day life, vitakka arises with all cittas except those moments of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and bodily experience. ... >I mean, as you say, lifetimes of cittas are necessary to develop the panna to go from level A to level B, etc., so there is a process of investigating and growing wiser and clearer that is passed along. I don't see why vitakka can't do the same with its repeated beatings and turnings. ... S: Exactly so - see my last message. Vitakka accumulates too. Nothing is ever forgotten that has been beaten or investigated. ... >I'd like to find out in any case. I have an instinctive idea of how this can work, but I can't convince anyone I'm right. :( ... S: Join the club! Metta, Sarah ==== #97737 From: "sprlrt" Date: Tue May 5, 2009 10:17 am Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sprlrt Hi Sarah, Scott & all My pali is far from being perfect, any corrections are welcome. - Alberto Dhammasangani, nikkhepakandam, suttantikadukam: 1313, 1314, 1315. katame dhammaa pa~n~natti / adhivacanaa / nirutti? yaa tesa.m tesa.m dhammaana.m sa"nkhaa sama~n~naa pa~n~natti vohaaro naama.m naamakamma.m naamadheyya.m nirutti bya~njana.m abhilaapo -- ime dhammaa pa~n~natti / adhivacanaa / nirutti. sabbeva dhammaa pa~n~natti/adhivacanaa/nirutti pathaa. Which dhammas are concept / definition / language? That which, of those dhammas, is name, description, concept, conventional usage, definition, named, name-assignation, denomination, language, interpretation, detail; these dhammas are concept/definition/language. All dhammas are within the range of concept/definition/language. 1316. tattha katama.m naama.m? vedanaakkhandho, sa~n~naakkhandho, sa"nkhaarakkhandho, vi~n~naa.nakkhandho, asa"nkhataa ca dhaatu -- ida.m vuccati naama.m. Of these, which is nama? (the five khandhas), and the unconditioned element; this is called nama. 1317. tattha katama.m ruupa.m? cattaaro mahaabhuutaa, catunna~nca mahaabhuutaana.m upaadaaya ruupa.m -- ida.m vuccati ruupa.m. Of these, which is rupa? The four great essentials, and the rupa derived from the 4 great essentials; this is called rupa. #97738 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue May 5, 2009 12:36 pm Subject: Are 'not-self' vs are not 'self' (was, [dsg] Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Robert E (and Ken O) Just chipping in here, if I may. (97212) > -------------- > Yes, I believe that Buddha said "form is not 'self,'" rather than "form is 'not-self.'" Anatta is not a thing, it is the absence of self. > -------------- I'm wondering if this interpretation (i.e., "form *is not* permanent/pleasant/self" vs. "form *is* impermanent/suffering/not-self") is supported by the Pali syntax. You are suggesting an assertion in the negative rather that the positive form. From my limited knowledge of Pali, the sentence structure would be quite different. Also, I think it more likely that the Buddha would be teaching what dhammas *are* than what they *are not*. The development of insight in the teachings is the development of insight into the true nature of dhammas, that is to say, into dhammas as they truly *are*. Jon #97739 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue May 5, 2009 2:30 pm Subject: Questions szmicio Dear Sarah and friends Does chanda arise with each kusala citta? There is ditthi almost all the time. does ditthi support citta? Can ditthi arise with cittas that experience concepts? Can ditthi arise without vitaka? When seeing there is also idea of my seeing. And it's all so deeply rooted. There is so many akusala and so little sadha in daily life. When there is sadha there is always understanding what's nama and ruupa. best wishes Lukas #97740 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 5, 2009 3:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Questions nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 5-mei-2009, om 16:30 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > Does chanda arise with each kusala citta? -------- N: Yes, it arises with cittas of the four jaatis but not with every citta. It accompanies all types of sobhana cittas. Without chanda we could not perform good deeds, it supports the kusala citta. This helps again to understand that kusala citta is anattaa. So many conditions are necessary for kusala citta. Nobody can make it arise at will. ------- > > L: There is ditthi almost all the time. does ditthi support citta? ------ N: There are also many moments of lobha without di.t.thi. Di.t.thi is a wrong interpretation of reality. ------- > > L:Can ditthi arise with cittas that experience concepts? ------- N: Yes, when you think that this or that person really exists, is permanent, is a self. Or you take a thing outside for permanent or self. -------- > > L: Can ditthi arise without vitaka? ------ N: Vitakka accompanies all kaamavacaara cittas, except the sense- cognitions of seeing etc. Thus also lobha-muulacittas with di.t.thi. Vitakka is translated as thinking, but remember that it also accompanies cittas arising in sense-door processes. -------- > > L:When seeing there is also idea of my seeing. And it's all so > deeply rooted. There is so many akusala and so little sadha in > daily life. When there is sadha there is always understanding > what's nama and ruupa. ------- N: You mean: when there is understanding what's nama and ruupa there is also saddha. Saddha also arises without understanding, it is confidence in kusala, such as daana, siila. You may be disheartened about your akusala, but then you need saddha, confidence to be aware also of akusala. The other day I read to Lodewijk about saddha, from my Cetasikas (p. 241): When we realize how weak out confidence still is, we should not become discouraged. When we think of all the virtues of the ariyan, his unshakeable confidence in wholesomeness, his purity of sila and his generosity, we should not forget that it all started with listening to the dhamma, considering it and developing right understanding. We read in the Middle Length sayings (II, no. 70, Kitagiri sutta) that the Buddha, while he was in Kasi, said that enlightenment could not be attained without diligence. He spoke to the monks about people with different accumulations who attained enlightenment, and then said: " I. monks, do not say that the attainment of profound knowledge comes straightaway; nevertheless, monks, the attainment of profound knowledge comes by a gradual training, a gradual doing, a gradual course. And how. monks. does the attainment of profound knowledge came by means of a gradual training, a gradual doing, a gradual course? As to this, monks, one who has faith draws close; drawing close, he sits down near by; sitting down near by he lends ear; lending ear he hears dhamma; having heard dhamma he remembers it; he tests the meaning of the things he has borne in mind; while testing the meaning the things are approved of- there being approval of the things desire ( kusalacchanda, "wish-to-do" which is kusala.) is born; with desire born he makes an effort; having made the effort he weighs it up; having weighed it up he strives; being self-resolute he realizes himself the highest truth itself and, penetrating it by means of wisdom, he sees..." The ariyan is often described as a person who has heard much. He has listened to Dhamma and has applied what he has heard. If he had been a passive listener he could not have attained enlightenment. We may wish to reach the goal without cultivating the right cause which leads to the goal. If there is no beginning of the development of understanding at this moment how can we expect the arising of profound wisdom? Realities such as hardness, feeling or sound appear time and again. If one begins to be mindful of the reality which appears now, one cultivates the right conditions for the growth of right understanding. There should be confidence which is as courageous and determined as the hero who crosses the flood. Many moments of such courageous determination are needed in order to realize what one has not yet realized. --------- Note that jhaana is not mentioned as a condition for enlightenment. Listening. We may hear: visible object is rupa, it does not know anything, and slowly this may become more meaningful. Sound does not know anything. We believe that we see a person, but visible object is seen, not a person, only visible object which is rupa is seen, and this does not know anything. We think of a person, many stories about a person who feels, who knows things. Nina. #97741 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue May 5, 2009 4:09 pm Subject: Re: Questions szmicio Dear Nina and friends thank you for your very quick reply. let me add few things. and rise another questions. > > > > L:Can ditthi arise with cittas that experience concepts? > ------- > N: Yes, when you think that this or that person really exists, is > permanent, is a self. Or you take a thing outside for permanent or self. > -------- L: Ditthi takes realities for permanent, full of happiness or Self. When there is ditthi, there is no understanding of ti-lakkhana as they are. Ditthi arises with moha. althought ditthi doesnt think it can arise with cittas experiencing concepts. And then we think about stories.Such moments are supported by moha and ditthi. > > > > L: Can ditthi arise without vitaka? > ------ > N: Vitakka accompanies all kaamavacaara cittas, except the sense- > cognitions of seeing etc. Thus also lobha-muulacittas with di.t.thi. > Vitakka is translated as thinking, but remember that it also > accompanies cittas arising in sense-door processes. > -------- L: But thinking is possible because of vitakka hits its object. Can vitakka arise with vipaka or kiriya cittas? Or only with javana-cittas? > > > > L:When seeing there is also idea of my seeing. And it's all so > > deeply rooted. There is so many akusala and so little sadha in > > daily life. When there is sadha there is always understanding > > what's nama and ruupa. > ------- > N: You mean: when there is understanding what's nama and ruupa there > is also saddha. > Saddha also arises without understanding, it is confidence in kusala, > such as daana, siila. L: Correct. There have to be so many sadha in order to make right understanding arise. this is the deepest sadha. Always when we give attention to what is important, that's sadha. And such kind of sadha that gives importance to seeing and hearing, is superior. This is the sadha of Buddha. We can hear Dhamma but if there is no sadha then we know just empty words. saddha is the cause of all sobhana dhamma and satipatthana. sadha is out of control. It arises beacuse of condtions. No one can make sadha arise. And if we think we can. That's ditthi then. ditthi is so deeply rooted. It's more likely to arise then any kusala. But sometimes there can be kusala cittas performing its own functions. In such moments there would be develoment. development which leads to nibbana. > Note that jhaana is not mentioned as a condition for enlightenment. L: That's really important. > Listening. We may hear: visible object is rupa, it does not know > anything, and slowly this may become more meaningful. Sound does not > know anything. We believe that we see a person, but visible object is > seen, not a person, only visible object which is rupa is seen, and > this does not know anything. We think of a person, many stories about > a person who feels, who knows things. L: Why do we belive in our thinking so much? why do we believe that outer world of our own dreams exist? When we realise there is no self does lobha be weaker? best wishes Lukas #97742 From: "colette" Date: Tue May 5, 2009 4:59 pm Subject: Are 'not-self' vs are not 'self' (was, [dsg] Re: effort.) ksheri3 Hi Jon, Bless you, thanx for relieving the stress on this totally rediculous question. Now, it seems that you are trying to put words in the Buddha's mouth, such as is found in the differences between the Sunni and the Shia Muslims but this is also definative of the Theravadan trying to maintain "substiability" against a Mahayana conception. BOY COULD I COULD FOREVER WITH THAT PLAY I JUST MANIFESTED. It seems, appearances, ;), that you are speaking of triffles which ridicule the Buddha. Anatta is a thing! Anatta is a conception. Anatta is a characteristic of Sunyata, it lacks Svabhava.It is not SELF-EXISTANT from the mind that conceives it. (I can't wait til you "creationists" step in to try to validate your hallucinatory theology based upon that sentence). > Also, I think it more likely that the Buddha would be teaching what dhammas *are* than what they *are not*. colette: WHAT? I think you lack the knowledge of Dependent Origination and Dependent Co-Origination. The Buddha speaks of Enlightenment. That's it. Nothing else. Nothing other. Enlightenment is the only thing. Enlightenment is the succsation of suffering. Let it stop! Let suffering become stagnant. Then, after the stillness has been cognized, then begin looking at the causes of suffering. You will find it! ------------------- >The development of insight in the teachings is the development of >insight into the true nature of dhammas, that is to say, colette: HEAVY PLAY! Lets take it apart. vipisanna, insight, is a resultant phenomena. It is not something a person ASPIRES TO GENERATE, DESIRES TO HAVE AND TO POSSESS. Vipisanna is spontaneous! It flashes before the practicioners eyes and enlightens them as to the reality of CITTA. RIGPA? Wow, true vipissana? Zoiks, I think you're bighting off more than can be chewed here, in a theravadan context. Even worse, "true nature of dharmas" WHAT? a Rigpa version of Svabhava and, NO LESS, in the form of Vipissana? Jeeze, heavens to mergatroid, as Snaglepuss is known to say. Ooops, look at the time. "Exit stage left" toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E (and Ken O) > > Just chipping in here, if I may. > > (97212) > > -------------- > > Yes, I believe that Buddha said "form is not 'self,'" rather than "form is 'not-self.'" Anatta is not a thing, it is the absence of self. > > -------------- > > I'm wondering if this interpretation (i.e., "form *is not* permanent/pleasant/self" vs. "form *is* impermanent/suffering/not-self") is supported by the Pali syntax. You are suggesting an assertion in the negative rather that the positive form. From my limited knowledge of Pali, the sentence structure would be quite different. > > Also, I think it more likely that the Buddha would be teaching what dhammas *are* than what they *are not*. The development of insight in the teachings is the development of insight into the true nature of dhammas, that is to say, into dhammas as they truly *are*. > > Jon > #97743 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue May 5, 2009 10:27 pm Subject: Alteration within a single moment (was, Not self vs. not-self) jonoabb Hi Robert E Just getting round to tackling this lengthy post of yours (97594) which covers a number of interesting topics, so will split it into parts. > ---------------------- > Please describe how an "alteration" can be noted within a single moment? > ---------------------- Each dhamma is said to have an arising, persisting and ceasing phase, within its single moment of "being", and that arising and ceasing can be known to (highly developed) panna. Such panna would see the dhamma's arising (from not having been), and it's falling away (to no longer being). > ---------------------- The only way that this could be so if within that same single moment is retained the comparison of the state of the dhamma in the preceding moment. I suppose this is possible through the cetasika responsible for memory of what has just occurred. Is that how this takes place? > ---------------------- I don't think I can give a definitive answer to that. But bear in mind that panna is cumulative and so, as I understand it, each moment of arising panna includes what has become known to panna previously. > ---------------------- Does vipaka note the "alteration" from what has just occurred to the state of the dhamma now? > ---------------------- Do you mean panna? Vipaka is the result of kamma. > ---------------------- > "Mode of alteration" has to have a meaning, it cannot just be a blank term. > ---------------------- Agreed Jon #97744 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue May 5, 2009 10:36 pm Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) kenhowardau Hi Sarah, --------------- <. . .> S: Must be a bit of a shock to that surfer system....anyway, welcome back to the 'real' conventional world of paid responsibilities.... ---------------- It fills me with awe for working people. How do you do it? My first job when I get home in the evening is to patch up all the mistakes I've made during the day (a bit like my typo's to DSG but with greater consequences). Then I plan the calls I have to make the next day. And watch the work piling up faster than it's going down! There is no rest for the wicked! ------------------- S: >Isn't it great to realise that the dhammas, such as seeing, visible object and sati are just the same in whichever conventional world we find ourselves at any time? ------------------- Yes, and we will never tire of saying how great that is to realise. For example, lately I have been thinking of how life - no matter whether it be good or bad, rich or poor, happy or sad, peaceful or strifeful - is just for this moment. "This moment" and then another, completely new life (universe , existence, set of realities that can be mistaken for self) arises to take its place. But, even better than this realisation, is to see life (as you have said) as dhammas arising at doorways. Visible object . . and so on. There is no need to classify momentary existences as rich or poor, happy or sad. It's just the same old dhammas! I suppose right understanding is always good no matter what form it takes. :-) Ken H #97745 From: "Chew" Date: Wed May 6, 2009 2:34 am Subject: Re: Sacca Yamaka chewsadhu Guide 2: There are 3 types of dukkha: 1. dukkha-dukkha, 2. vaparinama dukkha, 3. sankhara dukkha. 