#101600 From: "Sadhu Chew" Date: Sat Oct 24, 2009 6:57 am Subject: Re: anumodana, Books from Malaysia chewsadhu Dear Robert, You are also welcome too. May all beings be well and happy. With respect, Chew --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > Thanks also from me Chew, the books you sent me arrived and I will place a copy each at the center here in bangkok. > > > #101601 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 24, 2009 6:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours (314, sutta 50)and commentary. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 23-okt-2009, om 21:31 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > The > main problem that I have with this, even with regard to the other > physicaL > characteristics of "dwarfish, sickly, purblind, crooked, lame or > paralysed" > is the universality of application. I doubt that this section is > the word > of the Buddha, for it is inconsistent with what he has taught > elsewhere, and > moreover it is clearly false. ------- N: I understand your feelings and I agree what you write here. This time I quoted a sutta. The Co as you see here is in complete agreement with the suttas, the co does not deviate from the sutta. Let us see again whether or not you misunderstand the sutta. In other suttas too the Buddha spoke about beings with many illnesses or with a few illnesses, all the result of kamma. The result of kamma, vipaakacitta: this citta experiences pleasant or unpleasant objects (colour, sound, tangibles) through the senses. It is not by accident that one is born with a weak body. The Buddha spoke about a given situation in that society in India at that time. He did not say that he approved of it, but it was an existing situation. Born in a sweeper's family, this was not by accident. It is an example of the opportunity to experience unpleasant objects through the senses. And it is wonderful that inspite of this one develops kusala and this will bring a happy rebirth in the future. The Abhidhamma gives it more precisely: a human may be born with two sobhana hetus, or three sobhana hetus, pa~n~naa included. Or without sobhana hetus: ahetuka kusala vipaakacitta. In that case he is handicapped from the first moment of life. But it is still kusala vipaakacitta. There are degrees of kamma: and birth that is ahetuka kusala vipaaka is the result of a weak kusala kamma. Those are all given situations, no judgement, not looking down on anybody.The Buddha spoke in a language and gave examples that people at that time could understand. He also said that one is not a brahmin by birth: . The criteria are spiritual. This is completely right. ------- Nina. #101602 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 24, 2009 7:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta nilovg Hi Howard, I think you will agree with what Alberto quoted. It shows what is at the root of racism. Ignorance. And the Buddha showed the Path leading to the end of ignorance. Nina. Op 24-okt-2009, om 9:01 heeft sprlrt het volgende geschreven: > Because of ignorance one has wrong understanding and takes the > dhammas which arise and fall away for self, being or person. > This is the cause of desire and ever growing infatuation with one's > rank, title or status, with one's birth, one's family, the colour > of one's skin and so on. #101603 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 24, 2009 7:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anger management nilovg Dear Han, thank you for the sutta. In that case compassion is beneficial. We do not know the motives behind someone's actions. Sometimes we hear later on about the circumstances or conditions that made someone act in a disagreeable way and then we regret having judged him. Nina. Op 24-okt-2009, om 6:30 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > If we can think it that way, we may even feel pity for him instead > of hatred toward him. We may feel sorry for him that he will have > to bear the effects of his bad behaviour in this life or in future > lives. #101604 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 24, 2009 7:25 am Subject: Lukas and the present moment. nilovg Dear Lukas, you said that you want to hear more baout the present moment. I listened again to the recording of your questions, beginning of this year. I quote again: Lukas: < Can you say more about present moment? I'll find it the only way to develop more understanding.> -------- Kh S: That is so true. It is now. N: We never hear enough, we have to continue to listen in order to accumulate more understanding. That is a condition for sati but we should not wish for it. Ann: I think that many people just think of wanting to have sati. What about right understanding? That is much more important. Kh S: Now there is a reality and there can be awareness when there are the right conditions for its arising. But what about the understanding? That is more important. For example, now everyone can experience hardness, but what about the understanding of hardness as just a reality. It is not different from daily life or from this moment. The reality now is exactly the same when there is no understanding or when there is understanding. The same reality is experienced. N: But there is always some idea of the hardness of my body, my hardness. Kh S: That is why it is not enough to think about awareness; we should have more and more understanding of realities in order to become detached from them, detached from seeing them as mine or something permanent. N: It is so hard to get rid of that idea. Kh S: Desire hinders the progress of understanding. If we realize how much ignorance has been accumulated from past lives up till now, we see that there cannot be suddenly strong understanding. N: We cling to self with tanhaa, di.t.thi or maana (conceit). It is very difficult to know these different ways of clinging when I have the feeling that it is my hardness. Kh S: I think that there is not di.t.thi every moment. Who can know whether there is clinging with or without wrong view? It can be known when there is awareness and right understanding. We should start correctly, we should just speak about realities as dhammas. They should be seen as just dhammas. One thinks without understanding about the Dependent Origination or any other subject. > Nina. #101605 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 24, 2009 7:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Latent Tendencies, anusaya. no 5. nilovg Dear Han, thank you for your observations and I like the simile very much. Nina. Op 24-okt-2009, om 4:37 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > In one Burmese book I found the following comparison: > > (3) anusaya kilesa is like a match box. One cannot yet see any fire > burning, although there are inflammable substance in the matchbox > and matchstick. > > (2) pariyu.t.thaana kilesa is like when one strikes the matchstick > against the rough surface of the matchbox. The fire starts to burn > the matchstick. But the fire is not yet spreading, and it only > burns the matchstick itself. So also, pariyu.t.thaana kilesa burns > only within the person himself. > > (1) vtikkama kilesa is like when the burning matchstick is applied > to some inflammable substance. Then the fire will spread to other > substances. So also, vtikkama kilesa causes harm to other persons. > > When the matchbox is soaked with water, then one cannot lit the > fire even when the matchstick is struck against the matchbox. So > also, when the anusaya kilesa is eliminated by magga ~naa.na there > cannot be any kilesa fire. The latent tendencies for defilements > are eliminated forever. #101606 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Oct 24, 2009 7:46 am Subject: Re: mindfulness and thinking szmicio Dear Alan, >What happens when I have to think about something purposefully? For instance, I have to do a math calculation but want to do so mindfully. L: I like you gave math calculations as example. It's so absorbing, isnt it? Here is a quote from Nina's Letters from vipassana - I like it very much): (First letter) ---- Best wishes Lukas #101607 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Oct 24, 2009 7:59 am Subject: Re: mindfulness and thinking szmicio Dear Alan, I especially like this: And Khun Sujin answer: Best wishes Lukas #101608 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Oct 24, 2009 4:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Alberto) In a message dated 10/24/2009 10:10:23 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, I think you will agree with what Alberto quoted. It shows what is at the root of racism. Ignorance. And the Buddha showed the Path leading to the end of ignorance. Nina. Op 24-okt-2009, om 9:01 heeft sprlrt het volgende geschreven: > Because of ignorance one has wrong understanding and takes the > dhammas which arise and fall away for self, being or person. > This is the cause of desire and ever growing infatuation with one's > rank, title or status, with one's birth, one's family, the colour > of one's skin and so on. ============================== Yes, of course I agree. Also, I understand racism and related prejudices to all amount to taking "accidental" characteristics (i.e., qualities not definitionally applying to a group, but individual characteristics that may hold for some and not for others), whether favorable or unfavorable, and attributing them to all the members of the group. For example: "Jews are smart" or "Jews are cheap" or "Negroes are lazy" or "Untouchables are ugly," as opposed to true statements such as "Most Jews are descendants of the ancient Israelites" or "Negroes have African ancestry" or "Untouchables are considered ritually impure." Racism is a genus of collectivist thinking, and a particularly pernicious one growing out extremes of self-promotion, conceit, hatred, envy and resentment. With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #101609 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Oct 24, 2009 8:26 am Subject: Re: Lukas and the present moment. szmicio Dear Nina, It supports me very much. It's good to hear that right understanding is the most important. I can say you that in my life even there is no development of kusala as I wanted it to be. And instead of this there is akusala. I still can learn, dhammas just dhammas. But i forget it so often. I need to be reminded more an more. I am happy that I meet wise friends. Without this, without your great support, without your courage, i'd never been on the path. Thanks also to Han for his great reminder. I really appreciate it. But sometimes I get too distracted when hear too much on development of kusala. It's very hard. My best wishes Lukas #101610 From: Herman Date: Sat Oct 24, 2009 2:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta egberdina Hi Alberto, 2009/10/24 sprlrt > > Hi Staisha, This is from ch. 2 of K. Sujin 'A survey of paramattha > dhammas', (it is available on the net in several sites and file formats) - > Alberto > > ....... > Moreover, it is evident that the different colours, sounds, odours, cold, > heat, softness, hardness, motion or pressure, even though their > characteristics have such variety, could not appear if there were no dhammas > which can experience them, namely, seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, > experiencing cold, heat, softness, hardness, motion or pressure, knowing the > meaning of the different things and thinking. > > The dhammas which can experience different things such as the dhamma which > experiences colour, the dhamma which experiences sound, the dhamma which > experiences odour, flavour, cold, heat, softness, hardness, motion, > pressure, the dhamma which knows the meaning of the different things and the > dhamma which thinks about different subjects, all these dhammas which > experience different things have been classified by the Sammasambuddha as > citta, consciousness. > ...> > > I know you are only quoting someone else, but I presume you do so because you agree with them. Could I ask you to clarify what you/they mean by a "dhamma which experiences", in the light of the following from SN12:12: "Lord, who makes contact?" "Not a valid question," the Blessed One said. "I don't say 'makes contact.' If I were to say 'makes contact,' then 'Who makes contact?' would be a valid question. But I don't say that. When I don't say that, the valid question is 'From what as a requisite condition comes contact?' And the valid answer is, 'From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling.'" Thanks in advance Herman #101611 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Oct 24, 2009 3:32 pm Subject: Deed without Doer... bhikkhu.sama... Friends: No Doer exists apart from Kamma & its Result! In all kinds of becoming, generation, destiny, station and abode there can only appear mentality-materiality, which occurs caused by previous kamma. One cannot discover any doer over & above the activity of the doing itself! There is neither any experiencer of the result apart from the result itself! That we say 'doer', when actually there is 'doing', and 'experiencer' when actually there is 'experiencing', is nothing more than linguistic convention. Therefore the Ancient Elders said : There is no doer of a deed or any one who reaps the deed's result. Impersonal phenomena alone arise and cease... No other view than this is right. Only kamma & its result causally maintain their round, just as seed and tree succeed in turn. No first beginning can be shown. Nor in the future round of births can any 'agent' ever be found! Sectarians, not knowing this, fails to gain self-mastery, since they assume a 'being', a 'person', a 'doer', an actor or agent, who performs the action.. The stream of craving carries them on, caught in the meshes of their views. Since the stream thus carries them on, they are not freed from suffering. A monk, disciple of the Buddha, with direct knowledge of this egolessness, can penetrate this deep & subtle conditionality empty of any acting agency. There is no kamma in result of kamma, nor does a result exist in the kamma. Though they are void of one another, there is no fruit without the kamma... Nor does the kamma still persist in the result it has produced. Kamma of its fruit is void and no fruit exists yet in the kamma. Still the resulting fruit is born from the kamma, wholly depending on this initiating & seeding kamma. For there is no almighty God as creator of this revolving round of rebirths! Phenomena alone flow on: Cause and effect. Components & their conditions. Vism 603 Activities and their resulting traces is, but no actor or agency! <...> Help me Out! "I" have been caught inside a Concept of Ego... Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri <...> #101612 From: Staisha Perry Date: Sat Oct 24, 2009 4:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta staisha_perry hello all, in nature to this post my understanding is the eye faculty is used only to see, so if one was to view a object thought the eye one would see color (light or dark), anything more than seeing the color is no longer the eye and seeing wouldn't it then become the mind that is seeing? (perception, volition,consciousness ) -staisha --- On Fri, 10/23/09, Staisha Perry wrote: Hello Sarah, thank you this makes perfect sense once one can see that this only seeing an object at this is the present moment of citta, regardless whether what faculty from one( mind or body) thereafter once you start identifying with the object shape form, name /label, memory contact, thinking this turns into something else completely cause then it is a phenomena that we have give into as identity or self, but if we acually see it as it is just an object then there is not attachment, clinging, and exists only due to the conditions. maybe i am jumping way ahead of myself or totally wrong, regardless thank you for the feedback. thank you everyone #101613 From: "sprlrt" Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 1:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta sprlrt Hi Herman > Could I ask you to clarify what you/they mean by a > "dhamma which experiences", in the light of the following from SN12:12: > "Lord, who makes contact?" > "Not a valid question," the Blessed One said. "I don't say 'makes contact.' Just a translation glitch, one of the many ... English phrases requires a pronoun with the verb, while pli usually omits it, being it is easily inferred. And to a 'who....?' question only the pronoun he/she would make sense in the reply, 'it' wouldn't. i.e. . (i.e. it is a paramattha dhamma, phasso/contact doing that). This is from the Nidanavagga of SN, explaining that all sankhra dhammas arise because of conditions (themselves dhammas), paticcasamuppada. Alberto #101614 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:15 am Subject: mind-element and mind-consciousness-element szmicio Dear friends, What's the difference between mind element and mind-consciousness element? In Vibhanga,Dhammahadayavibhanga (The essence of Dhamma analysis) we read: 986. Tattha katame satta phassaa? Cakkhusamphasso, sotasamphasso, ghaanasamphasso, jivhaasamphasso, kaayasamphasso, manodhaatusamphasso, manovi~n~naa.nadhaatusamphasso ime vuccanti 'satta phassaa'. L: What's the difference between manodhaatusamphasso and manovi~n~naa.nadhaatusamphasso? When they arise? My best wishes Lukas #101615 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:24 am Subject: abyaakatahetuu - 9 hetus at all szmicio Dear friends, There are 3 kusala hetus, 3 akusala hetus and 3 abyakatahetus. The Analysis of the essence of Dhamma:(Vibhanga, Dhammmahadayavibhanga) --- L: So the abyakata hetus are both hetus of kiriyacittas of arahat and hetus arised with patisandhi-citta? Best wishes Lukas #101616 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 4:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Consciousness of nirvana is said to be "without surface" (anidassanam) sarahprocter... Dear Marcin, Apologies for my rushed reply before. --- On Sat, 24/10/09, marcin.kubica wrote: >Could you please post me the link? Many Thanks. ... S: Here are the links themselves: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16916 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16922 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/43148 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/63504 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/75609 Many thanks to pt for his clear explanation on finding items in U.P. A U.P. in itself:-) Marcin, when you've had a look at these, I'd like to continue the discussion with you. I think you'll find the references (and other messages) indicate the text is referring to nibbana. Vinnana is a khandha, but nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma, therefore, not a khandha. This was a translation I gave before: "'Cognizable (vi~n~naa.na.m), invisible (anidassana.m), shinining in all directions (ananta.m sabbatopabha)'” How does this sound? Metta Sarah ======== #101617 From: "philofillet" Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 4:26 am Subject: Re: Anger management philofillet > > Nina mentioned her book "The World in the Buddhist Sense" in one of her posts. Hello Han and all Thank you for helping out with some thoughts on anger management, Han. > I managed get the book through Google, and I like it very much. > > In the Preface, Nina wrote: > > "When we hear harsh words it is only sound which is heard, only the rupa which impinges on the earsense. However, we think with anger or sadness about an unkind person who spoke harsh words, we think in a negative, unwholesome way and this happens most of the time. In the absolute sense there is no person who speaks unkind words. The moments of consciousness which motivated his speaking are only fleeting moments, they have fallen away but we keep thinking about his unkindness. There is no person, no self who hears, hearing arises only for a moment and then it falls away. The sound which is heard is only a kind of rupa which does not last. Right understanding of the objects we experience through the six doors will eventually lead to more patience. The effect will be that we are less inclined to feel hurt by what others say to us and that we will be able to forgive more easily". Ph: This sort of teaching has helped me a lot with assuaging anger, relieving or releasing it after it has arisen. I remember a sutta that is something like "what are you angry with? The eye element? The visible object?" and so on. It helps, definitely. But I think it is a different matter when it comes to the prevention (or dramatic reduction of the likelihood of) transgression rooted in anger, lashing out in anger. In other words, after the fact reflection in paramattha terms is very helpful, but I think it is unlikely to provide much protection. I remember hearing Sarah saying that sila is always taken care of when there is awareness of realities, because when there is kusala, sila must always be one of the factors involved. I'm sure this is technically true, but I think counting on sati of present dhammas to provide protection against harmful transgression rooted in anger is very dangerous. Look at this sutta for example, AN III, 25, which says there are three kinds of persons found in the world. There is one with a mind like an open sore; one with a mind like lightning; one with a mind like a diamond: "Of what nature is the person with a mind like an open sore? He is one who is irascible and irritable. If he is criticized even slightly he loses his temper and becomes angry and upset; he is stubborn and displays anger, hatred and resentment. Just as, for instance, a festering sore, if struck by a stick or a shard, will discharge mattter all the more...." According to the commentary, the person with the mind like lightning is the sekka, and the mind like a diamond is the arahant. In other words, if we are to believing the commmentary (which is not always a sure thing, perhaps) all of us non-Ariyan worlldlings have minds like open sores which, if they haven't spewed their pus, have only been spared by fortuitous conditions. So who are we to believe that protection lies in our understanding of fleeting paramattha dhammas? I believe that is unwise, and constitutes the appropriation of or playing around with degrees of wisdom that don't belong to us. I think protection - and the protective aspect of the Dhamma is something that is not appreciated here nearly enough - is provided by such factors as appamada, another word that I don't see here at DSG nearly enough. It was of course the Buddha's final emphasis, so where is it at DSG? Perhaps it is because appamada as a fleeting dhamma that rises and falls away in a flash of an eye has no sense. Appamada that protects is far closer to conventional heedfulness. We must be aware of situations and people that are more likely than not to cause transgression rooted in anger. In my case, I learned that when I am near cars, I must be careful, very heedful. I've learned to reflect that by being heedful I can protect the driver from the harsh kamma that would be involved in his or her hitting me. Heedfulness is not "sexy" (fascintating and deep) the way paramattha dhammas are, but it is necessary *all* the time, and some times more than that. Another form of protection is a friendly attitude. I like very much this definition of metta meditation that I came across somewhere or other. "Metta meditation is preparing the mind to go out into the world with an attitude of friendliness." Now, in my case, I don't do metta meditation. I find it enough to reflect a) all people were born human due to favourable kamma involved somewhere, i.e all people are worthy and b) the defiled nature of the mind, the burning prevalenece of lobha/dosa/moha are driving people to behave in ways that are harmful to themselves and others. We are all worthy idiots! This reflection quickly conditions friendliness. But for others, whatever kind of metta meditation works should be done. The mind must be established in friendliness every morning, it is a festering sore, and festering sores don't go marching merrily into the world with their brains full of paramattha musinings unless they are very, very unwise festering sores! Another nice reflection to do in the morning is that refraining from displaying dosa is considered a form of dana, offering the freedom from fear to other beings. That kind of reflection in the morning is a great conditioning factor for friendliness during the day. The third great aspect of protecting against transgression rooted in anger that I can share now is mindfulness of the body, mindfulness in the body. Again, there are people who probably correctly point out that the way meditation is practiced today is not in line with the techniques laid out in great details in visudhimagga. But when the issue is protecting against harmful deeds, whatever works, works. I use a method of meditaiton in which the breath is made to be an intersting, pleasant sensation. I think this is highly dubious from a technical point of view, more akin to a feel good visualization than anything, but it helps me be in my body rather that in my head (but only a meditation can understand that.) And during the day, there is more resilience to objects, the mind is tethered close to that pleasant sensation, doesn't have the need to go feeding on sense objects in such a crazed way, is like the gong that is dull and doesn't vibrate with such great sensitivity, and there is therefore less lashing out in transgressions rooted in either anger or lust. I think of one of my favourite Dhammapada verses, I, 14, "as rain pentrates the poorly thatched dwelling, so passiona pentrates the untended mind." "abhavitam citta rago samativijjhati." The mind that is developed through meditation to even very modest extents is developed to that extent, the difference can be felt in daily life. It can of course be argues that "bhavita citta" can be about thinking about paramattha dhammas and perhaps having few rare moments of "awareness of arisen realities" but people are playing a dangerous game by being confident that it isn't just thinking with attachment about dhammas, which would of course have no protective power. So Han, and Lukas, I think the preventive aspect of anger management is as important as the relief/assuaging aspect. There are never any guarantees, of course. But the frequency of transgression rooted in anger can be dramatically reduced to the point that such occurences are beautifully rare. I speak from experience. Metta, Phil #101618 From: "philofillet" Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 4:35 am Subject: Re: Lukas and the present moment. philofillet Hi Lukas > Dear Nina, > It supports me very much. > It's good to hear that right understanding is the most important. > I can say you that in my life even there is no development of kusala as I wanted it to be. And instead of this there is akusala. I still can learn, dhammas just dhammas. But i forget it so often. I need to be reminded more an more. I am happy that I meet wise friends. Without this, without your great support, without your courage, i'd never been on the path. > Thanks also to Han for his great reminder. I really appreciate it. But sometimes I get too distracted when hear too much on development of kusala. It's very hard. Ph: Of course right understanding is important. But please remember that if you were to meet the Buddha, he would teaching you about right understanding in terms that would be in line with conventional stories about people and things, not in paramattha terms. He didn't even teach the four noble truths to people until he knew their minds were ready for the deep teachings, that's very clear in the suttanta. You have been encouraged by Nina and others to plunge straight into the deepest teachings, so you are no longer willing to consider the conventional teachings that the Buddha would have taught you. You are aware of the frustrating gap between the sakayya-ditthi (which the Buddah knew we all have until ariyan status) feeling of the conventional teachings and the beautifully pure feeling paramattha teachings, and you reject the former because the latter are more appealing. I think that's a shame and someday I hope the DSG folks will wake up and reflect on the greedy appropriation of deep teachings that they encourage, and the loss of access to a proper progreession into the teachings that they encourage. It's not too late.... Metta, Phil p.d this appropriation of the deep teachings goes on everywhere on the internet of course, we Westerners are very hungry brainy beings. #101619 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 4:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: (dsg) charactoristic of citta sarahprocter... Hi Herman, >>H: --- On Tue, 20/10/09, egberdina wrote: > >There are no citta, so just like in the case of Santa Claus, you can > safely stop looking for the characteristics of what isn't there. > ... >> S: So what is there? .. >H: There is dependent origination. ... S: What is dependent origination if there are no cittas? Metta Sarah ======= #101620 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 1:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta upasaka_howard Hi, Alberto (and Herman) - In a message dated 10/25/2009 4:41:26 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sprlrt@... writes: Hi Herman > Could I ask you to clarify what you/they mean by a > "dhamma which experiences", in the light of the following from SN12:12: > "Lord, who makes contact?" > "Not a valid question," the Blessed One said. "I don't say 'makes contact.' Just a translation glitch, one of the many ... English phrases requires a pronoun with the verb, while p li usually omits it, being it is easily inferred. And to a 'who....?' question only the pronoun he/she would make sense in the reply, 'it' wouldn't. i.e. . (i.e. it is a paramattha dhamma, phasso/contact doing that). This is from the Nidanavagga of SN, explaining that all sankh ra dhammas arise because of conditions (themselves dhammas), paticcasamuppada. Alberto =============================== You are right, Alberto. However, a somewhat more "Buddhist" rendering might replace "a dhamma which experiences" by "an experiencing" (or, more specifically, "a knowing" or "a feeling" or "a perceiving" or "a seeing" or "a disliking" etc), which emphasizes the operational or functional aspect, and tries to avoid agent terminology. With metta, Howard Emptiness /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none — such a seeker gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta) #101621 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 5:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Citta = whole . If "whole" do not exist, then citta doesn't really exist. sarahprocter... Hi Alex, Just looking at your subject heading first, please quote me the text which says that "citta = whole". ... > >A: Vinnana is "formed" when internal and external ayatana come together. > .... >> S: yes, but remember that vinnana is an internal ayatana. > ... A:> Vinnana is not internal ayatana. Manayatana is. ... S: And what is manayatana if not vinnana (aka citta)? ... >There is also dhammayatana, but in 12 ayatana classification there isn't "vinnana" word. ... S: Really? Vism XV, 14: "...And the mind base, when classified according to profitable,unprofitable, resultant, and functional consciousness, is of eighty-nine kinds or of one hundred and twenty-one kinds....” "...Manaayatana.m kusalaakusala-vipaaka-kiriyavi~n~naa.nabhedena ekuunanabutippabheda.m, ekaviisuttarasatappabbheda.m vaa..." Note that "consciousness" is a translation of vi~n~naa.na here. Manayatana includes all kinds of vinnanas or cittas. .... > >In other words it is a sort of a "whole", and as some people argue - the wholes do not really exist - just like a car doesn't exist outside of its parts. > ... > S: Why does this make it any kind of "whole", which as you say, >does not really exist. > .... >Just like all arguments about cars not existing because they are made of parts, none of which is the car. Same is here. The argument that "whatever has parts (such as trees, cars, people) do not in reality exist" can be applied to vinnana which is two elements coming together. Neither eye nor forms is vinnana. Thus there isn't really an ultimate called eye-consciousness. ... S: Sorry, Alex....you lost the plot on this one:-). Metta Sarah ========= #101622 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 5:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] More questions about nimitta sarahprocter... Dear pt & all, # 101375 --- On Thu, 15/10/09, ptaus1 wrote: >pt: A few more things I'd like to ask on this topic: 1. If a reality (dhamma) has fallen away - i.e. it's not a 'present' object - not a shankara nimitta, in that case that particular past dhamma can become an object of cittas: ... S: Yes, strictly speakind it is the characteristic of that dhamma that has fallen away that is the sankhara nimitta of the present citta if it appears. ... >a) only as a nimitta of a concept - so, a pannatti? ... S: I wouldn't say that, if it is the sankhara nimitta of the paramattha dhamma. We have to differentiate between the nimitta of the reality experienced immediately after the sense-door object, say, has fallen away, as opposed to the nimitta anupyanjanna (the images and details) which are the concepts experienced by further mind-door processes, usually with lobha, dosa or moha. ... >b) in the mind-door? ... S: Yes, any kind of nimitta is only experienced in the mind-door. In the sense-door processes, only the 7 rupas are experienced - visible object, sound, smell, taste and the 3 tangible objects experienced through the body-sense. ... >2. In posts on concepts, it's often said that they neither arise nor fall away, since they are not a reality, but are only experienced (like in #97787). ... S: Yes. ... >So they do appear to "exist" for some time. ... S: Yes, when appearing to ignorance. ... >Can it be said that a concept "exists" (is experienced) for the minimum duration of at least one mind-door process (10 cittas: 1 mind-door-adverting , 7 javanas and possibly 2 tadarammanas) ? That is, there can't be two different concepts in the same mind-door process? ... S: One concept is experienced by the entire proces, i.e. same object for the cittas you mention. It is experienced, but it does not exist or "exist":-). .... >3. Concepts are brought about by sanna only? ... S: They are marked and remembered by sanna and