1. dukkha-dukkha: Unendurable physical and mental suffering (dukkha vedana) is called dukkha-dukkha. (2 domanasasahagatam citta + 1 kaya dukkha = 3 mental states) 2. vaparinama dukkha: Happiness arising from physical comfort and mental joy (sukha vedana) is called vaparinama dukkha. (62 somanasasahagatam citta + 1 kaya sukha = 63 mental states) 3. sankhara dukkha: In addition to this equanimous feeling (upekkha vedana), all the other formations of nama and rupa of the mundane sphere are also called sankhara dukkha as they need constant conditioning. (55 upekkhasahagatam citta) #97746 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed May 6, 2009 6:49 am Subject: Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Robert E (97594 - B) > ---------------------- > > I think the description assumes that implicit in the idea of a "self" is the idea that anything that is part of that is within the control of the "self". > > It is not implicit in all ideas of the self. Our Western idea of self includes being out of control and moving towards greater control; having parts of self that are subconscious and are not controlled or which control us without our awareness, and many other factors. It is the Buddha's own definition of self, in the sense of "true self" which says that anything out of control is "not self." He is promoting this definition, not taking it as a given. > ---------------------- I do not see the Buddha as attempting a definition of "self". There would be no point in defining something that is being rejected as not having any basis in reality. On the other hand, there are plenty of definitions (or explanations or classifications) of "view of self", which is a mental factor, or a moment of consciousness accompanied by that mental factor. These definitions are well worth spending some time over. This (wrong) view of self is one of the defilements that is eradicated at the first stage of stream entry. So if the path is to be developed, it must be seen and known as and when it arises (we can all safely assume that there are ample accumulations of this tendency yet to be eradicated). > ---------------------- > In the world of the Buddha's time, self was defined as "eternal self," "personality self vs. higher self," "internal self or Atman," "Higher Self," or Brahman, etc., all of which had different characteristics. Atman/Brahman were seen as eternal, beyond control or change, but they themselves did not exercise control over anything at all, having nothing to do with illusory reality, and being the Hindu equivalent of Nibbana - unconditioned reality. > ---------------------- I'm not in a position to comment on any of this, I'm afraid. As a matter of interest, what is your source for these views? > ---------------------- > In other philosophical frameworks, the self is seen as the experiencer or observer, not something that has control, but which merely undergoes whatever arises. So, I don't think that such a definition can be taken as a "given" at all. > ---------------------- As I said, I don't think a definition is being proposed or assumed. I would say the Buddha is pointing out that only something that is not subject to disappearance can be a refuge in the true sense. > ---------------------- > What Buddha is saying is that the self-concept which is dependent on keeping things under control, but cannot control anything in reality, is not a true self and should be abandoned, along with its clingings. > ---------------------- I would consider it the Buddha's teaching that *all* self-concepts are to be abandoned. Jon #97747 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed May 6, 2009 6:59 am Subject: Dukkha; anatta (was, Not self vs. not-self) jonoabb Hi Robert E (97594 - C) > ---------------------- > So, if you are stuck by a thorn and this causes extreme physical suffering, and in addition you are reactive to this pain and go into a state of fear and anxiety, that has nothing to do with dukkha? > ---------------------- There are different kinds of dukkha discussed in the teachings. The dukkha that is the characteristic of conditioned dhammas has nothing to do with conventional ideas of pain and suffering. > ---------------------- > What about the parable of the two arrows which the Buddha delivered to show the difference between the suffering caused by physical pain and the additional suffering caused by akusala cittas arising around the pain? > ---------------------- Yes, this describes dukkha of that kind/those kinds, but not the characteristic of dukkha. > ---------------------- > If one says "I can see the quality of "change in a dhamma" in "a single moment during which nothing is changing" that is self-contradictory. It is simply not possible. One has to explain how that is even proposed on the level of pariyatti, or it is a wrong understanding. > ---------------------- As mentioned already in an earlier part of my reply to your post, there is change within a single moment that is perceptible to developed panna. > ---------------------- > If you tell me that there is a cetasika that is responsible for registering the former state and another that compares it to the present state, then at least that is plausible. > ---------------------- Well I would assume that this also happens, and that the knowledge thus gained is accumulated (in sanna and other mental factors). > ---------------------- But to say it "just knows it" with no idea how that can be, is not a viable understanding. > ---------------------- Hope I've addressed this. > ---------------------- > Now if you say that anatta, as the "characteristic of self not existing" is a positive characteristic that can be perceived in a single moment, then tell me how it works. It has to be specified somewhere. Is there a cetasika which probes the dhamma for a "self" and registers that it is not there? Or does a cetasika note the changes that have been undergone and register via some quality of their change that control is impossible, thus understanding deeply that the dhamma is not-self because it cannot possibly be subject to control? If these things are said to actually take place, I would like to at least have some rudimentary idea of how they occur. > ---------------------- Sorry, but I can't really add anything to what I've said already in the context of the characteristic of anicca. > ---------------------- > K. Sujin says in her Survey [p.379] that understanding the characteristic of anatta is developed by investigating dhammas over and over again and realizing that a nama is "only an element which experiences, only a reality, not a being, person or self." I can understand this; I can understand coming to see that a nama has the characteristic of "only being an element" and nothing more, and that this would be a realization of anatta. > ---------------------- The fact of dhammas being "only an element" is knowledge that supports the understanding of dhammas as not-self, but is not the same as the direct knowledge of that characteristic. > ---------------------- But if you say that anatta is itself a "something" to be recognized, then you are making this lack of being anything other than "an element which experiences" into something. > ---------------------- There is no suggestion of anatta being <>. I hope this is not a prelude to another round of the bogey-man of "reification/substantialization" ;-)) > ---------------------- To see that anatta is the fact that a nama is "only an element" and not a self, is perfectly understandable, as this does not make anatta a thing in its own right. It identifies the true characteristic of a nama, that it is "just this" and nothing more. > ---------------------- As I see it, one aspect the "just this" in relation to dhammas is that of "not-self". > ---------------------- > > I think that the direct experience of the characteristic is of course dependent on a proper intellectual grasp of the nature of the characteristic, and this would include the fact of the nonexistence of the imagined self. > > And when you directly experience it, what do you experience? An absence? A gap? A nothingness? What? Pariyatti wants to know. :-) > ---------------------- No use asking me ;-)) Seriously, whatever it is, it is experienced as a characteristic of the dhamma that is at that moment the object of awareness. So I'm confident that it wouldn't be any of those things you mention (an absence, gap, nothingness). Jon #97748 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 6, 2009 7:46 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep (& Ken H), Does this help? --- On Mon, 4/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >>K: Your explanation is different from the Abhidhamma's, in which the whole > world begins, persists and ends in a single moment. If there is no > 'repeated striking' that begins, persists and ends in a single moment > then there is no repeated striking at all. R:>Show me the quote from the Abhidhamma please, in which this is ever said. I don't see this kind of explanation anywhere. What begins persists and ends in a single moment? And how does this occur? Where is this claimed? Show me please. .... S: Visuddhimagga, VII, 39: "As to the shortness of the moment: in the ultimate sense the life moment of living beings is extremely short, being only as much as the occurence of a single conscious moment. Just as a chariot wheel, when it is rolling, rolls [that is touches the ground] only on one point of [the circumference of] its tyre, 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, according as it was said: 'In a past conscious moment he did live, not he does live, not he will live. In a future conscious moment not he did live, not he does live. In a present conscious moment not he did live, he does live, not he will live. "'Life, person, pleasure, pain - just these alone Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive Are all alike, gone never to return. No [world is] born if [consciousness is] not Produced; when that is present, then it lives; When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead: The highest sense this concept will allow' (Nd.1,42)." .... Metta, Sarah =========== #97749 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 6, 2009 7:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- On Sun, 3/5/09, szmicio wrote: >> S: .....Yes, no one can determine what vitakka will hit next. It's only when we think of a conventional story about 'thinking' and 'thought' that there is an idea of being able to decide what to think about or do next. ... >L: Yes. There are just few moments in life, when we are not forgetful of realities. Panna can arise so natural and be so suprising. When going to school or being involved in our work. There can be a few moments of awarness, just by conditions. Then we see there is no Self. ... S: Very true....we never know when or where.....anytime, any place, very naturally.... ... >But there can be also thinking about realities or knowing but that's not the same as direct awarness. ... S: And it's very important to know the difference... Metta, Sarah ======= #97750 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed May 6, 2009 9:48 am Subject: Characteristics vs. (observed) behaviour (was, Not self vs. not-self) jonoabb Hi Robert E (97594 - D) > ---------------------- > Well, it was just repeating back what you said and trying to separate out what is the characteristic as a fact, as opposed to as a characteristic. It seems artificial to me. See your quote below: > ---------------------- I wouldn't put it quite like that ("characteristic as a fact, as opposed to characteristic as a characteristic"). I would describe it as *the fact of the impermanence of dhammas*, as opposed to *impermanence as a characteristic of conditioned dhammas*. The former refers to the observed behaviour of dhammas, the latter to their inherent nature. Hope this sounds a little less artificial. > > > ---------------------- > Wow, that is a mouthful. So, the reality of the three characteristics is not the same thing as the characteristics as characteristics, because the characteristics as characteristics are known not through their occurrence in the various forms of the kandhas, but are known as characteristics in their "modes of alteration" within the same aforementioned kandhas. > ---------------------- Again, I would not put I like that. I would say that the observed anicca (or dukkha or anatta) of dhammas is not the same as the characteristic of anicca (or dukkha or anatta) of dhammas that is capable of being directly experienced by developed panna. > ---------------------- > So what does this mean? It seems that the convoluted quote is talking about understanding the characteristics rather than merely experiencing or undergoing them in their various forms; i.e., "getting" what they are through understanding their modes of alteration and how the mode of alteration is the cause of their existence. > ---------------------- I'm not sure if the "they" in the foregoing is "dhammas" or is "characteristics". But whichever it is, I don't see it that way ;-)) > ---------------------- Changability causes non-permanance; it also causes suffering/oppression; it also means that the dhamma is uncontrollable and thus not-self. And so the understanding of the "mode of alteration" gives you right understanding; whereas merely undergoing the characteristics as they occur merely gives you the experience of impermanence, suffering and not-self, though you may not recognize them for what they are. > ---------------------- You've lost me here, I'm afraid. What does "undergoing the characteristics" mean? > ---------------------- > It seems like this is a standing-back of panna or vipaka to see the nature of the characteristics and how they are all tied to the "mode of alteration" that gives rise to them, rather than being subjected to them without insight into their existence or nature. > ---------------------- It is not the "nature of the characteristics" that is seen, but the nature (or characteristic/s) of dhammas. > ---------------------- > I see that too; but the distinction between "description" and "characteristic" is a pretty abstruse one. I've tried to flesh it out above. What do you think? > ---------------------- Hoping what I've said above helps make it less abstruse ;-)). > ---------------------- > > As I mentioned in my message, the Abhidhammattha Sangaha gives as separate classifications the 3 characteristics of anicca, dukkha and anatta and the 3 contemplations of anicca, dukkha and anatta. > > That's nice. What does that mean? If you are contemplating them, aren't you contemplating their characteristics? I mean, gee! > ---------------------- Contemplation of dhammas and direct experience of dhammas involve different levels of panna. > ---------------------- > > To me the distinction seems like one of an inherent property that is known by direct experience vs. a property that is known by observation (i.e., a form of deduction). > > I can accept that theoretically and thanks for that clear statement of that possibility. > ---------------------- Good to find some common point of reference here ;-)) > ---------------------- > > I would agree with "recognition as an inherent characteristic ... by panna". This would be a direct, rather than a deduced, recognition. > > Okay. > ---------------------- This distinction -- direct, rather than deduced, recognition -- is an important one. It goes a long way towards answering some of the questions you've been raising. > ---------------------- > > To my understanding, the seeing at this level is so powerful that the clinging is less likely to arise in the first place. But yes, for the reasons you give, this is the path to the eradication of all clinging. > > Thanks, I think we have reached a reasonable mutual understanding on this point. That is nice. I will now rest my brain, or at least the concept of such. > ---------------------- ;-)) Always good to end on a note of mutual understanding. Jon #97751 From: "sprlrt" Date: Wed May 6, 2009 10:12 am Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sprlrt Hi Sarah, Scott & all Some more translation exercising (Atthasalini comments on the Dhammasangani paragraph about pannatti) - Alberto Atthasalini. 1313. [1314, 1315] Exposition of the term definition [language, concept] "That which, of these/those dhammas, is...", all dhammas are included. A name is 'named', meaning is 'conveyed'. A designation is 'designated'. A concept is 'conceptualized'. A convention is 'set'. 'What' is conveyed, designated, conceptualized, set? 'I am', 'it is mine', 'another', 'it is of another', 'a person', 'a being', 'an individual', 'a man', 'a youth', 'Tissa', 'Datta', 'a couch', 'a chair', 'a mat', 'a pillow', 'a monastery', 'a room', 'a door', 'a window'; such are some fashions in which a name is 'conveyed', a designation is 'designated', a concept is 'conceptualized', a convention is 'set'. (Dhs. 1313. [1314, 1315] katame dhammaa adhivacanaa / nirutti / pa~n~natti? yaa tesa.m tesa.m dhammaana.m sa"nkhaa sama~n~naa pa~n~natti vohaaro naama.m naamakamma.m naamadheyya.m nirutti bya~njana.m abhilaapo -- ime dhammaa pa~n~natti / adhivacanaa / nirutti. sabbeva dhammaa pa~n~natti/adhivacanaa/nirutti pathaa.) Adhivacanadukaniddese Atthasalini. 1313. [1314, 1315] yā tesaṃ tesaṃ dhammānanti sabbadhammaggahaṇaṃ. Saṅkhāyatīti saṅkhā, saṃkathiyatīti attho. Kinti saṃkathiyati? ahanti mamanti paroti parassāti sattoti bhāvoti posoti puggaloti naroti māṇavoti tissoti dattoti, 'mañco pīṭhaṃ bhisi bimbohanaṃ 'vihāro pariveṇaṃ dvāraṃ vātapānanti evaṃ anekehi ākārehi saṃkathiyatīti 'saṅkhā. Samaññāyatīti samaññā. Kinti samaññāyati? 'ahanti - pe - vātapānanti samaññāyatīti [V] 'samaññā. Paññāpiyatīti paññatti. Vohariyatīti vohāro. Kinti vohariyati? 'ahanti - pe - 'vātapānanti vohariyatīti vohāro. #97752 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 6, 2009 12:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sacca Yamaka nilovg Dear Chew, Op 6-mei-2009, om 4:34 heeft Chew het volgende geschreven: > 3. sankhara dukkha: > In addition to this equanimous feeling (upekkha vedana), all the > other formations of nama and rupa of the mundane sphere are also > called sankhara dukkha as they need constant conditioning. ------ N: Thank you for your contribution. I could add: san.khaara dukkha: since they are conditioned they arise and fall away. Their falling away is dukkha, they are not a refuge. Nina. #97753 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 6, 2009 1:06 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) nilovg Dear Ken H and Sarah, I will use this for my Vesak discussion with Lodewijk. He has afew questions. Great, the way you say it! Do keep on! Nina. Op 6-mei-2009, om 0:36 heeft kenhowardau het volgende geschreven: > S: >Isn't it great to realise that the dhammas, such as seeing, > visible > object and sati are just the same in whichever conventional world we > find ourselves at any time? > ------------------- > > Yes, and we will never tire of saying how great that is to realise. > For > example, lately I have been thinking of how life - no matter > whether it > be good or bad, rich or poor, happy or sad, peaceful or strifeful - is > just for this moment. "This moment" and then another, completely new > life (universe , existence, set of realities that can be mistaken for > self) arises to take its place. But, even better than this > realisation, > is to see life (as you have said) as dhammas arising at doorways. > Visible object . . and so on. There is no need to classify momentary > existences as rich or poor, happy or sad. It's just the same old > dhammas! #97754 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 6, 2009 9:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 5/6/2009 2:50:33 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: I do not see the Buddha as attempting a definition of "self". There would be no point in defining something that is being rejected as not having any basis in reality. ======================= Then what is it that is being rejected?! A concept that has no basis in reality needs to be defined, else the denial is worthless. It happens that at the time of the Buddha the notion of "self" was well understood. With metta, Howard (off to the airport) /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97755 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 6, 2009 2:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 5-mei-2009, om 18:09 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > L: Ditthi takes realities for permanent, full of happiness or Self. > When there is ditthi, there is no understanding of ti-lakkhana as > they are. Ditthi arises with moha. ------- N: Yes, it can accompany lobha-muulacitta which is also accompanied by moha. It does not accompany moha-muulacitta. It is a kind of clinging, thus, when it arises, it accompanies lobha-muulacitta. -------- > L: althought ditthi doesnt think it can arise with cittas > experiencing concepts. And then we think about stories.Such moments > are supported by moha and ditthi. ------- N: Thinking of stories: also by lobha-muulacittas without di.t.thi. You may think of the food you will eat just with lobha, no di.t.thi involved. We can also think of concepts with kusala cittas: the present we are going to get for someone else, the way we shall hand it, etc. -------- > > L: But thinking is possible because of vitakka hits its object. > Can vitakka arise with vipaka or kiriya cittas? Or only with javana- > cittas? ------- N: With all cittas of the sensesphere, except the sense-cognitions of seeing, hearing etc. Thus, with cittas of all four jaatis. --------- > > L: There have to be so many sadha in order to make right > understanding arise. this is the deepest sadha. Always when we give > attention to what is important, that's sadha. > > And such kind of sadha that gives importance to seeing and hearing, > is superior. This is the sadha of Buddha. ------ N: saddhaa for the development of right understanding, this means: understanding is seen as of the greatest value. Not so much giving importance to seeing, hearing, but understanding that all realities of daily life have to be known as they are. ---------- > > L: We can hear Dhamma but if there is no sadha then we know just > empty words. saddha is the cause of all sobhana dhamma and > satipatthana. ------- N: Should we not say here instead of saddhaa: pa~n~naa? But it is accompanied by saddhaa. > -------- > > L: Why do we belive in our thinking so much? why do we believe that > outer world of our own dreams exist? ------- N: We cling to our dreamworld. This inclination has been accumulated from life to life, during aeons. How could it be eradicated soon? Impossible. -------- > L: When we realise there is no self does lobha be weaker? ------ N: The sotaapanna still clings to all pleasant sense objects, but he will not, for the sake of them, commit akusala kamma that can lead to an unhappy rebirth. No conditions. When we realise for a moment that there is no self does not mean that di.t.thi is eradicated. We are full of clinging to all pleasant objects. But also clinging can be understood as a conditioned dhamma. Nina. #97756 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed May 6, 2009 2:15 pm Subject: Avoid all Evil! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: How do the Effort to Avoid Protect against Evil? The Blessed Buddha once said: There are these four efforts, Bhikkhus and friends: 1: The effort to avoid all evil, 2: The effort to overcome wrong, 3: The effort to develop the good, 4: The effort to maintain any advantage... What, Bhikkhus and friends, is the effort to avoid? When experiencing a form with the eye, a sound with the ear, a smell with the nose, a taste with the tongue, a touch with the body, or a thought with the mind, the Bhikkhu neither fixes his attention on the whole appearance, nor on any specific detail. He instead tries hard to dispel all these evil and disadvantageous states, such as greed, lust and longing, that would arise if he remained with his senses unguarded. He therefore watches over his senses, control his senses, and restrains his senses. This is called the effort to avoid evil. Source (edited extract): The Numerical Sayings of the Buddha. Anguttara Nikaya AN 4:14 http://What-Buddha-Said.net/Canon/Sutta/AN/Index.Numerical.htm More on the Avoiding Effort! http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Avoiding_Effort.htm Have a nice unlighted day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄhita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Avoid all Evil! #97757 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed May 6, 2009 11:03 pm Subject: Direct Experience! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: How does Direct Experience confirm Faith? Sariputta once said to the Buddha: It is indeed to be expected, Venerable Sir, that a Noble Disciple who has faith, who has aroused energy & established awareness, & whose mind is concentrated, will understand the reality thus: This Samsara is without discoverable beginning! Any first point for beings roaming & wandering on, blinded by ignorance & bound by craving cannot ever be seen! But the traceless fading & ceasing of ignorance, this massive of darkness: This is the peaceful state, this is the supreme state ... ; that is, the stilling of all mental construction, the relinquishment of all acquisition, the elimination of all craving, disenchanting disillusion, final ceasing, NibbÄna! That comprehension of his is rooted in his ability to understand Venerable Sir! And, Venerable Sir, when he has again and again strived in such a way, repeatedly recollected in that way, again & again concentrated his mind in exactly this way, over and over again understood only this in this very way, then that Noble Disciple gains complete faith thus: Regarding things that I previously had only heard about, now I dwell having contacted them with my body, and having perforated them by understanding; I now see & directly experience! That faith is his ability of faith ... Good, good. Sariputta ! noted the Buddha... .... Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta NikÄya. Book [V:226] section 48: The Abilities. 50: At Ä€pana ... Have a nice direct day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄhita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Direct Experience! #97758 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 7, 2009 6:11 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 24 nilovg Dear friends, We believe that realities are the way we experience them, but in fact we experience them in a distorted way. It seems to us that realities such as hardness or visible object stay because their arising and falling away has not been realized yet. Their impermanence cannot be realized so long as paññå has not yet been developed to that stage. We know in theory that there is no self, but we still cling to the idea of self who is aware. We may take energy or effort for self. Effort or energy (viriya) is a cetasika, a mental factor which arises with many cittas, though not with each type. It arises with the citta and falls away together with it. When it accompanies kusala citta it is kusala and when it accompanies akusala citta it is akusala. There is no self who can exert control over effort, who can cause it to be kusala. When there is right awareness of a nåma or rúpa which appears through one of the six doors, there is already right effort accompanying the kusala citta. We do not have to try or to think of effort. When there is still wrong view, we may think that we cannot be aware while doing complicated things. We may think that at such moments awareness is more difficult than when we are walking or doing things which do not require much attention. In reality there is no difference. If one believes that there is a difference, one does not know what right awareness is. If there is less of a preconceived idea that in particular situations awareness is impossible, there can be awareness also while doing complicated things. We may be absorbed in what we are doing, but that doesn’t matter. Being absorbed is a reality, it can be known as only a type of nåma. Realities appear already because of their own conditions, and gradually we can learn to study their characteristics. ******* Nina #97759 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 7, 2009 6:47 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours (9) and commentary, part 1. nilovg Dear friends, sutta 9, Four ariyan Lineages. Walshe: DN 33.1.11(9) 'Four Ariyan lineages (ariya-va'msa). Here, a monk (a) is content with any old robe, praises such contentment, and does not try to obtain robes improperly or unsuitably. He does not worry if he does not get a robe, and if he does, he is not full of greedy, blind desire, but makes use of it, aware of [such] dangers and wisely aware of its true purpose. Nor is he conceited about being thus content with any old robe, and he does not disparage others. And one who is thus skilful, not lax, clearly aware and mindful, [iii 225] is known as a monk who is true to the ancient, original (agga~n~ne) Ariyan lineage. Again, (b) a monk is content with any alms-food he may get ... Again, (c) a monk is content with any old lodging-place ... And again, (d) a monk, being fond of abandoning (pahaana), rejoices in abandoning, and being fond of developing (bhaavanaa), rejoices in developing, is not therefore conceited...And one who is thus skilful, not lax, clearly aware and mindful, is known as a monk who is true to the ancient, original Ariyan lineage. ---------- N: With regard to ariyan lineage, the Co. explains who are ariyans: Buddhas, Paccekabuddhas (silent Buddhas), and the disciples of the Tathaagata. The Co elaborates on the four aspects of the ariyan lineages: contentment with robes, almsfood, dwelling place and delight in mental development. The Co. refers to the Visuddhimagga, Ch 2, Ascetial practices, Dhuta”ngas, for details about the requisites a monk is contented with. He is contented with any kind of robe: be it coarse, made from a refuse rag, made from kusagrass, be it agreeable or disagreeable. As to alms food, he is always contented. He does not think of where he will go to obtain food, and, as the Tiika explains, he is not agitated and keeps paying attention to his meditation subject (kamma.t.thaana), being pure. The Co refers to the Visuddhimagga Ch. 2, where are five kinds of practices as to alms-food are mentioned: the almsfood-eater’s practice, the house-to-house-seeker’s practice, the one-sessioner’s practice, the-bowl-food-eater’s practice, the later-food-refuser’s practice. He knows moderation as to food and just uses it to dispell hunger. As to dwellingplace, he is content with whatever kind, be it the root of a tree, in the open air, or in whatever other place. ---------- N: As we read in the sutta, he is not conceited about being thus content with the requisites, nor does he disparage others. It is said of him that he is skilful, not lax, clearly aware and mindful, sampajaano pa.tissato. He has sati sampaja~n~na. He is mindful and understands the different cittas that arise. One may know moderation as to food with an idea of self, when one is afraid of diseases because of eating too much. But when pa~n~naa arises one knows to what extent one clings to food and there is moderation without clinging to an idea of self. As we read in the section on contentment with almsfood, he is not agitated and does not abandon his meditation subject, kamma.t.thaana. Meditation subject does not only refer to the subjects of samatha but also to vipassanaa. He is aware of naama and ruupa. He understands that whatever vipaaka, result of kamma, he receives is conditioned. He may receive undesirable vipaaka or desirable vipaaka, but this is beyond control, anattaa. There are only conditioned dhammas arising and falling away. ******** Nina. #97760 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 7, 2009 8:34 am Subject: Dhamma with Khun Bussabong, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Our friend Khun Bussabong had passed away. She had a very keen understanding of the Dhamma and posed questions that were useful for everybody. Khun Unop composed a recording in Thai with her questions and Acharn Sujin's answers. I shall render a translation into English of this recording in the following series. ----------- Acharn: “People learn about citta and cetasika but they do not know where these are at this moment.” Khun Bussabong had just returned from India where she became very ill so that she could not go anywhere. She spoke about it that she had hoped to travel together with Acharn, but because of sickness she had to follow later on. She understood that this was anattaa, beyond control. In the plane she sat near Acharn, and said that she had not seen India. Acharn: “All this is only thinking.” Kh Bong: "Yes, a story we think of does not exist. Only the dhamma that thinks is real." Acharn explained about elements, dhaatus and Kh Bong wanted to know whether a dhaatu is ruupa or naama. Acharn: “Then you are looking for stories again and this is wrong. We remember people, stories and we do not know that there are only phenomena appearing for a very short moment. What arises does so because of conditions. If there were no conditions it could not arise. Very gradually phenomena can be understood as anattaa, as dhamma. They arise already and appear. They appear and can be understood. People and things we are thinking of are not real. We have to listen to the Dhamma. Now there must be a reality appearing that can be seen. We cannot manipulate it and it falls away very rapidly. We remember the appearance of a whole because we did not pay attention to the characteristic of what appeared. We think of people or flowers but did not pay attention to what appears through the eyesense and can be seen. Thinking of people and stories is not right understanding of the characteristic of the reality that appears through the eyes. --------- My reflection: We find it very important to travel and see places like India, but in reality there are only nama and rupa, everywhere. Seeing is always seeing, visible object is always visible object, no matter we are in India or in our own country. Khun Bong understood that seeing India was just an idea she could think of. This reminds us that the development of right understanding of nama and rupa is most important. It leads to detachment from the idea of self. --------- Nina. #97761 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu May 7, 2009 11:15 am Subject: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Howard (97754) > --------------- > I do not see the Buddha as attempting a definition of "self". There would > be no point in defining something that is being rejected as not having any > basis in reality. > ======================= > Then what is it that is being rejected?! A concept that has no basis > in reality needs to be defined, else the denial is worthless. > --------------- I don't see it like that. Firstly, if "reality" has been defined, then it's not necessary to actually define what is not reality. Secondly, both "not-self" and "view of self" have been defined, so a definition of "self" as a stand-alone term is not required. > --------------- It happens > that at the time of the Buddha the notion of "self" was well understood. > --------------- That may be so, but the Buddha gave a comprehensive classification of "view of self" that stands for all times and societies. > Howard (off to the airport) Happy travels :-)). Hope you are able to keep in touch with us while you're away. Jon #97762 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu May 7, 2009 11:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sacca Yamaka sarahprocter... Dear Chew, I appreciate this detail: --- On Wed, 6/5/09, Chew wrote: >Guide 2: There are 3 types of dukkha: 1. dukkha-dukkha, 2. vaparinama dukkha, 3. sankhara dukkha. 