assoicated mental factors, such as vitakka, vicara, ekaggata, manasikara, phassa and so on. The condition for concepts to be marked, recalled and brought to mind later is natural decisive support condition. Clearly, they are experienced as object by object condition too. ... >How does it happen that a certain concept all of sudden just pops into my head, without any seeming relevance to the present situation for example? ... S: Natural decisive support condition. Any object experienced can be recalled anytime later, even aeons later by this condition. Why do we all recall different details? Because of such accumulations. ... >Sometimes it seems it's due to a habit - like often thinking about something, which would mean that it's brought about by conditions, and yet, it is said that concepts are not conditioned. ... S: Yes, but the tendency to think in a particular way, the habit of that kind of thinking of those kinds of concepts is accumulated or conditioned. So the thinking about concepts of dhammas now may be a condition for further reflection on such concepts. SN 12:38 “...Bhikkhus, what one intends, and what one plans, and whatever one has a tendency towards: this becomes a basis for the maintenance of consciousness.... Such is the origin of this whole mass of suffering” Metta Sarah ======== #101623 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 5:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Introduction from a new member sarahprocter... Dear Win win yee, I also wished to welcome you here! Apologies for the delayed welcome. >Mingalaba! I am Ms Win Win Yee from Yangon, Myanmar. I found DSG introduced by Chew (Chewsadhu) I do hope I can get wider knowledge from DSG. For the time being I am studying the Buddha Abhidhamma now. So I do hope I can get wider knowledge from DSG. ... S: We look forward to sharing with you and hearing about your studies as well. Many thanks to Chew for introducing you. Metta Sarah p.s Chew - anumodana and appreciation for the printing of the books. I hope you received the very small package with a few copies of "Concepts & Realities" I sent you some time ago. ======= #101624 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 7:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] mind-element and mind-consciousness-element nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 25-okt-2009, om 10:15 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > L: What's the difference between manodhaatusamphasso and > manovi~n~naa.nadhaatusamphasso? When they arise? ------- N: manodhaatu: the five-door adverting-consciousness, pa~ncadvaaraavajjana citta, and the two types of receiving- consciousness, sampa.ticchaanacitta, one kusala vipaaka and one akusala vipaaka. Manovi~n~naa.nadhaatu includes all cittas except the dvipa~ncavi~n~naa.nas (five pairs of sense-cognitions)) and the three kinds of cittas that are mano-dhaatu. Nina. #101625 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 7:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] abyaakatahetuu - 9 hetus at all nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 25-okt-2009, om 10:24 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > There are 3 kusala hetus, 3 akusala hetus and 3 abyakatahetus. > > The Analysis of the essence of Dhamma:(Vibhanga, > Dhammmahadayavibhanga) > > vipaakato kiriyaabyaakatesu vaa dhammesu alobho, adoso, amoho > – ime tayo abyaakatahetuu. Ime vuccanti ‘‘nava > hetuu’’.> > > --- > L: So the abyakata hetus are both hetus of kiriyacittas of arahat > and hetus arised with patisandhi-citta? -------- N: avyaakata hetus: you are correct. neither kusala nor akusala. It includes the jaatis that are kiriya and vipaaka. ------ Nina. #101626 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 7:32 am Subject: Re: abyaakatahetuu - 9 hetus at all szmicio Dear Nina, > > > vipaakato kiriyaabyaakatesu vaa dhammesu alobho, adoso, amoho > > – ime tayo abyaakatahetuu. Ime vuccanti ‘‘nava > > hetuu’’.> > > > > --- > > L: So the abyakata hetus are both hetus of kiriyacittas of arahat > > and hetus arised with patisandhi-citta? > -------- > N: avyaakata hetus: you are correct. neither kusala nor akusala. It > includes the jaatis that are kiriya and vipaaka. L: You used avyaakata instead of abyaakata? the same? Is there any difference between this two words? so 3 abyaakata/avyaakata hetus also support the javana cittas of Arhata, that are of kiriya jati? Best wishes Lukas #101627 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 7:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lukas and the present moment. nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 24-okt-2009, om 17:26 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > But sometimes I get too distracted when hear too much on > development of kusala. It's very hard. ------- N: Yes, I understand. You may become discouraged, thinking, it is so far away. Lodewijk has the same. I heard something on a recording from a person who felt discouragement: Nina. #101628 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 7:43 am Subject: Re: Lukas and the present moment. szmicio Dear Phil, maybe the problem is my non-appreciation of siila at the moment. Or maybe there is no problem at all. I enjoyed siila anisamsa in my life. But i cant do it now I dont control it. Should I learn anattaness in such moments? Isnt it like the akusala dhamma can be understood? Best wishes Lukas > #101629 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 7:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: abyaakatahetuu - 9 hetus at all nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 25-okt-2009, om 15:32 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > L: You used avyaakata instead of abyaakata? the same? Is there any > difference between this two words? ----- N: In Paali v or b can be used. You find both versions. Maybe the pronunciation is in between b and v. -------- > > L: so 3 abyaakata/avyaakata hetus also support the javana cittas of > Arhata, that are of kiriya jati? ------- N: The hetus and other cetasikas that accompany the mahaakiriyacittas of the arahat are all of them of the jaati that is kiriya, thus, abyaakata/avyaakata. For the non-arahat the abyaakaata hetus arise not only with the pa.tisandhicitta that is accompanied by sobhana hetus but also with the bhavangacittas in that same life, and they may arise with the tadaaramma.nacitta. Nina. #101630 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 7:50 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lukas and the present moment. szmicio Dear Nina, So there is no rush? One or two kusala moments in a life are OK? > > But sometimes I get too distracted when hear too much on > > development of kusala. It's very hard. > ------- > N: Yes, I understand. You may become discouraged, thinking, it is so > far away. Lodewijk has the same. L: I am happy you can understand what I feel. There are akusalas, strong ones, so there can be understood each moment? Best wishes Lukas #101631 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anger management sarahprocter... Hi Phil, Pls excuse and feel free to ignore a little interjection here... --- On Sun, 25/10/09, philofillet wrote: >I remember hearing Sarah saying that sila is always taken care of when there is awareness of realities, because when there is kusala, sila must always be one of the factors involved. I'm sure this is technically true, but I think counting on sati of present dhammas to provide protection against harmful transgression rooted in anger is very dangerous. .... S: Whenever the citta is kusala (of any kind), there is sati which 'guards' or 'protects'. Yes, satipatthana is the highest kind of sila, the greatest protection and this is why only those who develop satipatthana may eventually have minds like lightning or even a diamond. Otherwise, as the good sutta indicates, 'the festering sore' remains, no matter how kind or calm it may be now. .... >Look at this sutta for example, AN III, 25, which says there are three kinds of persons found in the world. There is one with a mind like an open sore; one with a mind like lightning; one with a mind like a diamond: "Of what nature is the person with a mind like an open sore? He is one who is irascible and irritable. If he is criticized even slightly he loses his temper and becomes angry and upset; he is stubborn and displays anger, hatred and resentment. Just as, for instance, a festering sore, if struck by a stick or a shard, will discharge mattter all the more...." According to the commentary, the person with the mind like lightning is the sekka, and the mind like a diamond is the arahant. In other words, if we are to believing the commmentary (which is not always a sure thing, perhaps) all of us non-Ariyan worlldlings have minds like open sores which, if they haven't spewed their pus, have only been spared by fortuitous conditions. So who are we to believe that protection lies in our understanding of fleeting paramattha dhammas? I believe that is unwise, and constitutes the appropriation of or playing around with degrees of wisdom that don't belong to us. .... S: Yes, we have minds like open sores and never know when they may "spew their pus" as you aptly put it:-) So how else does one become a sekka with 'a mind like lightning' if not by following the eightfold path? Isn't that path the path of satipatthana, the path of "understanding of fleeting paramattha dhammas"? I agree, however, as I wrote above, that any kind of "guarding" with sati is a support - at least at these moments there is no "spewing pus" by way of lobha, dosa and moha. However, only one path to 'diamond-hood'. Glad to hear you're getting on well these days, Phil. Metta Sarah ======== #101632 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 12:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lukas and the present moment. nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 25-okt-2009, om 15:50 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > So there is no rush? > One or two kusala moments in a life are OK? ------- N: If you think of rush you think of yourself. How can we count kusala moments or make any evaluation. We just understand that any kind of kusala is beneficial, and then you do not think of yourself. --------- > > > But sometimes I get too distracted when hear too much on > > > development of kusala. It's very hard. > > ------- > > N: Yes, I understand. You may become discouraged, thinking, it is so > > far away. Lodewijk has the same. > > L: I am happy you can understand what I feel. > > There are akusalas, strong ones, so there can be understood each > moment? ------- N: Not each moment. How could we select? First nama has to be understood as nama, different from ruupa. I quote from your questions beginning of this year: < Q. 4. Why is it that akusala arises so often? Kh S:Without conditions nothing can arise. N: Akusala arises because of ignorance. Kh S: Befeore thinking about ignorance one should know that there must be conditions for anything to arise. N: Lukas worries about akusala. Kh S: All conditions are not known yet. Even the reality that has arisen is not known yet. We have to begin at the beginning and know that what appears now is a characteristic of a reality. N: For some people it may be hard to see akusala as just a dhamma. People have aversion. Kh S: I think that although someone may say that akusala is a dhamma, he may not understand why it is a dhamma. Is there now a characteristic appearing? We can call that a dhamma. Akusala has conditions to arise, we can call it a dhamma. It is not yours, it does not belong to anyone at all. N: You often say that we cling so much to names, instead of understanding realities. Kh S: We do not have to name what is appearing now, we do not need to call it by any name. Instead of trying to know whether it is called by this or that name we can have more understanding of the characteristic that is appearing. > -------------- Nina. #101633 From: "Christine" Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 12:47 pm Subject: Bhikkhuni Ordination re-establishment of original lineage ~ Ajahn Brahmavamso christine_fo... Hello all, I found this surprise on the Buddhist Society of Western Australia website. BSWA News : Bhikkhuni Ordination Talk Now Live Apologies for the technical glitch earlier today, the audio recording announcing the full ordination of our Bhikkhunis is now active. Please partake in the joyous occasion of the re-establishment of the original lineage of nuns (Bhikkhunis) -established by the Bhudda 2000+ years ago - right here in Western Australia by Ajahn Brahm. http://www.bswa.org/modules/news/ metta Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- #101634 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 1:15 pm Subject: Citta = whole . If "whole" do not exist, then citta doesn't really exist. truth_aerator Hello Sarah, Howard, Herman and all > sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > Just looking at your subject heading first, please quote me the text which says that "citta = whole". > ... Citta = vinnana. Right? > > >A: Vinnana is "formed" when internal and external ayatana come together. > > .... > >> S: yes, but remember that vinnana is an internal ayatana. > > ... No, Sarah. The Buddha did not call Vinnana to be internal (or external). The 6 ajjhattikani ayatanani are "Cakkhayatanam sotayatanam ghanayatanam jivhayatanam kayayatanam manayatanam". These are called internal ayatana. Vinnana is not part of them. Neither does vinnana belong to bahirani ayatanani (external ayatanas) Rupayatanam saddayatanam gandhayatanam rasayatanam photthabbayatanam dhammayatanam. MN148 Internal vs external implies location. Consciousness is not found in any spatial *location*. And neither does the Buddha calls it internal or external like the ayatanas. > A:> Vinnana is not internal ayatana. Manayatana is. > ... > S: And what is manayatana if not vinnana (aka citta)? > ... Citta is collection of interaction of past internal + external ayatanas. As to what manayatana exactly is, is not to my knowledge defined in the suttas. Correct me if I am wrong. The mind *consciousness* (manovinnana) is mana + dhamma. "Mananca paticca dhamme ca uppajjati manovinnanam" Since manovinnana is made of mano + dhamma , that means that it is a whole. And just like none of the parts is a car, neither mano nor dhamma by itself is manovinnana. > >There is also dhammayatana, but in 12 ayatana classification there isn't "vinnana" word. > ... > S: Really? Vism XV, 14: "...And the mind base, when classified according to profitable,unprofitable, resultant, and functional consciousness, is of eighty-nine kinds or of one hundred and twenty-one kinds....” > > "...Manaayatana.m kusalaakusala-vipaaka-kiriyavi~n~naa.nabhedena ekuunanabutippabheda.m, ekaviisuttarasatappabbheda.m vaa..." > > Note that "consciousness" is a translation of vi~n~naa.na here. >Manayatana includes all kinds of vinnanas or cittas. All kinds of vinnana is made of ajjhattikani & bahirani ayatanani. Since what is made of parts is neither ultimate, nor truly exist. Vinnana is a produced "whole" like a tree, mountain, a car, etc etc. The difference is that while tree, mountain, car, etc, have spatial locations - the vinnana does not. > .... > > >In other words it is a sort of a "whole", and as some people argue - the wholes do not really exist - just like a car doesn't exist outside of its parts. > > ... > > S: Why does this make it any kind of "whole", which as you say, >does not really exist. > > .... Because all 6 types of vinnana is produced by ajjhattikani & bahirani ayatanani (internal & external bases). With metta, Alex #101635 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 3:05 pm Subject: Anything Whatsoever... bhikkhu.sama... Friends: The 3 Stigmata are Universal Characteristics! Any form, materiality or body whatsoever, whether past, future or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near is only impermanent, painful and not-self: these are 3 kinds of deep comprehension. Any feeling whatsoever ... Any perception whatsoever ... Any construction whatsoever ... Any consciousness whatsoever is impermanent, miserable and not-self! Any eye, any ear, any nose, any tongue, any body and any mind is impermanent, suffering and not-self! Any visible form, any sound, any smell, any taste, any touch and any idea whether past, future or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near remains always transient, painful and impersonal: These are 3 kinds of real comprehension. One can understand it in this way: Any object is impermanent in the sense of destruction, painful in the sense of terror, and not-self in the sense of having no core: These 3 characteristics can be generalized to all things... Full comprehension is understanding: Any object whatsoever whether past, future or present, is impermanent, constructed, dependently arisen, thus inevitably it will be destroyed, unambiguously it will fade away by decay, unavoidably it will be lost, inescapably it will all cease, perish and vanish ... Vism 608 <...> Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ <...> #101636 From: Herman Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 4:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: (dsg) charactoristic of citta egberdina Hi Sarah, 2009/10/25 sarah abbott > Hi Herman, > > >>H: --- On Tue, 20/10/09, egberdina wrote: > > >There are no citta, so just like in the case of Santa Claus, you can > > safely stop looking for the characteristics of what isn't there. > > ... > >> S: So what is there? > .. > >H: There is dependent origination. > ... > S: What is dependent origination if there are no cittas? > Not a valid question, I'm afraid :-) It is this entire mass of suffering that arises and ceases dependently (on conditions). Cheers Herman #101637 From: "drampsych" Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 4:20 pm Subject: mindfulness and thinking drampsych Nina: Thank you for replying to my query. I am still confused, however. N:: Mindfulness, sati, of the level of satipa.t.thaana, is mindful of one naama or ruupa at a time as it appears through one of the six doorways. The object of mindfulness may be seeing, and that means, that seeing has just fallen away and mindfulness which arises shortly afterwards can be mindful of just that characteristic. A: This means, I take it, that mindfulness occurs in a separate succeeding mind-moment to seeing, which it takes as its object? However, sometimes mindfulness is characterized as arising with a citta, as a cetasika. Is the arising of sati as a cetasika co-occurring or is it separate? Or am I just hopelessly confused? Alan #101638 From: Herman Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 4:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta egberdina Hi Alberto, Thanks for the clarification. We interpret Buddhism differently. Contact to me is not a thing that contacts, feeling is not a thing that feels, citta is not a thing that knows, paramattha dhammas are not things that perform their function. There is only action or function, not a doer of that action or function. Further, I do not believe this to be a linguistic matter, but a matter of view/understanding. Thanks again Herman 2009/10/25 sprlrt > Hi Herman > > > Could I ask you to clarify what you/they mean by a > > "dhamma which experiences", in the light of the following from SN12:12: > > > "Lord, who makes contact?" > > "Not a valid question," the Blessed One said. "I don't say 'makes > contact.' > > Just a translation glitch, one of the many ... > English phrases requires a pronoun with the verb, while pli usually omits > it, being it is easily inferred. > And to a 'who....?' question only the pronoun he/she would make sense in > the reply, 'it' wouldn't. > i.e. . > (i.e. it is a paramattha dhamma, phasso/contact doing that). > > > This is from the Nidanavagga of SN, explaining that all sankhra dhammas > arise because of conditions (themselves dhammas), paticcasamuppada. > > Alberto > > > #101639 From: han tun Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 5:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anger management hantun1 Dear Phil and Sarah (Nina and Lukas), After I had posted my message #101592 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/101592 I find Phil's message #101617 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/101617 and Sarah's message #101631 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/101631 very useful. I very much appreciate both the messages. -------------------- Phil wrote: "So Han, and Lukas, I think the preventive aspect of anger management is as important as the relief/assuaging aspect. There are never any guarantees, of course. But the frequency of transgression rooted in anger can be dramatically reduced to the point that such occurences are beautifully rare. I speak from experience." I fully agree with the importance of the preventive aspect of anger management. An ideal situation will be to combine the two, i.e., to prevent the arising of anger, and the to subdue the anger that has arisen. -------------------- Han: However, as far as I am concerned, I find it more difficult to prevent the arising of anger than to subdue the anger that has arisen. Why so? Because: (1) I most probably am the one with a mind like an open sore (aruukuupamacitto puggala) as mentioned in AN.III.25 Vajiruupama sutta, which Phil had quoted. [aruka-uupama-citto (adj.) having a heart like a sore (of a man in anger): PTS Dictionary] (2) I have still a lot of pa.tighaanusaya (latent tendencies for aversion). Therefore, my immediate concern is to subdue the anger that has arisen and to contain it at the level of pariyu.t.thaana (prepossession) kilesa, and not to let it go over to the level of vtikkama (transgression, misconduct) kilesa. If I can do that I will be more than happy. -------------------- Han: To subdue the anger that has arisen, I follow the instructions given in the following two suttas: AN 5.161 Aghatavinaya Sutta: Subduing Hatred (1) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.161.than.html AN 5.162 Aghatavinaya Sutta: Subduing Hatred (2) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.162.than.html with metta and respect, Han #101640 From: "Sadhu Chew" Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 7:34 pm Subject: to Sarah - Aumodana chewsadhu Dear Sarah, Thanks and Sadhu for sending the Dhamma books to me. FYI, I still haven't received it yet. When did you send out the books? Thanks. May all beings be well and happy. With respect, Chew > p.s Chew - anumodana and appreciation for the printing of the books. I hope you received the very small package with a few copies of "Concepts & Realities" I sent you some time ago. > ======= > #101641 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 3:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Alberto) - In a message dated 10/25/2009 7:25:29 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Alberto, Thanks for the clarification. We interpret Buddhism differently. Contact to me is not a thing that contacts, feeling is not a thing that feels, citta is not a thing that knows, paramattha dhammas are not things that perform their function. There is only action or function, not a doer of that action or function. Further, I do not believe this to be a linguistic matter, but a matter of view/understanding. Thanks again Herman ================================ On this matter, Herman, we are in complete agreement. :-) With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #101642 From: han tun Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 9:41 pm Subject: Physical Phenomena (63) hantun1 Dear All, This is the serial presentation of The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena by Nina. I will now start with Chapter 8. Characteristics of Ruupas Questions and comments are welcome. ---------------------------------- Chapter 8 Characteristics of Ruupas As we have seen, ruupas can be classified as sabhaava ruupas, ruupas with their own distinct nature and asabhaava ruupas, ruupas without their own distinct nature. The four Great Elements are sabhaava ruupas, they each have their own distinct nature and characteristic. Ruupas such as lightness, plasticity and wieldiness are asabhaava ruupas, they are qualities of ruupas. The Dhammasanga.nii ( 596) incorporates in the list of the twentyeight kinds of ruupa not only ruupas with their own distinct nature but also qualities of ruupa and characteristics of ruupa. It mentions four different ruupas which are characteristics of ruupa, lakkha.na ruupas (lakkha.na means characteristic). These four characteristics common to all sabhaava ruupas are the following: arising or origination (upacaya) [Note 1] continuity or development (santati) decay or ageing (jarataa) falling away or impermanence (aniccataa) Ruupas do not arise singly, they arise in different groups (kalaapas). The groups of ruupa arise and fall away, but they do not fall away as rapidly as citta. Ruupa lasts as long as the duration of seventeen moments of citta arising and falling away, succeeding one another. After the arising of ruupa there are moments of its presence: its continuity or development. Decay, jarataa ruupa, is the characteristic indicating the moment close to its falling away and impermanence, aniccataa ruupa, is the characteristic indicating the moment of its falling away. We do not notice that the ruupas of our body fall away and that time and again new ruupas are produced which fall away again. So long as we are alive, kamma, citta, temperature and nutrition produce ruupas and thus our bodily functions can continue. These ruupas arise, develop, decay and fall away within splitseconds. The "Atthasaalinii" (II, Book II, Part I, Ch II, 327) and also the "Visuddhimagga" (Ch XIV, 66, 67) speak in a general, conventional sense about the arising of ruupas at the first moment of life, the initial arising, and they explain that after the initial arising at rebirth there is 'continuity', that is to say, the subsequent arising of the groups of ruupa. Thus, we have to remember that the characteristics are taught by different methods: according to the very short duration of one ruupa that arises and continues before it decays and falls away or in a more general way, in conventional sense. [Note 1] Literally: initial accumulation. ------------------------------ Chapter 8. Characteristics of Ruupas (to be continued) with metta, Han #101643 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Oct 25, 2009 11:57 pm Subject: [dsg] The Buddha's Path, Ch 3, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, The truth of non-self, in Pli anatt, is an essential element of the Buddhas teachings. This truth has been taught by the Buddha alone, it cannot be found outside the Buddhist teachings. Those who come into contact with Buddhism for the first time may be bewildered, even repelled by the truth of non-self. They wonder what the world would be without a self, without other people. Do we not live with and for other people? It is difficult to grasp the truth of non-self and its implications in daily life. What is called in conventional language a person or self is merely a temporary combination of physical phenomena and mental phenomena, which are depending on each other. They have been classified as five groups, in Pli khandhas: one group of all physical phenomena and four groups of mental phenomenafeelings, perceptions, mental activities and consciousness. The five khandhas are in a flux, in a constant process of formation and dissolution. There is nothing lasting, nothing eternal, nothing unchanging in life. The khandhas which arise, fall away and do not return. Present khandhas are different from past khandhas but they are conditioned by past khandhas, and present khandhas condition in their turn future khandhas. We read in the Dialogues of the Buddha (I, number IX, Potthapda Sutta) that the Buddha explained to Citta about the three modes of personality: the past, the present and the future personality. They are different, but the past conditions the present and the present conditions the future. We read that the Buddha explained this by way of a simile: Just, Citta, as from a cow comes milk, and from the milk curds, and from the curds butter, and from the butter ghee, and from the ghee junket; but when it is milk it is not called curds, or butter, or ghee, or junket; and when it is curds it is not called by any of the other names Just so, Citta, when any one of the three modes of personality is going on, it is not called by the name of the other. For these, Citta, are merely names, expressions, turns of speech, designations in common use in the world. And of these a Tathgata (one who has won the truth) makes use indeed, but is not led astray by them. We call by such or such a name what are actually the five khandhas. ******* Nina. #101644 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 1:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] (dsg) charactoristic of citta sarahprocter... Hi Staisha, --- On Sat, 24/10/09, Staisha Perry wrote: >thank you this makes perfect sense once one can see that this only seeing an object this is the moment of citta, regardless whether what faculty it is from. ... Sarah: Yes, seeing is a citta, as are the other moments of consciousness which experience the same visible object. At each moment there is a different citta. ... >there after once you start identifying with shape form memory contact thinking this turns into something else completely cause then it is a phenomena that we have give into as identity or self ... Sarah: Still, even when thinking about the shape or anything else, there are cittas experiencing these concepts, one at a time. Cittas are namas - they can experience any kind of object. We can keep this very short and simple if you'd like to ask for any clarification on this or anything else. Metta Sarah ======== #101645 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 1:53 am Subject: [dsg] Latent Tendencies, anusaya. no 6. nilovg Dear friends, We read in the Expositor (I, Introductory Discourse, 22) about the threefold training and the three levels of defilements: In the Vinaya-Pitaka the riddance of transgression due to the corruptions is meant, because morality is opposed to transgressions (vtikkama kilesa); in the Suttanta-Pitaka the riddance of the tyranny of the corruptions (defilements one is possessed by and that arise) is meant, because concentration of thought is inimical to such tyranny (pariyutthna kilesa ); in the Abhidhamma-Piaka the riddance of latent bias (anusaya kilesa) is meant, because understanding is opposed to it. In the first Pitaka there is a temporary riddance of the corruptions (by means of various factors of morality); in the others their riddance is of the nature of discarding and extirping by the Path. In the first Piaka the riddance is of the corruption of misconduct; in the others it is (respectively) of the corruption of craving and wrong views... The Sratthadpan, the Subcommentary to the Samantapsdik, on the Inception of Discipline gives an additional explanation. We read: As to the expression, the abandoning of the defilements that are transgressions (vtikkama kilesa), this refers to the abandoning of transgressions through the body-door and through the door of speech, thus, to the abandoning of the corruptions (sankilesa) and defilements [15]. The defilements that persist as a powerful condition in the continuous stream of cittas cause the arising of defilements with akusala citta and, even though they are disturbing, they do not violate morality in the sense of causing transgressions. Therefore, the teachers said, morality is opposed to transgressions. As regards the abandoning of medium defilements one is possessed with (pariyutthna kilesa), medium defilements ruin and destroy what is wholesome since they have the power to give opportunity for akusala. This is explained as follows: the abandoning of medium defilements means the abandoning of the defilements that are disturbing because they arise in the succession of cittas. As to the expression, the abandoning of the latent tendencies, latent tendencies are the defilements that lie dormant in the succession of cittas since they cannot be eradicated yet, and they are to be eradicated successively. These defilements can arise because of the appropriate conditions, and they are called latent tendencies [16]. There are seven defilements which are latent tendencies and these defilements can arise when the conditions are appropriate, such as sense desire. The abandoning of these seven defilements is called the eradication of the latent tendencies. The factor of the eightfold Path which is wisdom can completely eradicate them.Therefore the teachers said that wisdom is opposed to the latent tendencies. As to the expression, overcoming by opposites, tadanga-pahna, this is the overcoming of an unwholesome quality by an opposite wholesome quality among the bases of meritorious deeds, such as generosity, just as a lighted lamp dispels darkness. This is called overcoming by the opposite. However, here, overcoming by the opposite refers to the the overcoming of the wrong of transgressions by good morality. ---------- 15. Abandoning the transgression of sla by the observance of sla. 16. Latent tendencies themselves do not arise, but they are the condition for the arising of defilements with akusala cittas. ********* Nina. #101646 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 1:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Latent Tendencies, anusaya. no 5. sarahprocter... Dear Han & all, --- On Sat, 24/10/09, han tun wrote: >Han: In one Burmese book I found the following comparison: (3) anusaya kilesa is like a match box. One cannot yet see any fire burning, although there are inflammable substance in the matchbox and matchstick. (2) pariyu.t.thaana kilesa is like when one strikes the matchstick against the rough surface of the matchbox. The fire starts to burn the matchstick. But the fire is not yet spreading, and it only burns the matchstick itself. So also, pariyu.t.thaana kilesa burns only within the person himself. (1) vtikkama kilesa is like when the burning matchstick is applied to some inflammable substance. Then the fire will spread to other substances. So also, vtikkama kilesa causes harm to other persons. ... S: Yes, these are good analogies. Akusala kamma patha is vitikkama when harm is caused to other people. There was some discussion between Rob & KS in Bangkok on this. She was stressing again that with regard to akusala kamma patha, it is only when harm is caused to others, not just having wrong views about kamma, results and so on, however strongly held. .... >When the matchbox is soaked with water, then one cannot lit the fire even when the matchstick is struck against the matchbox. So also, when the anusaya kilesa is eliminated by magga ~naa.na there cannot be any kilesa fire. The latent tendencies for defilements are eliminated forever. ... S: Yes, it's the lokuttara path cittas which soak the matchbox only! Nicely put. Metta Sarah ======== #101647 From: "sprlrt" Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 1:52 am Subject: Dhs. The arising of consciousness - 10 dvi-panca-vinnana sprlrt Dhammasangani: Kusala dhammas, akusala dhammas and abykata [neither kusala nor akusala] dhammas. .... The arising of consciousness (cittuppada) ... [2 * 5] pacavina vipka abykata, 5 resulting from past kusala, 5 from past akusala dhammas 431., 443. [resulting from kusala] / 556. [from akusala] - Which dhammas are abykata? At the moment when a resultant eye-consciousness / ear-consciousness / nose-consciousness / tongue-consciousness / body consciousness has arisen, due to stored-up kusala kamma [cetana cetasika, abhisankhra], / akusala kamma, and pertaining to the sensous sphere, and accompanied by neutral feeling [eye... tongue consciousness resulting from both kusala and akusala kamma] , / pleasant feeling [body-consciousness resulting from kusala], / unpleasant feeling [body-consciousness resulting from akusala], and its object is visible. / udible. / smellable. / tastable. / tangible. At that moment there is: contact, feeling, memory, intention, consciousness, neutral feeling, / pleasant feeling, / unpleasant feeling, one-pointedness of mind, the faculty of the mind, the faculty of disinterestedness, / of pleasure, / of pain, and the faculty of life. These, and any other non-rpa dhammas arisen by conditions, are the dhammas that there are at that moment. These dhammas are abykata. Atthaslin: Kusala resultant without roots 431. Abykata [dhammas] are fourfold: resultant, functional, rpa and nibbana. Here [431., 443.] are considered those resulting from kusala, those of small results (parittavipka), and without roots (ahetuka). These are the five [sense] consciousnesses, and are given in their corresponding door-order beginning with eye-consciousness. 