1. dukkha-dukkha: Unendurable physical and mental suffering (dukkha vedana) is called dukkha-dukkha. (2 domanasasahagatam citta + 1 kaya dukkha = 3 mental states) 2. vaparinama dukkha: Happiness arising from physical comfort and mental joy (sukha vedana) is called vaparinama dukkha. (62 somanasasahagatam citta + 1 kaya sukha = 63 mental states) 3. sankhara dukkha: In addition to this equanimous feeling (upekkha vedana), all the other formations of nama and rupa of the mundane sphere are also called sankhara dukkha as they need constant conditioning. (55 upekkhasahagatam citta) ... S: From this, we can easily understand why these kinds of dukkha are often summarised as referring to 'unpleasant feeling', 'pleasant feeling' and 'neutral feeling. I'm interested that they are actually said to the numbers of cittas specified above. With regard to sankhara dukkha, what I understand it that it is said to refer to the 55 upekkhasahagatam cittas (those not already included), but actually all mundane sankhara dhammas are included. Thanks for sharing these passages. Metta, Sarah ===== #97763 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu May 7, 2009 11:49 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Ken H (Nina & all), Nina has kindly encouraged us to keep this thread running... --- On Wed, 6/5/09, kenhowardau wrote: >It fills me with awe for working people. How do you do it? My first job when I get home in the evening is to patch up all the mistakes I've made during the day (a bit like my typo's to DSG but with greater consequences) . Then I plan the calls I have to make the next day. And watch the work piling up faster than it's going down! There is no rest for the wicked! ... S: In other words, we see just the same accumulations at work whether we're in the surf, posting at DSG or going to the office. If one tends to worry, one can always find an object to fret about! It's just like the 'drafts folder' all over again:-). Anyway, you're obviously very conscientious. I remember you telling us once that you never (or seldom ever) get a phone call - now you have lots every day! ------------ ------- S: >Isn't it great to realise that the dhammas, such as seeing, visible object and sati are just the same in whichever conventional world we find ourselves at any time? ------------ ------- >Yes, and we will never tire of saying how great that is to realise. For example, lately I have been thinking of how life - no matter whether it be good or bad, rich or poor, happy or sad, peaceful or strifeful - is just for this moment. "This moment" and then another, completely new life (universe , existence, set of realities that can be mistaken for self) arises to take its place. But, even better than this realisation, is to see life (as you have said) as dhammas arising at doorways. Visible object . . and so on. There is no need to classify momentary existences as rich or poor, happy or sad. It's just the same old dhammas! I suppose right understanding is always good no matter what form it takes. :-) ... S: Yes, the same old dhammas, so no need to speculate about the best place for the best visible objects and so on....better just to develop understanding which of course is very different from trying to have understanding and awareness - the latter only leads to disappointment, frustration and even anger when the 'selected' dhammas don't arise on call. So it's back to all those phone calls and the piling up work with the understanding of just the 'same old dhammas'.... So now it's your turn..... more piling up....:). Nina, please share your Wesak discussion with Lodewijk's further comments/questions as well. Metta, Sarah ======= #97764 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu May 7, 2009 12:16 pm Subject: Cittas and cetasikas (was, Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Robert E (97717) > ---------------------- > > CMA > > > > "The cetasikas are mental phenomena that occur in > > immediate conjunction with citta or consciousness, and > > assist citta by performing more specific tasks in the > > total act of cognition. …The mental factors cannot > > arise without citta, nor can citta arise completely > > segregated from the mental factors. But though the two > > are functionally interdependent, citta is regarded as > > primary because the mental factors assist in the > > cognition of the object depending upon citta., which > > is the principal cognitive element. The relationship > > between citta and the cetasikas is compared to that > > between a king and his retinue. Although one says "the > > king is coming", the king does not come alone, but he > > always comes accompanied by his attendants. Similarly, > > whenever a citta arises, it never arises alone but > > always accompanied by its retinue of cetatsikas." > > [page 76 of CMA] … > > I don't see any problem with consciousness being assisted in performing cognitive functions by various operational factors associated with acts of perception or thought; although I hesitate to assign them separate identities as little what-nots that have independent existence which each do their jobs as discrete entities. > ---------------------- Regarding the last part of your comment, are you suggesting the passage quoted does that (i.e., "assign them separate identities as little what-nots that have independent existence which each do their jobs as discrete entities"). If so, what in particular in the passage gives that meaning? > ---------------------- > Whether or not you divide them up that way, the functions themselves do take place and are registered by consciousness. > ---------------------- I'm not sure what you mean here by "the functions themselves". A function cannot be spoken of independently of whatever it is that performs the function. > ---------------------- > > In transcendental phenomena (lokuttara.m dhamma.m), however, understanding is the chief, understanding is the principal, understanding is the forerunner." > > Could you explain this a bit? What are transcendental phenomena and how does understanding take the lead over consciousness? > ---------------------- Transcendental phenomena (lokuttara.m dhamma.m) are the moments of path and fruition consciousness (8 moments in all). At each of the 4 moments of path consciousness (corresponding to the 4 stages of enlightenment) (a) nibbana is the object of the consciousness, and (b) various kilesa/defilements are eradicated by virtue of the force of panna. So my guess would be that it has something to do with one or other of those aspects. Jon #97765 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu May 7, 2009 10:23 am Subject: Re: Dhamma with Khun Bussabong, no 1. szmicio Dear Nina, Sarah and friends I wish you a happy Vesak. Seeing a nice girl on the street there can be so many attachment and thinking of diffrent stories. Can there be still understanding when mind is involved in such stories with attachment? Nina I cant stop lobha. Life is going its own way. Best wishes Lukas #97766 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 7, 2009 12:00 pm Subject: Re:Q. [dsg] Re: Dhamma with Khun Bussabong, no 1. nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 7-mei-2009, om 19:23 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > I wish you a happy Vesak. ------- N: Thank you and I wish the same to you, with lots of Dhamma. -------- > > Seeing a nice girl on the street there can be so many attachment > and thinking of diffrent stories. Can there be still understanding > when mind is involved in such stories with attachment? -------- N: We can learn that there are conditions for such thinking. If there would not be seeing of visible object you would not think of that girl. Seeing is conditioned, it is only a dhamma. It is vipaakacitta produced by former kamma. Then thinking: this is often with akusala citta and also this is only a dhamma, conditioned by former moments of akusala citta. Just considering that they are all dhammas is already right understanding. It may happen that there is first absorption in stories, and then. Because of listening to the true Dhamma there are also conditions for changing from akusala to kusala.That is the power of the Dhamma. -------- > > L: Nina I cant stop lobha. Life is going its own way. ------- N: True, no you who can stop lobha. But a moment of understanding is kusala and then there is no place for lobha. Nina. #97767 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu May 7, 2009 2:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - -----Original Message----- From: jonoabb To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, 7 May 2009 6:15 am Subject: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) Hi Howard (97754) > --------------- > I do not see the Buddha as attempting a definition of "self". There would > be no point in defining something that is being rejected as not having any > basis in reality. > ======================= > Then what is it that is being rejected?! A concept that has no basis > in reality needs to be defined, else the denial is worthless. > --------------- I don't see it like that. -------------------------------- And I find that utterly amazing! If a noun has no meaning, then to say that "There is no such thing" is utterly empty talk. If I were to say to you that there are no such things as frillipies, you would have every right in the world to ask me what in the hell I'm asserting, and how I know that it is so! The bottom line is that when someone says that there is no self anywhere in anything, unless they can say exactly what they are denying, the statement is entirely without meaning, and about as silly as anything could be. ------------------------------- Firstly, if "reality" has been defined, then it's not necessary to actually define what is not reality. -------------------------------- Ain't so, Jon, unless, of course, you are omniscient. Has that happened while I wasn't looking? ;-) -------------------------------- Secondly, both "not-self" and "view of self" have been defined, so a definition of "self" as a stand-alone term is not required. ---------------------------------- Okay, Jon. Tell me what view of self is. If I know that, then I will know what it is that is alleged to exist by someone who holds self view. --------------------------------- > --------------- It happens > that at the time of the Buddha the notion of "self" was well understood. > --------------- That may be so, but the Buddha gave a comprehensive classification of "view of self" that stands for all times and societies. ------------------------- And what was that exactly? And what do you mean that it lasts for all times and societies? -------------------------- > Howard (off to the airport) Happy travels :-)). Hope you are able to keep in touch with us while you're away. -------------------------- Thanks. A bit. -------------------------- Jon =========================== With metta, Howard #97768 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu May 7, 2009 1:28 pm Subject: Happy Wesak 2U! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: At this Fullmoon Day do all Buddhas Awaken: 2009 May 8 Wesak Day celebrates the birth, Enlightenment , & passing away of the Buddha Gotama . Keep Clean, Calm, Clever, Kind, Generous, and Gentle! Photo by K. Kawasaki. Remember: At this May full moon in year 534 BC the Blessed Buddha awakened by completely perfect & utterly unsurpassable self-Enlightenment! At that time a girl named Sujata Senani lived in Uruvela . When adult, she prayed before a certain Banyan tree, that she might get a good husband equal to herself in caste & that her firstborn may be a son. Her prayer was successful, since so indeed did it happen. At the full moon day of the Wesak month, she rose at early dawn & milked the cows. As soon as new buckets were placed under the cows, the milk poured in streams spontaneously all by itself! Seeing this miracle, she knew something special was going on. Now at that very night the Future Buddha had 5 dreams that made him conclude: Surely, truly, without any doubt, today is the very day, I will reach Enlightenment! His 5 colored radiance illuminated the whole tree. Then Sujata came and offered the cooked milk rice in the hands of the Great Being. After that a grass-cutter came going with a bundle of grass just harvested from nearby. He offered the Great Being 8 handfuls of Kusa grass, when he saw that this Sage was a Holy Man. The Future Buddha accepted the grass & proceeded to the foot of the Bo-tree. Reaching the imperturbable Eastern side, where all the Buddhas take their seat, he sat down saying to himself: This is verily the immovable spot, where all the prior supreme Buddhas have planted themselves! This is the very place for destroying this net of desire! Then the Future Buddha turned his back to the trunk and thus faced east. Right there, he then resolutely settled on this mighty decision: Let just blood & flesh of this body dry up & let skin and sinews fall from the bones. I will not leave this seat before having attained the absolute supreme Enlightenment! So determined did he seat himself in this unconquerable seat, which not a 100 strikes of lightning could make him waver from. At this very moment the rebel deity Mara -the Evil One- raised exclaiming: Prince Siddhattha will pass beyond my power, but I will never allow it! And sounding the Mara 's war shout, he raised his army & went out for battle. Then Mara said to his evil militia: This Sakyamuni, son of Suddhodana , is far greater than any other man, so we will never succeed to fight him up front. We will thus have to attack him from behind. Frustrated, being unable even to touch the Wielder of power with 9 mighty hurricanes of wind, rain, rocks, weapons, red coals, hot ashes, sand, mud, and darkness Mara somewhat in panic commanded his army: Why do you all stand still? Seize, kill & drive away this prince. Mara yelled: Siddhattha, leave this seat. It is not yours, but mine! Hearing this the Well-gone One replied: Mara, neither have you fulfilled the 10 perfections to the third degree nor have you given the 5 great donations. Neither have you striven for insight, nor for the welfare of all the world, nor for enlightenment! Therefore does this seat not belong to you, but truly indeed only to me. Suddenly overpowered by fear Mara 's followers fled helter-skelter in all directions. Not two went the same way, but leaving their weapons in a chaos all behind, they all fled terrified by metaphysical panic. Seeing them flee, the great assembly of deities triumphantly shouted: Mara is defeated. Prince Siddhattha has Won! Let us celebrate this truly sublime, wonderful and unique Victory! It was before the sun had set that the Tathagata thus conquered Mara & defeated his army. That same night, after having bathed, while the Bo tree rained red sprigs on his robe, the Consummate One gained knowledge of his prior lives in the first watch of the night: With the mind thus concentrated, purified, bright, fixed, unified, focused, tractable, compliant, steady & imperturbable, I directed it to remembrance of my past lives. I recollected many past lives, i.e., one birth, two...five, ten...fifty, a hundred, a thousand, 100 thousand, many eons of cosmic contraction, & many eons of cosmic expansion: There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan & species, had such a body. Such was my food, such my life of pleasure & pain, such was the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose there. There I had such name, belonged to such a sort & family, had such a form. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure & pain, such was the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose here. Thus I remembered my various past lives in all their various modes & manifold details. This was the first knowledge I attained in the first watch of the night. Ignorance was destroyed; the knowledge arose; darkness was destroyed; light arose as happens in one who is alert, aware, & determined. But the pleasant feeling that arose in this way did not invade my mind nor remain. With the mind thus concentrated, purified, bright, intact, pliant, malleable, steady, & imperturbable, I directed it to the knowledge of the passing away & reappearance of beings. I saw by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human eye & I saw beings passing away & re-appearing, and I realized how and why they are high and low, beautiful or ugly, fortunate and unfortunate all in exact accordance with the intentions of their prior actions: These beings who were endowed with bad behaviour of body, speech, & mind, who reviled the Noble Ones, held wrong views & acted under the influence of wrong views, with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the plane of misery, the bad painful destination, the lower realms, even in hell. But these beings who were gifted with good behaviour of body, speech & mind, who did not revile the Noble Ones, who held right views and acted under the influence of right views after the break-up of the body, after the death, have re-appeared in happy destinations, even in a divine world...! Thus by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human I saw beings passing away & re-appearing, all in accordance with their particular mixture of good & bad kamma. But the satisfaction that arose in this way did not invade my mind nor remain. With the mind thus concentrated, absorbed, I directed it towards understanding the ending of the mental fermentations. I realized how it actually comes to be, that: <...> When my mind saw that, it was instantly freed of the fermentation of sense-desire, it was released from the fermentation of becoming, and it became fully unobstructed by the fermentation of ignorance. Fully & perfectly Enlightened - The Buddha - perceiving this immense glory, spoke these 2 solemn verses, which never has been omitted by any of countless thousands of prior Buddha s: Through this round of countless existences have I searched, but yet failed to find "the Creator", who framed this construction: What a Suffering is indeed such Endless Birth, Ageing, Decay & Death! Now I see that "the Constructor" of this structure is Craving ...!!! Never shall this construction be build again, as all the rafters are shattered and the main beam is busted & broken... At this calming of all Craving , the mind was finally, irreversibly & ultimately stilled… Then, friends, this revelation of certainty arose in me: This release is immutable, this is the very last birth, this endless re-appearance has finally ceased... <...> Have a joyous remembering day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄhita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Happy Wesak 2U! #97769 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu May 7, 2009 2:41 pm Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) kenhowardau Hi Sarah and Nina, ------------ <. . .> S: Yes, the same old dhammas, so no need to speculate about the best place for the best visible objects and so on....better just to develop understanding which of course is very different from trying to have understanding and awareness - the latter only leads to disappointment, frustration and even anger when the 'selected' dhammas don't arise on call. So it's back to all those phone calls and the piling up work with the understanding of just the 'same old dhammas'.... So now it's your turn..... more piling up....:). ---------------- Thanks, I'm only too pleased to have another turn. As you say, it's always 'better just to develop understanding which of course is very different from trying to have understanding and awareness.' Now my turn: There is never anything wrong in reminding ourselves about the Dhamma. However, if we are thinking of it as 'things to do' then we are missing the point (the actual Dhamma) entirely. So, how can we guard against thinking of the Dhanna in terms of 'things to do?' Well, the thing to do (ha, ha) is to remember the Dhamma is all about the present moment. If we are thinking about creating conditions for a "better" "future" moment then we are missing the point. How could the Dhamma be about something better, or something future, when there is only the present moment? The present moment is composed entirely of conditioned dhammas. There is no self there. Therefore, the Dhamma can't be about the self doing anything. So simple and yet so difficult! As Nina always reminds us, 'We need more reminders!' :-) Ken H #97770 From: "Chew" Date: Thu May 7, 2009 7:22 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Sacca Yamaka chewsadhu Dear Sarah, Yes, all mundane sankhara dhammas are included in sankhara dukkha. (The explanation I got it from here: The Great Discourse on the Wheel of Dhamma http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/dhamack4.htm) 3. sankhara dukkha: In addition to this equanimous feeling (upekkha vedana), all the other formations of nama and rupa of the mundane sphere are also called sankhara dukkha as they need constant conditioning. Feeling of happiness also requires constant conditioning for its maintenance and as such should be classified as sankhara dukkha, but the commentators left it out of this classification as it had been given a separate name as viparinama dukkha. Nevertheless, it should be regarded as sankhara dukkha too since it is very plain that considerable application is needed for its maintenance. The three types of dukkha explained above should be well understood as a complete grasp of these types will help in understanding the Truth of Suffering. ----- And the number below in fact was given by Sayadaw U Nandamala in his Sacca Yamaka talks, which I listened to: Sankhara dukkha: (55 upekkhasahagatam citta) + dukkha-dukkha (2 domanasasahagatam citta + 1 kaya dukkha = 3 mental states) + vaparinama dukkha (62 somanasasahagatam citta + 1 kaya sukha = 63 mental states) = 121 citta in total. As Sayadaw said, Magga and Phala citta also have the nature of change. (By nature , its rise and fall.) Thanks and Sadhu. With respect, Chew #97771 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Thu May 7, 2009 11:27 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (97534) > > ---------------------- > > > However, wrong livelihood is far wider than the undertaking of one of these occupations. It is any breach of sila committed in the pursuit of one's livelihood. Thus, to my understanding, a doctor who cheats the system would be committing wrong livelihood at the instance of such cheating. > > > > I would agree that makes sense. However, there are no kusala moments, I would assume, if one's occupation is lying, cheating or stealing. > > ---------------------- > > Conventionally speaking, of course, that would be so. But in terms of moment-to-moment dhammas, there may be kusala (or akusala) arising at any time. For example, stealing can be done with or without restraint as to the use of force or violence. > > Jon My mother had that idea as well; she thanked a mugger who took her money for not hurting her. Don't know if he fully appreciated it or not, but I will let my Mom know that she is unknowingly a Buddhist. :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #97772 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Thu May 7, 2009 11:29 pm Subject: Dhammas (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (97581) > > ---------------------- > > > Vis.: XIV, 32 (talking about understanding/panna) > > > Now the things classed as aggregates [khandha], bases [ayatana], elements [dhatu], faculties [indriya], truths [sacca], dependent origination [paticca-samuppada], etc., are the "soil" of this understanding, ... > > > > Seeing into the nature of the impersonal elements that are ordinarily taken for self is certainly of great importance. > > ---------------------- > > Indeed, is there anything of any greater importance, would you say? > > Jon Well, I would just say that personally I think that namas are more important than rupas. Seeing into the nature of sentience/consciousness seems to me to be the main area for insight into the nature of existence. However, I understand the point that if one cannot distinguish rupa from nama this is very difficult. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #97773 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Thu May 7, 2009 11:34 pm Subject: Re: effort epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Connie > > (97687) > > ---------------------- > > dear hoping to read the Visuddhimagga, > > If you read English &/or Chinese, you might want to take a look at thepathofpurification.blogspot.com -- just below the image of the front cover. Please consider listening to the lectures as well. > > ---------------------- > > Thanks for bringing to my (and others') attention this copy of Nanamoli's translation of the Vism for downloading (scanned pdf file, 131,500 MB, 471 pages). I'm happy to stand corrected! Thanks for clarifying this, Jon and Connie. I do have a copy of the Visuddhimagga in pdf format. Someone also gave me the link for the Vimuttimagga as well, translated by Ehara, Soma Thera, etc. from the Chinese. I can't remember the link, but if you would like a copy I'd be glad to email it, or upload it to dsg files. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #97774 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Thu May 7, 2009 11:41 pm Subject: Cittas and cetasikas (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (97703) > > ---------------------- > > > The first verse defines the mental factors by way of four characteristics that are common to them all: > > > > > > 1) arising together with consciousness (ekuppaada) > > > 2) ceasing together with consciousness (ekanirodha) > > > 3) having the same object as consciousness (ekaalambana) > > > 4) having he same base as consciousness (ekavatthuka) > > > >>> > > > > This is a good piece of information, thanks. > > ---------------------- > > And please give some thought to the implications of it. > > > ---------------------- > > I suppose. But if you want to know how things work, you need to have a view of the mechanism, do you not? This pariyatti business is beginning to seem rather thready to me. I mean, to have a decent intellectual understanding of something you have to have a vision of how the whole thing works, don't you? I hope I'm not going to wind up with the impression that the "glue" that holds the whole works together is just a lot of faith with a spotty amount of actual understanding.... > > ---------------------- > > I would describe intellectual understanding/pariyatti as being an understanding of "how things are" rather that "how things work". The Buddha did not profess to teach the latter. > > As far as "how's" are concerned, I think what's important is how panna/the path is to be developed, rather than how what is to be known by panna comes to be (or "works"). The only knowing that is worthwhile in the ultimate sense is direct knowledge of the way things are (as opposed to how we currently understand them to be). > > > ---------------------- > > > It is capable of verification by direct experience, but it requires panna of a sufficiently high level. Thus, not capable of investigation by the likes of you and me ;-)) is what I meant. > > > > Hmn...Well I appreciate your including me in the same group as yourself. > > ---------------------- > > Not a compliment, I can assure you, so there's no need to thank me ;-)) > > > ---------------------- > I mean, I may be too ignorant to know a cetasika when I see one, but at least I'm not completely oblivous. Or am I..... > > ---------------------- > > Well if I am, then so are you (see what I mean?). > > Jon Marlon Brando was once asked why he was dismissive of his own brilliant acting, when others said he was a genius in his field. Brando answered "In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is King." I wonder if anyone around here has a half an eye open, so they can tell us if we're on the right track... In any case, it's kind of hard for the blind or half-blind to assess each other, or the truth, is it not? :-) While I take your point that the only important knowledge is 'the way things are,' rather than 'how they work,' if one does not have a coherent basic model of 'how they work,' it is hard to take it for granted that their vision of 'how things are' is accurate. If I told you that flying pink elephants rule the stratosphere and cause the various types of weather to arise by how they blow their trunks to create air currents, you would want me to tell you how that works, and how I know it to be true. If I just said 'Well that's just the way it works' you might not believe me. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #97775 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Thu May 7, 2009 11:44 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > If as a result of reading and considering there is more understanding (at whatever level), then there has been "practice". It can happen just like that ;-)) I have noticed that occasionally, reading will lead to a bit of understanding. That is always exciting. :-) > > ---------------------- > > Thank you for the suggestions. I may wait a bit before getting more material, as I am somewhat overwhelmed, but I appreciate the suggestions for the future. > > > > I have taken a look at the Sangaha online, and for now will consult the online version. > > ---------------------- > > And see Connie's recent message (and my reply to her of a short time ago) for details of a downloadable version of the Vism. > > Jon Thanks Jon. I have the Vism and have transferred it over to my new computer. I hope to read parts of it as I can, as well as the Vimuttimagga [Path of Freedom,] both of which seem intriguing. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #97776 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 8, 2009 12:39 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 25. nilovg Dear friends, Misunderstandings are bound to arise as to what awareness really is and because of these misunderstandings people think that it is impossible to be aware in daily life. Someone wrote, for instance, that awareness is the same as keeping oneself under constant observation. We should observe ourselves in action, he said, and this can be done quite simply by asking oneself, “What am I doing?”. He thought that in this way we learn to be aware of what we are doing and that this constitutes awareness. The word awareness in conventional language has a meaning which is different from awareness, sati, of the Eightfold Path. When we ask ourselves, “What am I doing?”, what is the reality at that moment? There are many types of citta which think at such moments. If we do not realize that it is nåma which thinks while we ask ourselves, “What am I doing?”, the wrong view of self will not be eradicated. There is only thinking about the self who is performing different actions. There is no sati of the Eightfold Path, there is no development of understanding of the different characteristics of nåma and rúpa. When we are reading and we answer the question, “What am I doing?”, with, “I am reading”, without development of understanding, we live only in the world of conventional truth. We will continue to be ignorant of the absolute truth, the truth about nåma and rúpa. When we are reading, is there not the nåma which experiences visible object, is there not the rúpa which is visible object, is there not the nåma which thinks about the meaning of what is read, and should these realities not be known? It is the same when we are walking, talking or eating, if we only know “I am walking, talking and eating”, it is not at all helpful for the development of paññå. There is still the wrong view of self. While we are walking, talking and eating there are nåma and rúpa appearing through the six doors, and right understanding can be developed of them. Some people believe that they have to slow down all their movements in order to be able to be aware. Is there desire for awareness? If one is not aware naturally in one’s daily life paññå cannot develop. ******** Nina. #97777 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 8, 2009 3:50 am Subject: Dhamma with Khun Bussabong, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, Khun Bong: I would like to hear more about anattaa. Acharn: There is seeing now. Can anyone make it arise? There is seeing and that which appears through the eyes. Khun Bong: There can be understanding of anattaa, but we forget again. Acharn: We do not forget the image of a person a dog, but we are forgetful as to that which appears through the eyes. It appears now, it is dhamma. We do not know the truth of what appears through the eyes, it does not belong to anyone. Whenever seeing arises, something appears through the eyes, but we cling to it as ours, as self. The reality that is anattaa is not a person, not a thing, not us. What appears through the bodysense we also take for self. Hardness or softness of the body is not different from hardness or softness elsewhere but we cling to it as ours. It can be known as dhamma, non- self. We forget about the Buddha’s words:”Is seeing-consciousness permanent or impermanent?” When we are fast asleeep the world does not appear, there are no seeing, hearing or the other sense impressions. Then, when we wake up, colour arises and appears through the eyesense. And then thinking arises. ------------ Nina. #97778 From: "sprlrt" Date: Fri May 8, 2009 4:29 am Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sprlrt Hi Sarah, Scott, & all Last bit of translation (Atthasalini on Dhs nama-rupa couplet) - Alberto Dhs 1315. ... All dhammas are within the range of concept/definition/language. Dhs 1316. Of these, which is nama? Vedana khandha, sanna khandha, sankhara khanda, vinnana khandha, and the unconditioned element; this is called nama. Atth 1316. Nama and rupa couplet It is nama in the sense of name-making, in the sense of bending, and in the sense of attracting. Of these five khandhas, only four are nama in the sense of ame-making. ... (But here) it's nama in the sense of bending the four [nama] khandhas. Because they bend towards their object [all dhammas, inc. pannatti]. It's nama also in the sense of the attraction they all [khandhas] have. Because the four [nama] khandhas attract their object and viceversa. Nibbana attracts faultless [nama] dhammas on to itself by object predominance condition [arammana-adhipati paccaya which, apart from nibbana, also includes other dhammas accompanied by plesaurable feeling, but not pannatti]. ... Atth 1316. Naamaruupaduke naakara.na.t.thena ca namana.t.thena ca naamana.t.thena ca naama.m. Tattha cattaaro khandhaa taava naamakara.na.t.thena 'naama.m. ... 