'due to stored-up kusala kamma pertaining to the sensous sphere': points out its arising as being conditioned by a specific kamma, leaving out other general conditions such as door, object etc. Here 'due to' refers to a past cause; 'stored-up' to its accumulating and ripening. Eye-consciousness is the coming into being of an eye's consciousness, arising at the eye and cognizing, with the eye as its physical base. The same applies to the ear-consciousness and to the other three. Eye-consciousness has the inherent characteristic of knowing visual form through the eye. It has the function of [cognizing] visible object only. It manifest itself by confronting the existing visible form. Its proximate cause is the falling away of the functional mind element that adverted the visible object. For the other four [sense] consciousness the exposition is similar. ... #101648 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] mindfulness and thinking nilovg Dear Alan Mc A, Op 26-okt-2009, om 0:20 heeft drampsych het volgende geschreven: > N:: Mindfulness, sati, of the level of satipa.t.thaana, is mindful > of one naama or ruupa at a time as it appears through one of the > six doorways. The object of mindfulness may be seeing, and that > means, that seeing has just fallen away and mindfulness which > arises shortly afterwards can be mindful of just that characteristic. > > A: This means, I take it, that mindfulness occurs in a separate > succeeding mind-moment to seeing, which it takes as its object? > However, sometimes mindfulness is characterized as arising with a > citta, as a cetasika. Is the arising of sati as a cetasika co- > occurring or is it separate? --------- N: Sati is a beautiful (sobhana) cetasika accompanying each sobhana citta. Cetasikas never arise alone, they have to accompany citta. There are different levels of sati: it is non-forgetful of what is wholesome, kusala. There is sati with daana, with siila and with mental development, bhaavanaa. Sati of satipa.t.thaana is non-forgetful of the characteristic of naama or ruupa that appears at the present moment. For instance, sound may appear now. Most of the time there is forgetfulness of the characteristic of sound as a kind of ruupa that is experienced through the earsense. We think immediately of the voice of someone or the sound of something. When there are the right conditions for sati it arises and it can be mindful of sound. However, the kusala citta that is accompanied by sati is aware of the nama or rupa that has just fallen away, but we can still call it present moment. Is there no sound appearing now? We do not have to think of it that it has just fallen away. When there is sati, right understanding, pa~n~naa, arising at the same time, can investigate the charactreistic of sound as a kind of rupa, a conditioned element, not a thing or a person. We do not have to think of processes, there can just be awareness of this or that characteristic. Sati is not the goal, it is understanding of realities that is important. We do not have to think of sati. Listening and considering the Dhamma are the conditions for more understanding and then very gradually there can be awareness of the present reality and direct understanding. But nobody can direct sati and pa~n~naa, they arise because of their own conditions and are non-self. Nina. #101649 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Citta = whole . If "whole" do not exist, then citta doesn't really exist. sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Mon, 26/10/09, truth_aerator wrote: >>S: Just looking at your subject heading first, please quote me the text which says that "citta = whole". > ... A:> Citta = vinnana. Right? ... S: Yes, citta = vinnana, but that is not the same as saying "citta=whole" or quoting from a sutta (or any tipitaka/ancient commentary) that states this. ... > >> S: yes, but remember that vinnana is an internal ayatana. > > ... >A: No, Sarah. The Buddha did not call Vinnana to be internal (or external). >The 6 ajjhattikani ayatanani are "Cakkhayatanam sotayatanam ghanayatanam jivhayatanam kayayatanam manayatanam" . These are called internal ayatana. Vinnana is not part of them. ... S: I gave a quote from the Vism below that clearly indicates that manayatana, one of the internal ayatanas, includes all kinds of vinnana, all kinds of cittas. The ayatanas are paramattha dhammas, not "wholes". ... >Neither does vinnana belong to bahirani ayatanani (external ayatanas) Rupayatanam saddayatanam gandhayatanam rasayatanam photthabbayatanam dhammayatanam. MN148 ... S: No suggestion from me that it does. ... >A: Internal vs external implies location. Consciousness is not found in any spatial *location*. And neither does the Buddha calls it internal or external like the ayatanas. ... S: Cittas/vinnana are inner ayatanas and cetasikas are outer ayatanas, so we need to be careful about the meaning. I wouldn't refer to "location" in this regard. It is not the same meaning as in "internal/external objects" as discussed in the Satipatthana Sutta, for example. .... > A:> Vinnana is not internal ayatana. Manayatana is. > ... > S: And what is manayatana if not vinnana (aka citta)? > ... A:> Citta is collection of interaction of past internal + external ayatanas. ... S: No, this is not correct and you won't find any support in the texts for it. When there is the coming together of the inner and outer ayatanas, manayatna (citta/vinnana) always arises and "meets" it's object. So, for example, at a moment of seeing of visible object, there is the meeting of cakkhayatana (eye-sense), rupayatana (visible object), manayatana (seeing consciousness), dhammayatana (various cetasikas). Here, cakkhayatana and manayatana are internal ayatanas and the others are external ayatanas. ... >As to what manayatana exactly is, is not to my knowledge defined in the suttas. Correct me if I am wrong. ... S: It is certainly defined in a lot of detail in the Abhidhamma and ancient commentaries. If it is not clearly understood, one will end up reading the suttas to be all about "wholes" as you've shown:-)) ... >The mind *consciousness* (manovinnana) is mana + dhamma. "Mananca paticca dhamme ca uppajjati manovinnanam" >Since manovinnana is made of mano + dhamma , that means that it is a whole. And just like none of the parts is a car, neither mano nor dhamma by itself is manovinnana. ... S: Now you're talking about another term with similar misunderstanding, . Let's get back to this one later. ... > >There is also dhammayatana, but in 12 ayatana classification there isn't "vinnana" word. > ... > S: Really? Vism XV, 14: "...And the mind base, when classified according to profitable,unprofit able, resultant, and functional consciousness, is of eighty-nine kinds or of one hundred and twenty-one kinds....” > > "...Manaayatana. m kusalaakusala- vipaaka-kiriyavi ~n~naa.nabhedena ekuunanabutippabhed a.m, ekaviisuttarasatapp abbheda.m vaa..." > > Note that "consciousness" is a translation of vi~n~naa.na here. >Manayatana includes all kinds of vinnanas or cittas. ... A:> All kinds of vinnana is made of ajjhattikani & bahirani ayatanani. ... S: No, Alex. Read the reference again carefully. You said that there is no vinnana in the 12 ayatanas and I showed you that there is. Now you add another wild statement, also not backed up by any textual support... I'm not sure where all these ideas are coming from, but recommend some time in "Useful Posts" under "Ayatanas". I know it's a difficult topic. Anyway, I appreciate the discussion:-)) Metta Sarah ======= #101650 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:51 am Subject: Lukas and the present moment. nilovg Dear Lukas and Alan Mc, Lukas, here is a continuation of the discussion in Bgk : < N: I still keep on wondering about the difference between sati and thinking. They seem so close. Kh S: That is why there needs to be more understanding about non- self. Right now one can begin to understand the reality which appears, such as hardness. Understanding can become detached from thinking about it as some thing. Hardness cannot be anything else but hardness. One can begin to understand it as a reality. Nobody can control it, it has arisen and then fallen away. When there is understanding of a characteristic as a dhamma, understanding can grow. Sound appears and when we do not think much about it, it is just sound as usual. Sound is experienced by hearing, but there is no understanding of it as just a dhamma. One is not familiar with the characteristic of a dhamma. In order to understand what a dhamma is, we should remember that this is not merely a word, but a characteristic which appears. Without hearing, sound cannot appear. There must be a reality which experiences sound. Naama has no shape or form, but it can experience something, just like now. Just beginning to experience realities is better than reading a great deal about Dhamma subjects. Realities that are appearing now should be understood. If one has not heard Dhamma, one is blind from birth, one lives without any understanding.> Nina. #101651 From: han tun Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Latent Tendencies, anusaya. no 6. hantun1 Dear Nina, I have learnt three pahaanas (tadanga-pahaana, vikkhambhana-pahaana, samuccheda-pahaana) through your posts. Now, according to the Buddhist Dictionary by Ven Nyanatiloka, there are five pahaanas as follows. (1) 'Overcoming by repression' (vikkhambhana-pahaana) is the pushing back of adverse things, such as the 5 mental hindrances (niivara.na), etc., through this or that mental concentration (samaadhi), just as a pot thrown into moss-clad water pushes the moss aside. (2) 'Overcoming by the opposite' (tadanga-pahaana) is the overcoming by opposing this or that thing that is to be overcome, by this or that factor of knowledge belonging to insight (vipassanaa), just as a lighted lamp dispels the darkness of the night. In this way, the personality-belief (sakkaayadi.t.thi) is overcome by determining the mental and corporeal phenomena [the view of uncausedness of existence by investigation into the conditions] [the idea of eternity by contemplation of impermanency] [the idea of happiness by contemplation of misery]. (3) 'Overcoming by destruction' (samuccheda-pahaana) is through the knowledge of the noble path the fetters and other evil things cannot continue any longer, just like a tree destroyed by lightning. (4) 'Overcoming by tranquillization' (pa.tipassaddhi-pahaana) is when, after the disappearing of the fetters at the entrance into the paths, the fetters, from the moment of fruition (phala) onwards, are forever extinct and stilled. (5) 'Overcoming by escape' (nissara.na-pahaana) is identical with the extinction and Nibbaana. ------------------ Han: How can we apply the additional two pahaanas to the abandoning of the three levels of kilesas (anusaya-kilesa, pariyu.t.thaana-kilesa, and vitikkama-kilesa)? Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #101652 From: "Sadhu Chew" Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:35 am Subject: Re: to Sarah - Aumodana chewsadhu Dear Sarah, Thanks and Sadhu to you. I have received the books 'Realities and Concepts' 4 copies, 4 Dhamma CDs, and a very cute greeting card. Anumodana. May all beings be well and happy. With respect, Chew --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sadhu Chew" wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > > Thanks and Sadhu for sending the Dhamma books to me. FYI, I still haven't received it yet. When did you send out the books? > > Thanks. > > May all beings be well and happy. > > With respect, > Chew > > > > p.s Chew - anumodana and appreciation for the printing of the books. I hope you received the very small package with a few copies of "Concepts & Realities" I sent you some time ago. > > ======= > > > #101653 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:56 am Subject: Re: What is kaya / citta viveka? Citta Viveka = JHANAS jonoabb Hi Alex (101457) > MahaNiddesa Pali tells us as it is: > > Katamo kayaviveko? Idha bhikkhu vivittam senasanam bhajati arannam rukkhamulam pabbatam kandaram giriguham susanam vanapattham abbhokasam palalapunjam. Kayena vivitto viharati. So eko gacchati, eko titthati, eko nisidati, eko seyyam kappeti, eko gamam pindaya pavisati, eko patikkamati, eko raho nisidati, eko cankamam adhitthati, eko carati viharati iriyati vattati paleti yapeti yapeti. Ayam kayaviveko. > > The above talks about a monk who lives physically alone (eko) in the solitary place, the forest (aranna), under root of the trees (rukkhamula), who walks for alms alone, who SITS ALONE, who is fixing walking alone (eko cankamam adhitthati) , who abides practicing alone etc etc > > > Katamo cittaviveko? Pathamam jhanam samapannassa nivaranehi cittam vivittam hoti > > What is seclusion of mind? From being engaged in First Jhana , the mind is secluded from hindrances [the higher Jhanas are mental seclusion from lower Jhana factors] - MahaNiddesa PTS 1.28 =============== Thanks for quoting this passage from the Maha Niddesa. Not being a Pali scholar I can't comment on the selected terms you mention here. Is there any translation of the whole passage you could refer me to? Thanks. Jon #101654 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Does weight of kamma depend on others? jonoabb Hi pt (101462) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi John, > > Thanks for asking about this in Bangkok and explaining here. > =============== Glad you found it to be of some interest. =============== > pt: I hear what you're saying - you've explained this a few times already, so I guess I'm just not able to see your point at this time. I mean, to me it seems everything has the potential to incite stronger lobha, dosa and moha, depending on the "recipient's" anusaya so to speak. Nevertheless, I'll keep considering what you've said, maybe it'll start making sense at some point in the future. Thanks very much for the discussion so far. > =============== Thanks, pt. I won't add anything more until I have something new to say ;-)). Jon #101655 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 4:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours (314, sutta 50)and commentary. jonoabb Hi Howard (and Herman) (101577) > So, the commentary on the one hand is saying that the conditions of > birth are largely kamma-determined but one's current character and kamma need > not be. This makes the commentary less racist, IMO, than first meets the > eye, though I still find myself unhappy with what I view as an underlying > bigotry, particularly the evaluation of lower-caste folks having "outward > appearance [that] is unfavorable," a common evaluation of subjugated people > in a society by the "ruling classes". > =============== I think you are rushing to judgment here. The interpretation you are giving to this passage does not seem consistent with the commentaries as I know