'Namana.t.thenaapi cettha cattaaro khandhaa naama.m. Te hi aaramma.naabhimukhaa namanti. 'Naamana.t.thena sabbampi naama.m. Cattaaro hi khandhaa arammane aññamañña.m naamenti. Nibbaana.m aaramma.naadhipatipaccayataaya attani anavajjadhamme nāmeti. #97779 From: "Scott" Date: Fri May 8, 2009 5:15 am Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Alberto and Sarah, Regarding: "...All dhammas are within the range of concept/definition/language." (sabbeva dhammaa pa~n~natti/adhivacanaa/nirutti pathaa) Scott: Thanks for adding the above. 'All dhammas' can come into the 'range of' concept, designation, and explanation of words or way of speaking. Keeping in mind that pa~n~natti are objects of naama, and not naama, to say that all dhammaa can come into the range of pa~n~natti is not the same as saying that, since naama can have pa~n~natti as object, pa~n~natti is thereby made any more 'real'. Pa~n~natti can simply describe or contain all dhammaa but are not paramattha dhammaa. In the most recent quote from Atthasaalini, regarding naama, we see: "Because they bend towards their object [all dhammas, inc. pannatti]." Scott: So, pa~n~natti are objects for naama - naama bends towards pa~n~natti. This is clear. Considering the below: "Nibbana attracts faultless [nama] dhammas on to itself by object predominance condition [arammana-adhipati paccaya which, apart from nibbana, also includes other dhammas accompanied by pleasurable feeling, but not pannatti]." Scott: I'm not sure where the first '[' should go in the above, perhaps '[but not pa~n~natti]'. Nibbaana is a paramattha dhamma while pa~n~natti is not. Pa~n~natti, I'm musing, is like 'faux-nibbaana' since it mimics the timeless nature of that object (i.e. it is outside of time but not in the same way nibbaana is), while having none of it's reality, if that makes sense; also, naama bends to pa~n~natti as well, but not the same sorts of dhammaa which can have nibbaana as object. Unlike nibbaana, pa~n~natti is not real. The 'duration' of pa~n~natti is limited, I'm thinking now, by the duration of citta and cetasikaa which have it as object; since these arise and fall away with rapidity, so too, for all intents and purposes - as far as experience goes - does pa~n~natti. But this does not imply that pa~n~natti arises and falls away. The 'elephant' I think of, for example, seems to be the same each time 'elephant' comes to mind, as it were. In this way, 'elephant' seems unchanging and timeless. It is only the concept or the definition or the language that remain the same. Sincerely, Scott. #97780 From: "sprlrt" Date: Sat May 9, 2009 2:46 am Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sprlrt Dear Scott, & Sarah, ... > "Because they bend towards their object [all dhammas, inc. pannatti]." > > Scott: So, pa~n~natti are objects for naama - naama bends towards pa~n~natti. ... A: Yes, pannati is included in the dhammas that are arammana paccaya, object condition, a necessary condition for the arising (& falling away) of nama dhammas, citta and its cetasikas. > "Nibbana attracts faultless [nama] dhammas on to itself by object predominance condition [arammana-adhipati paccaya which, apart from nibbana, also includes other dhammas accompanied by pleasurable feeling, but not pannatti]." > > Scott: I'm not sure where the first '[' should go in the above, perhaps '[but not pa~n~natti]'. Nibbaana is a paramattha dhamma while pa~n~natti is not. ... A: Pannati is not included in the dhammas which are arammana adhipati paccaya, object predominance condition, along the 2 dosa-mula, the 2 moha-mula cittas, and akusala kaya-vinnana, all other nama dhammas are included., along with the 18 nipphana/sabhava rupa. K. Sujin has written a booklet on paccaya which I've found very helpful. The english translation is available at http://www.dhammastudy.com/paccaya.html Alberto #97781 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 9, 2009 3:04 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours (9) and commentary, part 2. nilovg Dear friends, The four ariyan lineages. Sutta 9, part 2. The first three aspects of the ariyan lineage are, as we have seen, contentment of the monk with the requisites of robes, food and lodging. The Co states that contentment as to medicines, the fourth requisite, is included in contentment with food. The fourth aspect is relinquishment (pahaana) and bhaavanaa, mental development. This is actually having delight (ramati) in abandoning akusala and delight in developing kusala. The co refers to the Pa.tisambhidaamagga, and mentions the abandonment of the hindrances by developing their opposites. He delights in developing renunciation (nekkhamma) and the abandonment of sensuous desire. He delights in developing non-illwill and abandoning illwill. The text mentions the following pairs, of which the first one has to be developed and the second one to be abandoned: perception of light/ sloth and torpor, non-disturbance/restlessness, establishment in the Dhamma/doubt, understanding/ignorance, gladness/ aversion. Then the stages of jhaana are mentioned, and each higher stage abandons the coarser preceding stage: the first jhaana/the five hindrances, the second jhaana/ applied thinking and sustained thinking, the third jhaana/rapture, the fourth jhaana/happy feeling and unhappy feeling (sukha and dukkha). It is the same in the case of the aruupa-jhaanas: each higher stage abandons the preceding stage. Further, the co mentions the development of insight, and indicates in pairs what is to be developed and what is to be abandoned: impermanence/permanence, dukkha/sukha (happiness), anattaa/attaa, weariness (nibbida) /clinging, dispassion (viraga) /desire, cessation (nirodha) /origination, renunciation/grasping. As to cessation and origination, the dhammas leading to the end of the cycle are to be developed, and then there will not be anymore origination, rebirth. Then the stages of enlightenment are mentioned and the defilements that are successively abandoned: the stage of the sotaapanna/wrong view, the stage of the sakadaagaami/ coarse defilements, the stage of the anaagaami/subtle defilements, the stage of the arahat/ all defilements. The co refers to the Diigha Nikaaya, The Tenfold Series, and quotes the beginning of the Satipatthaanasutta: This is the only Path leading to the purification of beings... He refers to being mindful of going, etc. and mentions the meditation on corpses: just as a corpse so will our body be. The co. refers to the Abhidhamma, stating that all conditioned dhammas are impermanent, dukkha, a boil, a disease... He is not conceited that he has developed insight into the three general characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anattaa for sixty or seventy years, nor does he disparage others who haven’t. ----------- N: One should realize that also the development of insight is not self and does not belong to a self. It is conditioned by hearing the Dhamma and considering of what one has heard. What has been explained here does not only apply to the monk. Also layfollowers can apply the texts in their daily life. In developing right understanding of naama and ruupa in daily life one learns that whatever one experiences, whatever happens, are mere conditioned dhammas. Understanding will eventually lead to equanimity with regard to the events of life. ********* Nina. #97782 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat May 9, 2009 3:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) -1a sarahprocter... Dear Scott, Apologies for the delay - we've had a few mini-dramas this end and are now preparing to go away next week too.....anyway, just the usual worldly concerns in samsara! Dividing part 1 again into two parts as it's long: --- On Sun, 3/5/09, Scott wrote: Scott:> I'd like to really get precise about what 'concept' actually refers to. For example, 'house' is a concept. Is the constructed, conventionally experienced collection of concepts that go to form a phrase that is thought about (eg. 'House is a concept but does not exist in reality') also 'concept'? I'd also like more precision when it comes to understanding 'thinking'. There is the conventional notion of thinking and then there is the 'thinking' which has to be referred only to the moment. >I would assume that the phrase 'momentarily experienced' refers to the fact that citta arises and falls away quickly. 'Concept' doesn't have the characteristics of rise and fall as I understand it, hence, it is 'there' to be experienced by a citta in the mind door. In what form is this concept that is momentarily experienced? Is it the momentary nature of the experience itself that delimits the concept? .... Sarah: I agree with all the above and 'yes' to all the questions, inc. the last. I'd just say that 'concept' is experienced by the citta in the mind door and leave out the 'there' even in the apostrophes. ... Scott:> For example, take the word 'Dhamma'. Would this word be the sort of concept you refer to? What would be going on when one has the experience of thinking this word? ... Sarah: Yes....many mind door processes, but again, no need to count. There can be aware of thinking, whilst thinking of 'Dhamma' or now. ... Scott:> I can see where there are all sorts of 'thoughts' about Dhamma that seem to come one after the other in some illusory story form and are conventionally called thinking about Dhamma. .... Sarah: Yes. Of course such thinking can be with understanding, ignorance or attachment (or even aversion). ... to be contd Metta, Sarah ======= #97783 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat May 9, 2009 3:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) -1b sarahprocter... Dear Scott, contd. >>S: "No, not as we think we experience it - this is a concept, a long story about the thought..." >Scott: Do you differentiate concept as 'the thought' and concept as 'a long story about the thought'? Here, it would seem, there are two sorts of concepts being referred to. .... Sarah: They are all concepts. There are many kinds of concepts (as the passages Alberto has been posting point to and as discussed before). However, it's more important to understand the realities, rather than try to differentiate different concepts, otherwise it's just more conceptual thinking - and we're already experts in that! ... >Scott: Yes. 'Thinking and thought' refer only to the moment when it comes to the Dhamma. And a lot occurs in the moment, given that a number of dhammaa are in force at once and combine to experience an object in a very complex fashion. In the moment vitakka experiences the object according to the characteristic way it has - the recently somewhat controversial function of repeatedly touching or turning. This function is performed only in the moment, no matter what the simile gives one to imagine about many moments or dhammaa which have to last long enough to do something over and over again. ... Sarah: Yes, this is why it's so important to have a good foundation of Abhidhamma understanding - then it's clear that whatever we read, it's about conditioned dhammas which arise momentarily and then fall away. This is why firm (conceptual) knowledge of the truth is indicated as being essential for satipa.t.thaana to develop. ... >Scott: You refer here to 'the ideas about the world'. Are these the concepts we are considering? These can seem overly wrought and complex - such that these couldn't have arisen in the moment. Or does this refer to the thought about the world which is momentary and experiences 'the world' of the moment? .... Sarah: I'm a bit lost here now. There can be wise or unwise considering now, whether we're reflecting on the words we read or on a friend's health or on something we just heard on the news. Of course, most the considering is unwise, given our tendencies for akusala. The most important thing is that sati and pa~n~naa can slip in anytime regardless. So it's not a matter of thinking a certain way, but of developing right understanding of what is experienced. ... Scott:> When 'citta thinks wisely about the object' is this in words? I'd imagine words come later. ... Sarah: It depends. There can be thinking wisely with or without words. Even in the sense door processes there can be kusala cittas (with vitakka, of course) experiencing the sense objects. ... Scott:> When I have the conventional thought, 'There are only dhammaa arising and falling away according to conditions, no one does anything,' I wouldn't necessarily assume that this was wise reflection proper. You and I can agree that this statement reflects the Dhamma. ... Sarah: Yes, it depends on the cittas, not on the words or concepts as to whether it is wise or unwise reflection. One might be repeating the line with attachment, doubt or sarcastically, for example. Different moments, different cittas. ... >>Sarah: "It depends on accumulated sa~n~naa, vitakka, sati, pa~n~naa and so on. This is why sa~n~naa is given as the proximate cause of sati. If there is no right remembrance of Dhamma, there is no wise reflection of it. Back again to natural decisive support condition." >Scott: This is important, I think - the idea of accumulation as applied to the various dhammaa composing the 'thought' (in the moment). In other words, that which is given to the experience of the moment by that which has 'come to it' from past moments and within each dhamma containing accumulations according to characteristic and function - a very complex matter. Can you say more on this interaction of accumulations as it bears on the moment? This is, perhaps, one way to understand natural decisive support condition. And, speaking of conditions, what sort of condition is pa~n~natti? ... S: Pa~n~natti can only be object condition (meaning it is experienced by the citta) or natural decisive support condition. In the latter case, it is by way of thinking of such concepts, that the tendency to think about such concepts again in future 'accumualtes'. So 'the Dhamma' is the condition in this way for wise considering and the development of understanding in future. If the Buddha hadn't taught the Dhamma and if there had not been any conditions for us to hear/read the Dhamma, there would be no conditions for right understanding of dhammaa (realities) to develop. So now, there may or may not be conditions to reflect wisely on dhammaa, such as seeing, visible object or thinking. It'll depend on accumulations from the past as will the direct understanding of such dhammaa when they appear. ... I'll look f/w to your further comments if you feel inclined to add any. Metta, Sarah ======= #97784 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat May 9, 2009 4:25 am Subject: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Howard (97767) > --------------- > I don't see it like that. > -------------------------------- > And I find that utterly amazing! If a noun has no meaning, then to say that "There is no such > thing" is utterly empty talk. If I were to say to you that there are no such things as frillipies, > you would have every right in the world to ask me what in the hell I'm asserting, and how I know that > it is so! The bottom line is that when someone says that there is no self anywhere in anything, unless > they can say exactly what they are denying, the statement is entirely without meaning, and about as > silly as anything could be. > ------------------------------- I think it has been pointed out here before that the assertion "there is no self" was not made in direct terms. What the Buddha said was, "All dhammas are not-self". While the former may require a definition of "self", the latter does not (it requires a definition, or understanding, of the term "not-self"). The term "self" is, however, used in various contexts in the suttas but, to my knowledge, is not anywhere defined by the Buddha. > Firstly, if "reality" has been defined, then it's not necessary to actually > define what is not reality. > -------------------------------- > Ain't so, Jon, unless, of course, you are omniscient. Has that happened while I wasn't looking? ;-) > -------------------------------- Sorry, but I'm not with you here. My point was that if those things having a basis in reality are defined by the Buddha, then anything outside that is "not reality". > Secondly, both "not-self" and "view of self" have been defined, so a definition > of "self" as a stand-alone term is not required. > ---------------------------------- > Okay, Jon. Tell me what view of self is. If I know that, then I will know what it is that is > > alleged to exist by someone who holds self view. > --------------------------------- Well for a start, there is the