them. Is it possible you are misreading the reference to "unfavorable outward appearance"? Jon #101656 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 5:02 am Subject: Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination re-establishment of original lineage ~ Ajahn Brahmavamso jonoabb Hi Chris (101633) > I found this surprise on the Buddhist Society of Western Australia website. > > BSWA News : Bhikkhuni Ordination Talk Now Live > Apologies for the technical glitch earlier today, the audio recording announcing the full ordination of our Bhikkhunis is now active. > Please partake in the joyous occasion of the re-establishment of the original lineage of nuns (Bhikkhunis) -established by the Bhudda 2000+ years ago - right here in Western Australia by Ajahn Brahm. > http://www.bswa.org/modules/news/ > =============== Of course, a lineage (whether of bhikkhus or bhikkunis) that was established by the Buddha, once broken cannot be re-established. So it is actually the establishment of a new lineage. Jon #101657 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 5:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta jonoabb Hi Howard and Herman > We interpret Buddhism differently. Contact to me is not a thing that > contacts, feeling is not a thing that feels, citta is not a thing that > knows, paramattha dhammas are not things that perform their function. There > is only action or function, not a doer of that action or function. > > Further, I do not believe this to be a linguistic matter, but a matter of > view/understanding. > > Thanks again > > Herman > ================================ > On this matter, Herman, we are in complete agreement. :-) An interesting perspective. I'd be interested to know how you'd describe the difference between, for example, seeing consciousness and visible object, hearing consciousness and sound. Thanks. Jon #101658 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 1:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] (dsg) charactoristic of citta upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Staisha) - In a message dated 10/26/2009 4:44:31 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Staisha, --- On Sat, 24/10/09, Staisha Perry wrote: >thank you this makes perfect sense once one can see that this only seeing an object this is the moment of citta, regardless whether what faculty it is from. ... Sarah: Yes, seeing is a citta, as are the other moments of consciousness which experience the same visible object. At each moment there is a different citta. ... >there after once you start identifying with shape form memory contact thinking this turns into something else completely cause then it is a phenomena that we have give into as identity or self ... Sarah: Still, even when thinking about the shape or anything else, there are cittas experiencing these concepts, one at a time. Cittas are namas - they can experience any kind of object. We can keep this very short and simple if you'd like to ask for any clarification on this or anything else. Metta Sarah ================================ What you wrote here Sarah raised a question in my mind: Is the Pali word 'citta' pluralized in the suttas? If yes, I'd be interested in seeing examples of the varying instances of that. With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #101659 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 1:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours (314, sutta 50)and commentary. upasaka_howard Hi, Jon (and Herman) - In a message dated 10/26/2009 7:04:21 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Howard (and Herman) (101577) > So, the commentary on the one hand is saying that the conditions of > birth are largely kamma-determined but one's current character and kamma need > not be. This makes the commentary less racist, IMO, than first meets the > eye, though I still find myself unhappy with what I view as an underlying > bigotry, particularly the evaluation of lower-caste folks having "outward > appearance [that] is unfavorable," a common evaluation of subjugated people > in a society by the "ruling classes". > =============== I think you are rushing to judgment here. The interpretation you are giving to this passage does not seem consistent with the commentaries as I know them. Is it possible you are misreading the reference to "unfavorable outward appearance"? --------------------------------------------------- It would be wonderful if that were the case. How do you read it? -------------------------------------------------- Jon =============================== With metta, Howard P. S. Do you believe that all commentaries came from the same source? Do you view them all as equally trustworthy? Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #101660 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta upasaka_howard Hi, Jon (and Herman) - In a message dated 10/26/2009 8:06:07 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: An interesting perspective. I'd be interested to know how you'd describe the difference between, for example, seeing consciousness and visible object, hearing consciousness and sound. Thanks. ================================ Seeing is the experiential presence of visual content, and visible object is that content. There is no seeing without visual content, and there is no unseen sight. With metta, Howard /"Thus, monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't construe an [object as] seen. He doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-seen. He doesn't construe a seer. "When hearing... "When sensing... "When cognizing what is to be cognized, he doesn't construe an [object as] cognized. He doesn't construe an uncognized. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-cognized. He doesn't construe a cognizer./ (From the Kalaka Sutta) #101661 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours (314, sutta 50)and commentary. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 26-okt-2009, om 13:59 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Do you believe that all commentaries came from the same source? Do > you view them all as equally trustworthy? ------ N:We are referring mostly to Buddhaghosa and the subcommentaries of Dhammapala who lived at the same time as Buddhaghosa. They used ancient commentaries which are now lost but which were rehearsed at the first Council. Buddhaghosa edited the ancient commentaries, he did not write something new. Seldom he gave his own opinion and when he did he mentioned it. He also mentioned the opinions of different teachers: 'Some say...' We do not always understand the commentaries, we need to consult several passages sometimes. But here 'unfavorable bodily appearance' is the result of kamma, the passive side of life. The Buddha speaks in the suttas of weak and strong bodies as a result of kamma. It is a given situation. But, as said, how are our deeds now, that is more important. Nina. #101662 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 4:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours (314, sutta 50)and commentary. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 10/26/2009 11:22:50 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: But here 'unfavorable bodily appearance' is the result of kamma, the passive side of life. The Buddha speaks in the suttas of weak and strong bodies as a result of kamma. ============================== I don't dispute that in the slightest. What I take exception to is imputing unfavorable bodily appearance to all the members of a subjugated societal group. That is racist. With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #101663 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours (314, sutta 50)and commentary. nilovg HI Howard, Op 26-okt-2009, om 16:27 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I don't dispute that in the slightest. What I take exception to is > imputing unfavorable bodily appearance to all the members of a > subjugated > societal group. That is racist. ------- N: I do not read this in the co. Results of kamma are individual. There is no collective kamma. Nina. #101664 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:37 am Subject: Re:Q. [dsg] Latent Tendencies, anusaya. no 6. nilovg Dear Han, Op 26-okt-2009, om 11:20 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Now, according to the Buddhist Dictionary by Ven Nyanatiloka, there > are five pahaanas as follows. > > (1) 'Overcoming by repression' (vikkhambhana-pahaana) is the > pushing back of adverse things, such as the 5 mental hindrances > (niivara.na), etc., through this or that mental concentration > (samaadhi), just as a pot thrown into moss-clad water pushes the > moss aside. > > (2) 'Overcoming by the opposite' (tadanga-pahaana) is the > overcoming by opposing this or that thing that is to be overcome, > by this or that factor of knowledge belonging to insight > (vipassanaa), just as a lighted lamp dispels the darkness of the > night. In this way, the personality-belief (sakkaayadi.t.thi) is > overcome by determining the mental and corporeal phenomena [the > view of uncausedness of existence by investigation into the > conditions] [the idea of eternity by contemplation of impermanency] > [the idea of happiness by contemplation of misery]. > > (3) 'Overcoming by destruction' (samuccheda-pahaana) is through the > knowledge of the noble path the fetters and other evil things > cannot continue any longer, just like a tree destroyed by lightning. > > (4) 'Overcoming by tranquillization' (pa.tipassaddhi-pahaana) is > when, after the disappearing of the fetters at the entrance into > the paths, the fetters, from the moment of fruition (phala) > onwards, are forever extinct and stilled. > > (5) 'Overcoming by escape' (nissara.na-pahaana) is identical with > the extinction and Nibbaana. > > ------------------ > > Han: How can we apply the additional two pahaanas to the abandoning > of the three levels of kilesas (anusaya-kilesa, pariyu.t.thaana- > kilesa, and vitikkama-kilesa)? --------- N: As to 4: The moment of phalacitta follows upon the magga-citta that eradicates the defilements that are to be eradicated in conformity with the stage of enlightenment that has been reached. Actually, latent tendencies are eradicated by the maggacitta and thus, the moment of fruition is of great tranquillity. It is higher, not to be compared to the calm obtained by temporary suppression in jhaana. Since latent tendencies are eradicated stage by stage and those that are eradicated cannot motivate anymore pariyuttaana kilesa nor vitikkama kilesa. As to 5: this is true freedom. The end of all defilements, latent tendencies included. No 4 and 5 are a consequence of 3. Nina. #101665 From: Ken O Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours (314, sutta 50)and commentary. ashkenn2k Dear Nina We cannot stop people from expressing their views, however we could look ourselves at realise there are only realities be it pleasant or unpleasant. The Perfections: pg 175 "Equanimity has the characterisitcs of promoting the aspect of neutrality; its function is to see things impartially; its manifestation is the subsiding of attraction and replusion; reflection upon the fact that all beings inherit the results of their own kamma as its proximate cause." Visud pg 288 No 2 "No higher rule, the Buddha say, than patience, And no nibbana higher than forebearance' (D.ii.49; Dh.184) cheers Ken O #101666 From: "Mike" Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 1:06 pm Subject: Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination re-establishment of original lineage ~ Ajahn Brahmavamso mikenz66 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > Jon: Of course, a lineage (whether of bhikkhus or bhikkunis) that was established by the Buddha, once broken cannot be re-established. So it is actually the establishment of a new lineage. Mike: Yes, but the Theravada Bhikkhus have an unbroken lineage. There is an argument that it is not clear that the double ordination is required (taking vows before both Bhikkhus and Bhikkhunis) or whether that's a later custom. Besides, an unbroken unbroken lineage of Bhikkhunis does exist (they happen to not be Theravada, but the Vinaya is not specific to Theravada). Mike #101667 From: Herman Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta egberdina Hi Jon (and Howard), 2009/10/26 jonoabb > Hi Howard and Herman > > > We interpret Buddhism differently. Contact to me is not a thing that > > contacts, feeling is not a thing that feels, citta is not a thing that > > knows, paramattha dhammas are not things that perform their function. > There > > is only action or function, not a doer of that action or function. > > > > Further, I do not believe this to be a linguistic matter, but a matter > of > > view/understanding. > > > > Thanks again > > > > Herman > > ================================ > > On this matter, Herman, we are in complete agreement. :-) > > An interesting perspective. I'd be interested to know how you'd describe > the difference between, for example, seeing consciousness and visible > object, hearing consciousness and sound. Thanks. > > Howard has already answered, and in the way I would have. I would just like to add that consciousness of any kind (seeing, hearing) has no characteristic other than it's object, so to talk about the consciousness of the object is superfluous, talking about the object suffices. In English, that translates into "consciousness of blue" and "blue" meaning exactly the same thing. The danger in the more wordy formulation is that some (at dsg, for example :-)) proceed to then take consciousness to be something separate, independent, with it's own characteristic. But in so doing they have introduced something that isn't there. Subject/object dualism (as in "seeing consciousness sees blue") is a feature of language, not a feature of reality :-) Cheers Herman #101668 From: han tun Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 6:39 pm Subject: Re:Q. [dsg] Latent Tendencies, anusaya. no 6. hantun1 Dear Nina. > Nina: As to 4 (pa.tipassaddhi-pahaana): The moment of phalacitta follows upon the magga-citta that eradicates the defilements that are to be eradicated in conformity with the stage of enlightenment that has been reached. Actually, latent tendencies are eradicated by the maggacitta and thus, the moment of fruition is of great tranquillity. It is higher, not to be compared to the calm obtained by temporary suppression in jhaana. Since latent tendencies are eradicated stage by stage and those that are eradicated cannot motivate anymore pariyuttaana kilesa nor vitikkama kilesa. > As to 5 (nissara.na-pahaana): this is true freedom. The end of all defilements, latent tendencies included. > No 4 and 5 are a consequence of 3. -------------------- Han: Thank you very much, Nina. It is all very clear now. Respectfully, Han #101669 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:33 pm Subject: Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination re-establishment of original lineage ~ Ajahn Brahmavamso rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > Jon: Of course, a lineage (whether of bhikkhus or bhikkunis) that was established by the Buddha, once broken cannot be re-established. So it is actually the establishment of a new lineage. > > Mike: Yes, but the Theravada Bhikkhus have an unbroken lineage. There is an argument that it is not clear that the double ordination is required (taking vows before both Bhikkhus and Bhikkhunis) or whether that's a later custom. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dear Mike Do you see any problem with this? These people (who say it was a later custom ) offer what proof. They simply say "the vinya and suttas and abhidhamma were invented by later monks- why bother taking them seriously as we know much better". So I wonder why they want to be bhikkhuni or bhikkhu in the first place, why not join another sect that sees no legitmacy in Theravada. But anyway for those who do consider the Tipitaka to have value this sutta is in the Anguttara Nikya. Gotamvaggo- Gotamisutta- To Gotmi. """ A trainee bhikkhuni should spend two rains observing the six precepts and be accomplished for the higher ordination, in the presence of both Communities, bhikkhus and bhikkhunis. This rule should be honoured, revered, esteemed and should not be thrown out until life lasts. these eight strong rules are declared to the bhikkhunis not to be thrown out until life lasts, as future protection."" ___http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara5/8-atthakanipata/006-gotamivaggo-e.htm Robert #101670 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:38 pm Subject: Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination lineage is unbroken! rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > Jon: Of course, a lineage (whether of bhikkhus or bhikkunis) that was established by the Buddha, once broken cannot be re-established. So it is actually the establishment of a new lineage. > > Mike: Ye Besides, an unbroken unbroken lineage of Bhikkhunis does exist (they happen to not be Theravada, but the Vinaya is not specific to Theravada). > +++++++++++ Dear Mike are you suggesting then that Bhikkunis ordained by other sects should be accepted as Bhikkhuni by theravada ? I assume then that also the Bhikkus of these other sects shoudl also be considered as bhikkhu by Theravada? Do you have the name of the sects? robert #101671 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 4:13 pm Subject: Certainty of Rightness... bhikkhu.sama... Friends: What Right View gives Certainty of Rightness? Seeing the 5 Clusters of Clinging: form, feeling, perception, mental construction, and consciousness collectively as impermanent, as painful, as a disease, a boil, a dart, a calamity, an affliction, as alien, as disintegrating, as a plague, a terror, a menace, a disaster, as fickle, as perishable, as not lasting, as transient, as no protection, no shelter, no refuge, as empty, as vain, void, as not-self, as a danger, as subject to change, as having no core, as the root of calamity, as murderous, as due to be annihilated, as subject to fermentation, as constructed of parts, as Mara's bait, as subject to birth, subject to ageing, subject to illness, subject to death, subject to sorrow, subject to lamentation, subject to despair, subject to defilement. By seeing that the 5 clusters of clinging are impermanent, one thus acquires a fondness, an inclination, a preference that conforms with the Dhamma. By seeing that ceasing of the 5 clusters of clinging is the very immutable Nibbana, one enters into the certainty of rightness. This is therefore perfectly right view ! Ps II 238, Vism 611 Clusters of thoughts and mental states as clinging, can be like Bees! <...> Physical aggregates can have many forms, yet mental even more so! Have a nice detached day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri <...> #101672 From: "Mike" Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 9:47 pm Subject: Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination lineage is unbroken! mikenz66 Hi Robert, > Robert: are you suggesting then that Bhikkunis ordained by other sects should be accepted as Bhikkhuni by theravada ? I assume then that also the Bhikkus of these other sects shoudl also be considered as bhikkhu by Theravada? Do you have the name of the sects? Mike: As I understand it the Bhikshunis who have participated in previous ordinations follow the Dharmagupta Vinaya. Are you suggesting that I should have no respect for monastics of other sects? Mike #101673 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 10:11 pm Subject: Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination lineage is unbroken! rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > > > Hi Robert, > > > Robert: are you suggesting then that Bhikkunis ordained by other sects should be accepted as Bhikkhuni by theravada ? I assume then that also the Bhikkus of these other sects shoudl also be considered as bhikkhu by Theravada? Do you have the name of the sects? > > Mike: As I understand it the Bhikshunis who have participated in previous ordinations follow the Dharmagupta Vinaya. > > Are you suggesting that I should have no respect for monastics of other sects? > > Mike > Dear Mike You can respect anyone you want- Catholic priests, the Dalai lama, or your local mullah, but surely you would not imagine them to be Theravada Bhikkhu. And it is only Theravada that that was able to carry on the Buddha's words correctly. I quote from the Katthavathuppakarana-Atthakatha (by Buddhoghosa) (p3 of Points of contoversy, PTS) It talks about after the second council (about 100 years after Buddha parinibbana) "Ten thousand of the of the Vajjiputtaka bhikkhus[after spliting from the good monks] seeking adherents among themselves, formed a school called the Mahasanghika [these then split several times] Thus from the school of the Mahasanghikas, in the second century only two schools seceded from the Theravada[note that the rightful monks are called Theravada by Buddhaghosa]-Mahimsinsasakas and Vajjiputtakas... [it lists more that split later]..Thus from the Theravada arose these eleven secding bodies making 12 in all. And these 12 together the six schools of the Mahasanghikas constitute the 18 schools which arose in the second century. Of the eighteen, 17 are to be understood as schismatics, the THERAVADAN ONLY being non- schismatic.""" The commentary continues and cites the Dipavamsa The Bhikkhus [of the schismatic sects] "settled a doctrine contrary [to the true faith] Altering the original redaction, they made another. They transposed suttas which belonged in one collection to another place;they destroyed the true meaning and the faith in the vinyaa and in the five collections. Those bhikkus who understood neither what had been taught in long expositons...settled a false meaning in connection with spourious speeches of the Buddha. These bhikkhus destroyed a great deal of meaning under the colour of the letter. Rejecting the other texts- that is to say the Pavara, the six sections of the Abhidhamma, the Patisambhidhida, the niddessa and some portions of the Jataka they composed new ones. They changed their appearance, ..forsaking what was original..." There is more along the same lines. Thus we see how fragile the Dhamma is - and open to abuse by foolish monks changing and rejecting sections of the Tipitaka at their whim. It is only because of the steadfastness of the Theravada that we have the Dhamma preserved until today. Anyone may respect the sects mentioned by Buddhagosa a great deal, however if thye feel that those sects are the ones who upheld the Dhamma and the Theravada are schismatic then why would they want to ordain as a Theravada Bhikkhu/Bhikkuni? Robert #101674 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 10:17 pm Subject: Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination lineage is unbroken! rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > > > Hi Robert, > > > Robert: are you suggesting then that Bhikkunis ordained by other sects should be accepted as Bhikkhuni by theravada ? I assume then that also the Bhikkus of these other sects shoudl also be considered as bhikkhu by Theravada? Do you have the name of the sects? > > Mike: As I understand it the Bhikshunis who have participated in previous ordinations follow the Dharmagupta Vinaya. > > +++++++++ Dear Mike But the Dharmagupta sect, apart from being non-Theravada, also has no proper ordaining of Bhikkhuni as set down in the Sutta and vinaya. Venerable Dhammanando pointed this out some time ago: http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index.php...mp;#entry464820 (Is esangha down temporarily- I can't seem to bring this link up?, but I have this copy ""Dhammnand has omitted some details - vital details, for they have a bearing on why the Dharmaguptaka bhikkhun lineage is considered dubious by vinayadharas in the Theravada tradition (and also, I believe by those in the Mulasarvastivada tradition of Tibet). The original transmission (or rather, alleged transmission) of the bhikkhun ordination to China in fact took place in 357 CE. This alleged transmission was carried out by bhikkhus alone and was therefore INVALID by Theravadin criteria. It led, however, to a century-long tradition of Chinese bhikkhun ordinations being given by bhikkhus alone. Moving forward to 433 CE, of the 300 women ordained in this year some had not done the two years' training as a sikkhamna, while others had already been living as bhikkhuns beforehand, having received ordination from the bhikkhu sangha alone. Therefore, by Theravadin criteria their ordinations failed on the grounds of "defect in the material to be ordained" (vatthu-vipatti). Those women who had never been sikkhamnas were ineligible to be ordained until they had fulfilled this preliminary training. Those women who had already been one-sidedly ordained were living in communion by theft and were therefore banned for life from receiving a genuine bhikkhun ordination. Therefore Dharmaguptaka nuns are not bhikkhuns by Theravadin criteria. Moreover, this judgment is not unique to the Theravada, for even within the Dharmaguptaka tradition the validity of Dharmaguptaka bhikkhun ordinations has been challenged, notably by the Taiwanese Vinaya master Ven. Dao-hai. Dao-hai has argued that at several points in Chinese history the bhikkhun parampar was irreparably broken (see his Discussion of Bhikṣuṇ Ordination and its Lineage in China, Based on Scriptures of Chinese Vinaya and Historical facts, p. 18-19, Dharamsala 1998). To carry out formal transactions of the sangha in such an irregular manner is not a "loophole"; it is a violation of Vinaya and a defect that invalidates the ordination. Best wishes, Dhammanando Bhikkhu #101675 From: "Mike" Date: Mon Oct 26, 2009 10:37 pm Subject: Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination lineage is unbroken! mikenz66 Dear Robert > Robert: But the Dharmagupta sect, apart from being non-Theravada, also has no proper ordaining of Bhikkhuni as set down in the Sutta and vinaya. > Venerable Dhammanando pointed this out some time ago: Thank you for the clarification. It is useful to be able to have these discussions. > Robert: http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index.php...mp;#entry464820 > (Is esangha down temporarily- I can't seem to bring this link up?. Yes, E-Sangha has some technical problems. Metta Mike #101676 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 2:28 am Subject: [dsg] The Buddha's Path, Ch 3, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, People have different characters, different personalities. In reality there is nothing static in what is called a person. The present personality is different from the past personality, but it has originated from the past personality. We read in the commentary to the Debates (to the Kathvatthu, Chapter I, the Person, 33, 34): Given bodily and mental khandhas, it is customary to say such and such a name, a family. Thus, by this popular turn of speech, convention, expression, is meant: there is the personThe Buddhas have two kinds of discourse, the popular and the philosophical. Those relating to a being, a person, a deva (divine being), a brahm,are popular discourses, while those relating to impermanence, dukkha, non- self, the khandhas, the elements, the sensesare discourses on ultimate meaningA discourse on ultimate meaning is, as a rule, too severe to begin with; therefore the Buddhas teach at first by popular discourse, and then by way of discourse on ultimate meaning The Enlightened One, best of speakers, spoke two kinds of truth, namely, the conventional truth and the ultimate truth, a third is not known. Therein, a popular discourse is true in conventional sense. A discourse on ultimate realities is also true, and as such, characteristic of things as they are Before studying the Buddhist teachings we only knew conventional truth: the truth of the world populated by people and animals, the world of persons, of self. Through the Buddhist teachings we learn about the ultimate truth: the mental phenomena and physical phenomena which are impermanent. ******* Nina. #101677 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 3:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: (dsg) charactoristic of citta sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- On Mon, 26/10/09, Herman wrote: > > >H: There are no citta... > > ... > >> S: So what is there? > .. > >H: There is dependent origination. > ... > S: What is dependent origination if there are no cittas? > H:>Not a valid question, I'm afraid :-) >It is this entire mass of suffering that arises and ceases dependently (on conditions). ... S: What is "this entire mass of suffering..." if not cittas, cetasikas and rupas? What is D.O. if not cittas, cetasikas and rupas? Metta Sarah ======== #101678 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 4:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] (dsg) charactoristic of citta sarahprocter... Hi Howard & all, --- On Mon, 26/10/09, upasaka@... wrote: >...Is the Pali word 'citta' pluralized in the suttas? If yes, I'd be interested in seeing examples of the varying instances of that. ... S: A Pali question....Hmmm, we need a Pali expert to help, but, for now... As I understand, citta.m is singular nom. (nt) and the plural would be cittaani. In the following example here from Atth.(Analysis of Terms), the gen. pl. cittaanam is used (I think!): kaama~n c'ettha ekam eva.m citta.m na hoti cittaanam pana antogadhattaa etesu ya.m ki~nci eka.m pi cittataaya cittam pi vattu.m va.t.tati. ("Although any single one of these (cittas) is verily not variegated in itself and by itself in the sense explained thus, it is nevertheless proper to say of any one of them, that is it so called from its variegated character, because it is included in consciousness as making up a variegated whole.") ***** And a little later, from the same text, of relevant to your discussions on kamma: "In dependence on the difference in kamma appears the difference in the destiny of beings without legs, with two legs, four legs, many legs, vegetative (ajjhattika.m), spiritual, with perception, without perception, with neither perception nor without perception. Depending on the difference in kamma appears the difference in the births of beings, high and low, base and exalted, happy and miserable. Depending on the difference in kamma appears the difference in the individual features of beings as beautiful or ugly, high-born or low-born, well-built or deformed. Depending on the difference in kamma appears the difference in the worldly conditions of beings as gain and loss, fame and disgrace, blame and praise, happiness and misery." ("Kammanaanaakara.na.m paticca sattaana.m gatiyaa naanaakarana.m pa~n~naayati, apadaa dipadaa catuppadaa bahuppadaa ruupino aruupino sa~n~nino asa~n~nino nevasa~n~niinaasa~n~nino kamanaanaakara.na.m paticca sattaana.m uppattiyaa naanaakara.na.m pa~n~naayati, uccaniicataa hiinapa.niitataa sugataduggatataa kammanaanaakara.na.m pa.ticca sattaana.m attabhaave naanaakara.na.m pa~n~naayati, suva.n.nadubba.n.nataa sujaatadujjaatataa susa.n.t.hitadussa.n.thitataa kammanaanaakara.na.m pa.ticca sattaana.m lokadhamme naanaakara.na.m pa~n~naayati laabhaalaabhe yasaayase nindaapasa.mse sukhadukkhe ti.") S: Happy to discuss any of this in more detail. And why is there this variety of results? Because of the variety of cittas: "...Good and bad acts in various deeds, as charity, virtue, cruelty, deceit, etc., are accomplished by the mind. Hence there is a variety of kammas; and owing to this variety of kammas, there is in the various destinies difference of features, i.e., difference in hands, feet, ears, stomachs, necks, faces, etc., the difference in notion or idea is because of the difference in outward form, expressed by 'this is a woman, this is a man,' according to the form taken. The difference in the common usage of such terms as 'man,' 'woman' in language, according to ideas, is due to the difference in ideas." S: And for a last tongue twister on citta: "...'Tam pi kho bhikkhave cara.na.m citta.m citten'eva cintita.m.' Tena pi kho bhikkhave cara.nena cittena citta.m yeva citataran ti." " Bhikkhus, that masterpiece of art is designed by the mind. Indeed, Bhikkhus, the mind is even more artistic than that masterpiece [SN iii 151]' " Metta Sarah ========= #101679 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 2:37 am Subject: Sutta on Low Castes and High Castes (and What Really Counts as Such) upasaka_howard Snp 1.7 PTS: Sn 116-142 Vasala Sutta: Discourse on Outcasts translated from the Pali by Piyadassi Thera _© 1999–2009 _ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.07.piya.html#F_termsOfUse) Thus have I heard: On one occasion the Blessed One was living near Savatthi at Jetavana at Anathapindika's monastery. Then in the forenoon the Blessed One having dressed himself, took bowl and (double) robe, and entered the city of Savatthi for alms. Now at that time a fire was burning, and an offering was being prepared in the house of the brahman Aggikabharadvaja. Then the Blessed One, while on his alms round, came to the brahman's residence. The brahman seeing the Blessed One some way off, said this: "Stay there, you shaveling, stay there you wretched monk, stay there you outcast." When he spoke thus the Blessed One said to the brahman: "Do you know, brahman, who an outcast is and what the conditions are that make an outcast?" "No, indeed, Venerable Gotama, I do not know who an outcast is nor the conditions that make an outcast. It is good if Venerable Gotama were to explain the Dhamma to me so that I may know who an outcast is and what the conditions are that make an outcast."_1_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.07.piya.html#n-s22-2) "Listen then, brahman, and pay attention, I will speak." "Yes, Venerable Sir," replied the brahman. 1. "Whosoever is angry, harbors hatred, and is reluctant to speak well of others (discredits the good of others), perverted in views, deceitful — know him as an outcast. 2. "Whosoever in this world kills living beings, once born or twice born,_2_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.07.piya.html#n-s22-3) in whom there is no sympathy for living beings — know him as an outcast. 3. "Whosoever destroys and besieges villages and hamlets and becomes notorious as an oppressor — know him as an outcast. 4. "Be it in the village, or in the forest, whosoever steals what belongs to others, what is not given to him — know him as an outcast. 