description of sakkaaya-ditthi ("personality belief") given in SN 22:1, which sets out the 4 kinds of view that may be held in relation to each of the 5 khandhas: <<< Ven. Sariputta said: "Now, how is one afflicted in body & afflicted in mind? "There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — assumes form (the body) to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. He is seized with the idea that 'I am form' or 'Form is mine.' As he is seized with these ideas, his form changes & alters, and he falls into sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair over its change & alteration. >>> > > --------------- > It happens > > that at the time of the Buddha the notion of "self" was well understood. > > --------------- > > That may be so, but the Buddha gave a comprehensive classification of "view of > self" that stands for all times and societies. > ------------------------- > And what was that exactly? And what do you mean that it lasts for all times and societies? > -------------------------- In the Brahmajaala Sutta DN 1, the Buddha classified all possible kinds of wrong view, including views that involve an idea of self (as I understand it, these are all variations of eternalism or annihilationism). DN 1 is not available on ati, but can be viewed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmajala_Sutta_(Theravada) Jon #97785 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat May 9, 2009 4:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) -2a sarahprocter... Dear Scott, --- On Tue, 5/5/09, Scott wrote: >Regarding: >>S: "I take 'thinking' in the above to be referring to samma sankappa, right thinking (vitakka cetasika) of the eightfold path...the factors, including samma sankappa, arise singly. This is in contrast to the multiple moments of samma sankappa arising in the development of insight and jhaana (of course not as the development of the path in the case of jhaana.)" >Scott: Okay, the path is of one moment, this is clear. My reflections go to the 'multiple moments' to which you refer above. We've clarified that the inner monologue which is conventional thinking is not samma sankappa, nor can it refer to the function of vitakka cetasika. This is the superficial and illusory overlay we get lost in. >I think the shorthand terminology for this, at least on the list, is 'stories'. The manner in which this narrative is connected somehow to the momentary function of vitakka cetasika is under investigation. Or, perhaps, one might need to consider the experience of an apparently consistent narrative to be a function of other mental factors, such as ignorance. .... Sarah: Yes, to all your points. When there is the 'narrative', the 'stories' as during most of the day, vitakka is performing its important function too, also sa~n~naa and other mental factors. As you say, ignorance plays a big role too...and lobha... ... >>S: "...As for the relation of 'the moment to the 'whole thought'', in fact there's only ever a moment of experiencing an object, as you know. 'c-o-m-p-u-t- e-r' - many cittas, many mind-door processes, many moments of vitakka involved in the experience as we know it." >Scott: When 'thinking' is 'examined', that is, when one experiences the inner monologue, and then 'thinks' about it (i.e. experiences more inner monologue that is now supposedly about the inner monologue), we can say that this is neither the moment of vitakka nor 'thinking' in the true sense. ... Sarah: No, but such a monologue consists of many, many moments of vitakka and cittas which think. There are only the dhammaa arising and falling away, even though we think about a long monologue. ... to be contd Metta Sarah ======== #97786 From: "jessicamui" Date: Sat May 9, 2009 4:29 am Subject: Questions regarding Asava jessicamui Dear Friends, While studying MN2 Sabbasava Sutta, I cannot quite understand the term "Asava". Some translate as mental effluents or influx. How does it actually work in terms of the unwholesome mental phenomena arsing and passing away? Also, why Dosa is not part of asava ? Thanks in advance for your help. Metta, Jessica. #97787 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat May 9, 2009 4:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) -2b sarahprocter... Dear Scott & all, last section... Scott:>The thoughts we think all day long are no more than the scenes from life pieced together from all the seeing and hearing and tasting and smelling and being touched by things. They are just a part of this complex illusion. ... Sarah: Nicely put. This is why we can argue and ask questions about these stories or illusions all day - 'what should we do in such and such a situation?', for example - but the development of wisdom only occurs through the understanding of seeing and hearing etc. ... Scott:> So, when I think about Dhamma, in the inner-monologue, conventional sense - soundless words in my head - I'm tempted to think more of these thoughts than of, say, thoughts about music or whatever else. But is this any different? ... Sarah: Still thinking about concepts, with or without sati. Again, it's not a matter of the 'situation' or (in this case) object of thinking, but of the understanding at such times. I remember a friend once suggested that an engineer engrossed in his designs or projects wouldn't have sati in the way that someone with more time for Dhamma study would. I don't think this is right because even whilst so engrossed in one's work, there can be right understanding anytime. Otherwise we forget again about dhammaa as anatta and begin to try and make rules or classify 'situations' again. ... Scott:> The terms 'papa~nca' ('obstacle, impediment, a burden which causes delay, hindrance, delay...illusion, obsession, hindrance to spiritual progress') and 'papa~nceti' ('to have illusions, to imagine, to be obsessed') come to mind. Do you think these terms are helpful in clarifying this further? ... Sarah: Yes, most of the day there are papa~nca - thinking with lobha, maana or di.t.thi. (More in the 'Honey Ball Sutta' & 'Mulapariyaaya Sutta' & of course, U.P.) .... Scott:> To play the Paa.li play-on-words game, there is 'cetiya' which is 'a tumulus, sepulchral monument, cairn'; there are 'citi' and 'cinati' (related to 'cetiya'), the former meaning 'a heap, made of bricks', the latter, 'to heap up, to collect, to accumulate.' This certainly could be a description of the thoughts that proliferate and seem so meaningful at times. .... Sarah: Pursuing your word game - so we also have a ceti, which is a shrine or pagoda, a 'heap, made of bricks' in Buddhist centres such as in Sri Lanka and India. "By 'consciousness' (citta) is meant that which thinks of its object, is aware variously. Or, inasmuch as this word 'consciousness' is common to all states or classes of consciousness, that which is known as worldly, moral, immoral, or the great inoperative, is termed 'consciousness.' because it arranges itself in a series (cinoti, or, its own series or continuity) by way of apperception in a process of thought. And the resultant is also termed 'consciousness' because it is accumulatd (cito) by kamma and the corruptions." .... Scott:> So, the 'thoughts' are illusory. Somehow, as you are suggesting, these stories are not yet the concept that is object for citta and its accompanying mental factors within the mind-door. This concept is somehow as fleeting as the consciousness which has it as object. Can you say more about this? ... Sarah: Many, many illusory concepts thought about, but I'm reluctant to refer to them as 'fleeting' like the consciousness, because they don't arise or fall away - they are just experienced. Let me know your further 'concepts' and anything else you'd like me to say. Thanks for the helpful discussion, Scott. Metta, Sarah ====== #97788 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat May 9, 2009 5:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Alberto (& Scott), --- On Tue, 5/5/09, sprlrt wrote: >My pali is far from being perfect, any corrections are welcome. - Alberto ... S: Your translation looked good to me and you help me learn some Pali! Many thanks, I'll look forward to any other extracts you care to bring to our attention. Metta, Sarah Dhammasangani, nikkhepakandam, suttantikadukam: 1313, 1314, 1315. katame dhammaa pa~n~natti / adhivacanaa / nirutti? yaa tesa.m tesa.m dhammaana.m sa"nkhaa sama~n~naa pa~n~natti vohaaro naama.m naamakamma.m naamadheyya. m nirutti bya~njana.m abhilaapo -- ime dhammaa pa~n~natti / adhivacanaa / nirutti. sabbeva dhammaa pa~n~natti/adhivaca naa/nirutti pathaa. Which dhammas are concept / definition / language? That which, of those dhammas, is name, description, concept, conventional usage, definition, named, name-assignation, denomination, language, interpretation, detail; these dhammas are concept/definition/ language. All dhammas are within the range of concept/definition/ language. <...> #97789 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat May 9, 2009 4:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Questions sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, Nina answered your good questions, but I'd just like to comment on this: --- On Tue, 5/5/09, szmicio wrote: >When seeing there is also idea of my seeing. ... S: Most the day there is a lot of seeing, but no idea about it as 'mine' or anyone else's -- just seeing of the visible object followed by attachment or ignorance. I agree that it's also very common to take it for 'my seeing' when there's an idea about it. We find ourselves so important, that one way or other 'me, my or mine' will come into the 'inner dialogue' Scott and I are discussing. By the way, please join in any other threads too... I always appreciate your reflections. Metta, Sarah ======== #97790 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat May 9, 2009 5:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: effort. sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep, (Connie or Azita) --- On Fri, 8/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >J: Conventionally speaking, of course, that would be so. But in terms of moment-to-moment dhammas, there may be kusala (or akusala) arising at any time. For example, stealing can be done with or without restraint as to the use of force or violence. ... R:>My mother had that idea as well; she thanked a mugger who took her money for not hurting her. Don't know if he fully appreciated it or not, but I will let my Mom know that she is unknowingly a Buddhist. :-) ... S: I'm always impressed when people like your mother manage to look on the bright side at such times and in this case to even show her appreciation. I'd like to hear more such stories about your mother's good example. There is a sutta in Anguttara Nikaya about skilful and unskilful thieves. Perhaps Connie or Azita can find it - I seem to recall Azita reading it out and asking about it once... Metta, Sarah ======== #97791 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat May 9, 2009 5:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma with Khun Bussabong, no 1. sarahprocter... Dear Lukas (& Nina), --- On Fri, 8/5/09, szmicio wrote: >Dear Nina, Sarah and friends I wish you a happy Vesak. ... S: Thanks Lukas. It's just another ordinary workday in Hong Kong, unlike in Buddhist countries.....but even there, just more moments of seeing, attachment and thinking as Nina is reminding us with the new series. Thinking about India or Vesak, just another moment of thinking about a concept. ... >Seeing a nice girl on the street there can be so many attachment and thinking of diffrent stories. Can there be still understanding when mind is involved in such stories with attachment? ... S: Why not? The attachment and thinking is so real and can be known, but only with understanding and detachment. If we think that there shouldn't be such attachment or that it's not a suitable object or time, then that view is a real hindrance to the development of understanding and awareness. It has to be the awareness of the tendencies that arise, not of those we think would be preferable. Besides, everyone has attachment to sense objects....so very, very common. ... >Nina I cant stop lobha. Life is going its own way. ... S: True! At least you know! Seeing of visible object, then attachment. Attachment after the first moment of life, on and on... Metta, Sarah p.s Nina, thanks for sharing the good series. Conditions to appreciate Khun Bong's enthusiasm for the Dhamma, always in such good humour, and all the great questions she'd raise and discussions she'd participate in. She was always so welcoming to us all over the years as well. ================= ========= #97792 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 9, 2009 5:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma with Khun Bussabong, no 1. nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 9-mei-2009, om 14:22 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Nina, thanks for sharing the good series. Conditions to appreciate > Khun Bong's enthusiasm for the Dhamma, always in such good humour, > and all the great questions she'd raise and discussions she'd > participate in. -------- N: She was always so concerned for the newcomers to the Foundation, and there are newcomers every week. When Khun Unop gave me the tape I did not know it was all with Khun Bong. She spoke with such a lively voice, it is even better to hear her. The way she said: She was then already seriously ill. ------ Nina. #97793 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 9, 2009 7:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Questions regarding Asava nilovg Dear Jessica, It is a pleasure to see you here. Op 9-mei-2009, om 13:29 heeft jessicamui het volgende geschreven: > While studying MN2 Sabbasava Sutta, I cannot quite understand the > term "Asava". Some translate as mental effluents or influx. How > does it actually work in terms of the unwholesome mental phenomena > arsing and passing away? Also, why Dosa is not part of asava ? -------- N: I quote part from my Cetasikas: ------- The same defilements are also classified as floods, oghas, and the Atthasaalinii states: (I, Part I, Chapter II, 49) that the "floods" submerge a person again and again in the cycle of birth and death. They are also classified as yokes, they yoke us to the cycle. Three of the aasavas are connected with clinging and one with ignorance. Actually, ignorance and clinging cause us to be in the cycle of birth and death. Dosa is not classified as an aasava, but clinging conditions dosa. When things are not the way we like them to be there is aversion. When you study the Dependent Origination you will see that dosa is not among the links of the D.O. ------ Nina. #97794 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 9, 2009 7:17 am Subject: Vesak Discussions with Lodewijk, part 1. nilovg Dear friends, On the occasion of Vesak, Lodewijk asked some questions. Q. 1: There is no self, no person, but when I pick up the phone and want to speak to the Hotel manager, I know he is at his desk on the other side. He is still there. How can I reconcile this idea with the truth of non-self, anattaa? Nina: Neither you, nor me nor another person are the same for one moment. You can think of someone else's body and it seems that it was there all the time and that it does not change. In reality all ruupas of the body, from head to toe, arise, conditioned by kamma, citta, temperature or nutrition, and then fall away immediately. Nothing remains, except the memory. After a while you can notice that the body changes and becomes older, but this would not be possible if there were not a change at each moment. The same with what we call mind, citta. There is only one citta at a time, it arises and then falls away immediately. True, we can speak of a character of this or that person, and this is because of different accumulated tendencies. Each citta that arises falls away, and it is succeeded by the next citta without any interval. That is why accumulated tendencies can be carried on from moment to moment. Someone may be angry and the next moment he may be kind, these are completely different cittas. Can we say that there is one personality? As Proust said of his girlfriend Albertine: there is not one Albertine, but there are several Albertines. There is not a person who remains, but because of remembrance we have the illusion that there is a person who exists, who stays the same. -------- I like to read to you a discussion between Sarah and Ken: > Sarah quotes: Visuddhimagga, VII, 39: > > "As to the shortness of the moment: in the ultimate sense the life > moment of living beings is extremely short, being only as much as the > occurence of a single conscious moment. Just as a chariot wheel, when > it is rolling, rolls [that is touches the ground] only on one point of > [the circumference of] its tyre, 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, according as it was said: 'In a past > conscious moment he did live, not he does live, not he will live. In > a future conscious moment not he did live, not he does live. In a > present conscious moment not he did live, he does live, not he will > live. > > "'Life, person, pleasure, pain - just these alone > Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. > Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive > Are all alike, gone never to return. > No [world is] born if [consciousness is] not > Produced; when that is present, then it lives; > When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead: > The highest sense this concept will allow' (Nd.1,42)." > .... Sarah: >Isn't it great to realise that the dhammas, such as seeing, visible object and sati are just the same in whichever conventional world we find ourselves at any time? ------------------- Ken: Yes, and we will never tire of saying how great that is to realise. For example, lately I have been thinking of how life - no matter whether it be good or bad, rich or poor, happy or sad, peaceful or strifeful - is just for this moment. "This moment" and then another, completely new life (universe , existence, set of realities that can be mistaken for self) arises to take its place. But, even better than this realisation, is to see life (as you have said) as dhammas arising at doorways. Visible object . . and so on. There is no need to classify momentary existences as rich or poor, happy or sad. It's just the same old dhammas! ------- Lodewijk: Yes, that clarifies the matter of anattaa. Nina: As Ken said: each moment is a completely new life. Sarah quoted: Life, pleasure, pain, they are only one moment. This is comforting in case of a loss or sadness: it is only one moment and then gone forever. ----- Nina. #97795 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat May 9, 2009 9:20 pm Subject: Skillful thieves (was: [dsg] Re: effort.] epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Hi Rob Ep, (Connie or Azita) > > --- On Fri, 8/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: > > >J: Conventionally speaking, of course, that would be so. But in terms of moment-to-moment dhammas, there may be kusala (or akusala) arising at any time. For example, stealing can be done with or without restraint as to the use of force or violence. > ... > R:>My mother had that idea as well; she thanked a mugger who took her money for not hurting her. Don't know if he fully appreciated it or not, but I will let my Mom know that she is unknowingly a Buddhist. :-) > ... > S: I'm always impressed when people like your mother manage to look on the bright side at such times and in this case to even show her appreciation. I'd like to hear more such stories about your mother's good example. Thank you; she actually did get attacked more than once, as did I - I don't mean to negatively advertise New York City, but....well, things happen sometimes. My mother had the same attitude at least one or two other times - she said on one of those occasions "He was a nice young man - he didn't hurt me," and she would never be angry at the people who robbed her. She also said "He obviously needed money, so I told him to take whatever he needed," and offered him the bills that she had. I have a couple of interesting stories myself, although they aren't quite such an example of metta, but still intriguing, and may say something about the "skillful thief" as well. I stopped to help someone who was being accosted by thieves on a well-lit street in downtown Manhattan. Unfortunately I was carrying two heavy grocery bags and didn't even put them down. [Not too smart.] The thieves turned their attention to me, claimed to have a gun and took my wallet. One of them ran off with the wallet while the other stayed to watch me and make sure I didn't tell the police. While he was at it he checked to make sure I didn't have any money left. After a while I said "Do you know where your friend went?" "Yes" he said. I said "Can you do me a favor? Go ask him if I can have my wallet and papers back. He can keep the cash, I just don't want to mess up my records." So he actually said to me, like in a Department Store, "I'll see what I can do." He came back 5 minutes later with my wallet in one hand, and the papers in the other. I happened to be in the midst of a bank transfer that day, and one of the papers was a $10,000 check! The guy wanted a reward for bringing my papers back, but I pointed out that he had personally checked my pockets and I didn't even have a dime. Reluctantly he had to agree that I was right. That's New York negotiation for you! But it interested me that even at such a time, communicating with those guys like they were human beings resulted in a positive action. Many years earlier when I was 11 years old, I lived in an even worse neighborhood in Queens, New York. :-) I was a bit of a bad boy and at that young age I was trying to buy cigarettes. I had only a few cents left afterwards and a pale white kid with red hair came up to me with a knife and put it to my throat and demanded my money. When I showed him I had only 7 cents or so he got furious and asked me why I didn't have more money. I was a little worried but then a gang of young black guys came over - about twenty young men - and I thought "Well that's it, now I can choose who to be killed by." But the leader of the gang came over and told the guy with the knife to go away and leave me alone. "He's too young" he said, so he had a code of ethics of some kind about it. The guy with the knife was pretty frustrated but he put the knife away and left. As the gang was leaving I waved to the leader and thanked him. He gave me a smile and waved back. I always kept that in my mind as an example of why not to be prejudiced against one race or another or judge people by expectations, because you never know how anyone is going to behave. Another weird mugging story from Robert! :-) I have a couple of other skillful mugging stories [unfortunately...?] Maybe I'll tell them sometime! > There is a sutta in Anguttara Nikaya about skilful and unskilful thieves. Perhaps Connie or Azita can find it - I seem to recall Azita reading it out and asking about it once... I'd like to read that. I remember the story about the zen Master who was robbed of almost everything by thieves and when they were leaving called out to them, "Come back, you forgot the silverware!" Best, Robert E. ========================== #97796 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat May 9, 2009 9:37 pm Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Hi Rob Ep, Rob E. wrote: > >I would really like to see a detailed description of how vitakka works; you know, the kind they have for the dhamma - seven cittas of this, seven of that - something that is precise enough to remove doubt about the process. Something like that must exist somewhere... .. > .... > S: I recommend you read the chapter on Vitakka (ch 8) in 'Cetasikas' by Nina. It's very detailed. > http://www.scribd.com/people/documents/1746908-alanweller?page=1 Oh, I will look at that; thank you. > "Initial Application (Vitakka) arises in fifty-five types of consciousness... This may be in Nina's pages, but if not - I'm interested in "Initial Application Vitakka" as opposed to whatever other types there may be. > ... Vitakka accumulates too. Nothing is ever forgotten that has been beaten or investigated. That is good to hear. > ... > >I'd like to find out in any case. I have an instinctive idea of how this can work, but I can't convince anyone I'm right. :( > ... > S: Join the club! ha ha ha, that is good; that gave me a good chuckle. Gee, sometimes I feel like I'm having a little too much fun around here. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #97797 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat May 9, 2009 9:49 pm Subject: Are 'not-self' vs are not 'self' (was, [dsg] Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E (and Ken O) > > Just chipping in here, if I may. > > (97212) > > -------------- > > Yes, I believe that Buddha said "form is not 'self,'" rather than "form is 'not-self.'" Anatta is not a thing, it is the absence of self. > > -------------- > > I'm wondering if this interpretation (i.e., "form *is not* permanent/pleasant/self" vs. "form *is* impermanent/suffering/not-self") is supported by the Pali syntax. You are suggesting an assertion in the negative rather that the positive form. From my limited knowledge of Pali, the sentence structure would be quite different. > > Also, I think it more likely that the Buddha would be teaching what dhammas *are* than what they *are not*. The development of insight in the teachings is the development of insight into the true nature of dhammas, that is to say, into dhammas as they truly *are*. Well that is lovely, but you are coming from the idea of a general principle and I am trying to make some sense of what is being said. I have yet to hear a sensible explanation of how a "not-self" can be a positive characteristic. I can't get a specific explanation of why anyone thinks this is the case, except for the general type of assertion above, that it *must* be a positive attribute rather than something that is being said to not be there. But what is the original point of 'not self?' The point was never to assert that there was such a thing as a not-self. It was to refute the assertion that these things were atta or Atman. It was atta and Atman that came first and anatta came second. Anatta did not exist by itself as a 'characteristic' until the Hindu concepts of the temporary and eternal atta and Atman were outlined and the Buddha gave anatta as the refutation of these philosophies. So to then come along and say that 'anatta' is a real thing that has been a permanent characteristic that has always been part of a dhamma seems to be just a kind of imperative based on concept rather than either a logical or perceptual truth. Again, if one wakes up to anatta, what does one realize? Does one say "Oh my goodness, I just *saw* the mystical anatta sign as clear as day on that seeing-consciousness. It was riding along on it like it was a little horse." No, one would awaken to the understanding that "there is no self" and seeing consciousness "is not a part of self," because "there is no permanent or tangible entity that is composed of seeing consciousness." This mark of anatta is meant to point out the lack of self, not to create another kind of self: a permanent eternal thingy that arises with every nama and rupa. Instead, awakening to anatta must be the clear seeing or understanding as each nama and rupa arise that "there is no self and they are not part of self" that becomes apparent about every arising dhamma. So, that is my view, and rather than dismiss it wholesale because "anatta must be a positive attribute," it would be more useful to somehow grapple with my assertions and refute them on the merits. That would be my overly optimistic hope anyway. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = #97798 From: "colette" Date: Sat May 9, 2009 5:49 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. ksheri3 Hi Sarah, "...bright side..."? Is there such a thing as a bright side since you certainly impose upon Ron E. that which only you conceive. I mean you conceive of a bright side and a dark side EXISTING so it is from your mind that extends the concept of bright and dark in reference to certain "sides" THEREFORE it is your manifestation and not Ron's manifestation of actuality here, isn't it? You'll love this: "However, according to Buddhist psychology, every perception is subject to distortion, either by one's desires, by one's cravings, by the illusions of ego, or by habitual conceptions which have become dogma (Vajiranana, 1962). Human perception has been likened to a mirror at a crossroads, barely able to reflect ligt due to the dust tht has blown across its surface; such is perception: because it is clouded wit illusion, it can not properly reflect the reality being perceived (Griffith, 1986)." WOW, I COULD GO INTO THIS AND WILL GO INTO THIS TOTALLY CONCEPTUAL RATIONALE AS VALID AS IT IS, IN OTHER PLACES AT OTHER TIMES, SOON THOUGH. The only point here is that you are ascribing and designating characteristics onto something external tht another person is perceiving from their pair of shoes, or is that their POINT OF VIEW? BTW, this leads me to ask the question if "the object" used in the cover graphics for the album PRESENCE by Led Zepplin, if that object is a representation of the monolith that starred in the movie "2001 A Space Odyssey"? ARe they the same objects, and therefore concepts, and therefore a STREAM OF A SINGLE CONSCIOUSNESS? Which leads me to the Reverse Pyramid of Black Market Economics, but you in Hong Kong wouldn't have anything to do with such a shady enterprise as the black market since Hong Kong is so pure and pristine. How much does a single eye go for in Hong Kong as opposed to the entire body, selling humans and bodies that have expired is a status quo practice is it not? I finally refer you to the next paragraph in that paper which says: "Buddhist psychology suggests a pessimistic view of human nature [I think not, however I am not living and I am nothing more than a bauble that Chicago and the USA of POLICE STATE MENTALITY cognize]: the motivation for behavior is craving, which ulitmately leads to suffering; perception and cognition are distorted, clouding one's experience of relity; the sense of self is an illusion to which human beings desprerately cling, allowing for the experience of desire and craing; consciousness is composed of false notions and concepts;..." I choose to see Buddhism as optomistic and not pessimistic. You may subscribe to the pessimistic qualities as a means of maintaining a smaller control group, I however have no need to control anything other than myself. I do not want to control something "other" which countless people want to do and that makes them nothing more than meglamaniacs but the drug cartels that manifest the American Psychiatry Assoc, APA style, have a negative view of INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS, showing the market that "the fix" is in and operative. Why, Sarah, would you choose to mislead and misdirect Rob E. concering the complexity of the illusion that he manifests for you before our eyes? <.....> AS long as you possess an Ego then you clearly cast your vote in the direction of the destruction of the doctrines of Anatta and you most certainly must subscribe to a Brahman-type of society. Hark, do I hear Pink Floyd: "MONEY"? Are you, Sarah, an advocate of the Caste System? BTW, those heretical peoples of Henry the 8th have gone and claimed that John Lennon's song "IMAGINE" is a "heresy" and they have recently condemned it. Isn't that interesting from an organization that was created by Henry the 8th as a means of escaping VAtican dictates? <.....> Maybe I'm way out of your league since those Chinese apply the concepts of "Clouds and Rain" as equalities to sexual intercourse and your proximatey to Bangkok blinds your ability to see such things as Tantra, or Yin-Yang,, etc. My mistake for suggesting things that you have no ability to fathom in your world of HUNGRY GHOSTS. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Hi Rob Ep, (Connie or Azita) > > --- On Fri, 8/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: > > >J: Conventionally speaking, of course, that would be so. But in terms of moment-to-moment dhammas, there may be kusala (or akusala) arising at any time. For example, stealing can be done with or without restraint as to the use of force or violence. > ... > R:>My mother had that idea as well; she thanked a mugger who took her money for not hurting her. Don't know if he fully appreciated it or not, but I will let my Mom know that she is unknowingly a Buddhist. :-) > ... > S: I'm always impressed when people like your mother manage to look on the bright side at such times and in this case to even show her appreciation. I'd like to hear more such stories about your mother's good example. > > There is a sutta in Anguttara Nikaya about skilful and unskilful thieves. Perhaps Connie or Azita can find it - I seem to recall Azita reading it out and asking about it once... > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== > #97799 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 10, 2009 12:47 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 26. nilovg Dear friends, The “Satipatthåna sutta” (Middle Length Sayings I, no. 10) reminds us to be aware in our daily life, no matter what we are doing. We read under the section of mindfulness of the body, regarding the postures: ‘And again, monks, a monk, when he is walking, comprehends, “I am walking”; or when he is standing still, comprehends, “I am standing still”; or when he is sitting down, comprehends, “I am sitting down”; or when he is lying down, comprehends, “I am lying down”. So that however his body is disposed he comprehends that it is like that. Thus he fares along contemplating the body in the body internally, or he fares along contemplating the body in the body externally, or he fares along contemplating the body in the body internally and externally...’ The commentary to this sutta, the “Papañcasúdani” explains the words, “When he is going, a monk understands ‘I am going’ " as follows: ‘In this matter of going, readily do dogs, jackals and the like, know when they move on that they are moving. But this instruction on the modes of deportment was not given concerning similar awareness, because awareness of that sort belonging to animals does not shed the belief in a living being, does not knock out the perception of a soul and neither becomes a subject of meditation nor the development of satipatthåna.’ The commentary explains that there is no living being. There is going on account of the diffusion of the process of oscillation (motion) born of mental activity. There are only nåma and rúpa which arise because of conditions. When the monk is walking, standing, sitting or lying down, he contemplates the body in the body, he does not take the body for self. He is mindful of the realities which appear. ******* Nina.