5. "Whosoever having actually incurred a debt runs away when he is pressed to pay, saying, 'I owe no debt to you' — know him as an outcast. 6. "Whosoever coveting anything, kills a person going along the road, and grabs whatever that person has — know him as an outcast. 7. "He who for his own sake or for the sake of others or for the sake of wealth, utters lies when questioned as a witness — know him as an outcast. 8. "Whosoever by force or with consent associates with the wives of relatives or friends — know him as an outcast. 9. "Whosoever being wealthy supports not his mother and father who have grown old — know him as an outcast. 10. "Whosoever strikes and annoys by (harsh) speech, mother, father, brother, sister or mother-in-law or father-in-law — know him as an outcast. 11. "Whosoever when questioned about what is good, says what is detrimental, and talks in an evasive manner- know him as an outcast. 12. "Whosoever having committed an evil deed, wishes that it may not be known to others, and commits evil in secret — know him as an outcast. 13. "Whosoever having gone to another's house, and partaken of choice food, does not honor that host by offering food when he repays the visit — know him as an outcast. 14. "Whosoever deceives by uttering lies, a brahman or an ascetic, or any other mendicant — know him as an outcast. 15. "Whosoever when a brahman or ascetic appears during mealtime angers him by harsh speech, and does not offer him (any alms) — know him as an outcast. 16. "Whosoever in this world, shrouded in ignorance, speaks harsh words (asatam) or falsehood_3_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.07.piya.html#n-s22-4) expecting to gain something — know him as an outcast. 17. "Whosoever debased by his pride, exalts himself and belittles other — know him as an outcast. 18. "Whosoever is given to anger, is miserly, has base desires, and is selfish, deceitful, shameless and fearless (in doing evil) — know him as an outcast. 19. "Whosoever reviles the Enlightened One (the Buddha), or a disciple of the Buddha, recluse or a householder — know him as an outcast. 20. "Whosoever not being an arahant, a Consummate One, pretends to be so, is a thief in the whole universe — he is the lowest of outcasts. 21. "Not by birth is one an outcast; not by birth is one a brahman. By deed one becomes an outcast, by deed one becomes a brahman. 22. "Know ye by the example I now cite (the fact that by birth one is not an outcast). There was an outcast's son, Sopaka, who became known as Matanga. 23. "This Matanga attained the highest fame so difficult to gain. Many were the warriors (kshatriyas) and brahmans who went to attend on him. 24. "Mounting the celestial chariot (the Noble Eightfold path, and driving) along the passion-free high road, (Sopaka, now a monk), reached the Brahma realm having given up sense desires. 25. "His (lowly) birth did not prevent him from being reborn in the Brahma realm. There are brahmans born in the family of preceptors, kinsmen of (veda) hymns. 26. "They are often seen committing evil deeds. In this life itself they are despised, in the next they are born in an evil state of existence. High birth does not prevent them from falling into a woeful state, or from censure. 27. "Not by birth is one an outcast; not by birth is one a brahman. By deed one becomes an outcast, by deed one becomes an brahman." When the Buddha had thus spoken, the Brahman Aggikabharadvaja said to the Blessed One: "Excellent, O Venerable Gotama, excellent! Just as, O Venerable Gotama, a man were to set upright what had been overturned, or were to reveal what had been hidden, or were to point the way to one who had gone astray, or were to hold an oil lamp in the dark so that those with eyes may see things, even so in many ways has the Venerable Gotama expounded the Dhamma, the doctrine. I take refuge in the Venerable Gotama, the Dhamma, and the Sangha, the Order. May the Venerable Gotama accept me as a lay follower who has taken refuge from this day onwards while life lasts." Notes _1_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.07.piya.html#t-s22-2) . The abusive terms used by the brahman and the respectful address that follows need a word of explanation. The brahman had just prepared his offering to the great Brahma, his God, when his eyes fell on Buddha. To the brahman the sight of a samana, a shaven-headed recluse, was an unlucky sign. Hence he burst into angry words. The Buddha, however, was unruffled and spoke to him quietly in words of soft cadence. The brahman apparently was ashamed, and repenting of his folly, addressed the Buddha courteously. Comy. It is interesting to note the Buddha's stress on anger and hatred in his very first stanza. _2_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.07.piya.html#t-s22-3) . dvijam, birds. Twice-born is a reference to birds since they first come out as an egg, and when hatched a complete bird is born. _3_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.07.piya.html#t-s22-4) . asantamtipi patho, SnA. #101680 From: "Lukas" Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:53 am Subject: Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination lineage is unbroken! szmicio Dear Robert, That is my first time I deal with this book, the Katthavathuppakarana-Atthakatha (by Buddhoghosa). Could you give me a background of this book? I like your post and quotes. Maybe it's not something very important, but it somehow give some draws on wrong view. As I understand Mahasangikas,they were leaded by ignorance. > You can respect anyone you want- Catholic priests, the Dalai lama, or your local mullah, but surely you would not imagine them to be Theravada Bhikkhu. > And it is only Theravada that that was able to carry on the Buddha's words correctly. > I quote from the Katthavathuppakarana-Atthakatha (by Buddhoghosa) (p3 of Points of contoversy, PTS) It talks about after the second council (about 100 years after Buddha parinibbana) > > "Ten thousand of the of the Vajjiputtaka bhikkhus[after spliting from the good monks] seeking adherents among themselves, formed a school called the Mahasanghika [these then split several times] Thus from the school of the Mahasanghikas, in the second century only two schools seceded from the Theravada[note that the rightful monks are called Theravada by Buddhaghosa]-Mahimsinsasakas and Vajjiputtakas... [it lists more that split later]..Thus from the Theravada arose these eleven secding bodies making 12 in all. And these 12 together the six schools of the Mahasanghikas constitute the 18 schools which arose in the second century. Of the eighteen, 17 are to be understood as schismatics, the THERAVADAN ONLY being non- schismatic.""" > The commentary continues and cites the Dipavamsa The Bhikkhus [of the schismatic sects] > > "settled a doctrine contrary [to the true faith] Altering the original redaction, they made another. They transposed suttas which belonged in one collection to another place;they destroyed the true meaning and the faith in the vinyaa and in the five collections. Those bhikkus who understood neither what had been taught in long expositons...settled a false meaning in connection with spourious speeches of the Buddha. These bhikkhus destroyed a great deal of meaning under the colour of the letter. Rejecting the other texts- that is to say the Pavara, the six sections of the Abhidhamma, the Patisambhidhida, the niddessa and some portions of the Jataka they composed new ones. They changed their appearance, ..forsaking what was original..." L: sadhu. This is very true. > There is more along the same lines. Thus we see how fragile the Dhamma is - and open to abuse by foolish monks changing and rejecting sections of the Tipitaka at their whim. It is only because of the steadfastness of the Theravada that we have the Dhamma preserved until today. > > Anyone may respect the sects mentioned by Buddhagosa a great deal, however if thye feel that those sects are the ones who upheld the Dhamma and the Theravada are schismatic then why would they want to ordain as a Theravada Bhikkhu/Bhikkuni? Best wishes Lukas #101681 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 3:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] (dsg) charactoristic of citta upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 10/27/2009 7:52:55 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard & all, --- On Mon, 26/10/09, upasaka@... wrote: >...Is the Pali word 'citta' pluralized in the suttas? If yes, I'd be interested in seeing examples of the varying instances of that. ... S: A Pali question....Hmmm, we need a Pali expert to help, but, for now... As I understand, citta.m is singular nom. (nt) and the plural would be cittaani. <...trim...> S: And for a last tongue twister on citta: "...'Tam pi kho bhikkhave cara.na.m citta.m citten'eva cintita.m.' Tena pi kho bhikkhave cara.nena cittena citta.m yeva citataran ti." " Bhikkhus, that masterpiece of art is designed by the mind. Indeed, Bhikkhus, the mind is even more artistic than that masterpiece [SN iii 151]' " Metta Sarah ================================= Sarah, thank you for the foregoing. :-) What I was after, though, were instances of pluralization of 'citta' in the suttas. I had no doubt that it occurred elsewhere. With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #101682 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 8:06 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fives (315, 1-2) and commentary. part 1. nilovg Dear friends, sutta 1. Walshe DN 33.2.1(1) 'Five aggregates: body, feelings, perceptions, mental formations, consciousness. Pa~ncakkhandhaa. Ruupakkhandho vedanaakkhandho sa~n~naakkhandho sa'nkhaarakkhandho vi~n~naa.nakkhandho. -------- The commentary states that ruupakkhandha is lokiya, worldly, and that the other khandhas (the naama-khandhas) are lokiya and lokuttara. N: Lokuttara naama-khandhas are lokuttara citta and accompanying cetasikas that experience nibbana. Ruupa cannot be lokuttara. ---------- sutta 2: Walshe 'Five aggregates of grasping (pancuupaadaana-kkhandhaa) (as (1)). ----------- N: The co. states that the khandhas of grasping are lokiya. At the moment that clinging arises, there are the khandhas of grasping. The nine lokuttara dhammas, nibbaana and the eight types of lokuttara cittas that experience nibbana cannot be objects of clinging. The khandhas of grasping cannot be lokuttara. The co. refers to the Visuddhimagga for the explanation of the khanahdas. This is in Ch XIV, and I will quote part of this text with the Tiika. *********** The teaching of the five khandhas is the teaching of citta, cetasika and ruupa, dhammas that appear in daily life through the six doorways. ------- Five khandhas: here all conditioned dhammas, nama and rupa, are classified as five heaps of dhammas and each of these heaps consists of dhammas that ressemble each other. Further, there are five khandhas of clinging: these include all conditioned dhammas that are not lokuttara. They are liable to clinging, they can be objects of clinging. All ruupas are grouped into the ruupa-khandha. They are the dhammas that do not experience anything. The commentary applies a word association of ruupa and ruppana, molesting. We read in the Co. to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha:That which is afflicted (ruppati) is materiality (ruupa); that which comes to or is brought to change (vikaara) as a result of such opposing conditions as cold and heat is what is meant. If there were no ruupa that is bodysense, there would not be affliction by heat, cold, hunger, flies, etc. All feelings are grouped together as feeling-khandha and even so all kinds of saaa are grouped together as saaa-khandha. The Commentary to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (Topics of the Abhidhamma and Co. p. 281 ) explains about feeling and saaa being a separate khandha each: <... Because - of the dhammas involved in the round of rebirth- they constitute enjoyment and what facilitates that. For feeling occurs by way of enjoyment of the dhammas of the three levels, and when it occurs in the matter of the distorted view [N:vipallaasa or perversity] that perceives the beautiful in the ugly, recognition (saaa) becomes a facilitator of that. Therefore, because they are the principal causes of sa.msaara, they are taught separately...> --------- Text Tiika: Among them, those that are strong in the volition whose nature is accumulating with the function of forming the formed, are called the formations aggregate. ------ N: Here the Tiika refers to cetanaa, volition, which is strong (balava) and which accumulates (ayuhaana), and which has the function of abhisankhaara, kamma-formation. This is the second link of the Dependent Origination. Kamma is accumulated and produces vipaaka in the form of rebirth and vipaakacittas arising in the course of life. All other cetasikas, except feeling and saaa are grouped together in sankhaarakkhandha. All cittas are grouped together in vi~n~naa.nakkhandha. -------- Nina. #101683 From: "Lukas" Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fives (315, 1-2) and commentary. part 1. szmicio Dear Nina, > sutta 1. > > Walshe > > DN 33.2.1(1) 'Five aggregates: body, feelings, perceptions, mental > formations, consciousness. > > Pa~ncakkhandhaa. Ruupakkhandho vedanaakkhandho sa~n~naakkhandho > sa'nkhaarakkhandho vi~n~naa.nakkhandho. > > -------- > > The commentary states that ruupakkhandha is lokiya, worldly, and that > the other khandhas (the naama-khandhas) are lokiya and lokuttara. > > N: Lokuttara naama-khandhas are lokuttara citta and accompanying > cetasikas that experience nibbana. Ruupa cannot be lokuttara. L: There was said that ruupa is kaamaavacara.m, na ruupaavacara.m, na aruupaavacara.m. (Vibhanga, Rupakhandha, According to Abhidhamma section) so ruupa is always kaamaavacara? Best wishes Lukas #101684 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 12:24 pm Subject: Re: What is kaya / citta viveka? Citta Viveka = JHANAS truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > > (101457) > > MahaNiddesa Pali tells us as it is: > > > > Katamo kayaviveko? Idha bhikkhu vivittam senasanam bhajati arannam rukkhamulam pabbatam kandaram giriguham susanam vanapattham abbhokasam palalapunjam. Kayena vivitto viharati. So eko gacchati, eko titthati, eko nisidati, eko seyyam kappeti, eko gamam pindaya pavisati, eko patikkamati, eko raho nisidati, eko cankamam adhitthati, eko carati viharati iriyati vattati paleti yapeti yapeti. Ayam kayaviveko. > > > > The above talks about a monk who lives physically alone (eko) in the solitary place, the forest (aranna), under root of the trees (rukkhamula), who walks for alms alone, who SITS ALONE, who is fixing walking alone (eko cankamam adhitthati) , who abides practicing alone etc etc > > > > > > Katamo cittaviveko? Pathamam jhanam samapannassa nivaranehi cittam vivittam hoti > > > > What is seclusion of mind? From being engaged in First Jhana , the mind is secluded from hindrances [the higher Jhanas are mental seclusion from lower Jhana factors] - MahaNiddesa PTS 1.28 > =============== > > Thanks for quoting this passage from the Maha Niddesa. Not being a Pali scholar I can't comment on the selected terms you mention here. Is there any translation of the whole passage you could refer me to? Thanks. > > Jon Hi Jon, all, ask anyone who knows pali to translate the above. I did a search on definitions of "what is *seclusion" and I see only MahaNiddessa to define citta, kaya and upadhi viveka. In any case you can do some checking with a dictionary. With metta, Alex #101685 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 12:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fives (315, 1-2) and commentary. part 1. nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 27-okt-2009, om 17:20 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > L: There was said that ruupa is kaamaavacara.m, na ruupaavacara.m, > na aruupaavacara.m. (Vibhanga, Rupakhandha, According to Abhidhamma > section) > so ruupa is always kaamaavacara? ------- N: My english translation: Ruupa is characteristic of the plane of desire, is not characteristic of the plane of form (ruupa), is not characteristic of the formless plane. The aim of jhaana is being removed from, away from ruupa which is bound up with defilements. Kaamaavacara cittas are mostly after sense objects, they seek ruupa. Avacara means: frequenting. Nina. #101686 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 12:35 pm Subject: Re: mind-element and mind-consciousness-element truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Lukas, > Op 25-okt-2009, om 10:15 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > > > L: What's the difference between manodhaatusamphasso and > > manovi~n~naa.nadhaatusamphasso? When they arise? > ------- > N: manodhaatu: the five-door adverting-consciousness, > pa~ncadvaaraavajjana citta, and the two types of receiving- > consciousness, sampa.ticchaanacitta, one kusala vipaaka and one > akusala vipaaka. > Manovi~n~naa.nadhaatu includes all cittas except the > dvipa~ncavi~n~naa.nas (five pairs of sense-cognitions)) and the three > kinds of cittas that are mano-dhaatu. > Nina. Dear Nina and all, Can you explain in simple terms what 5 adverting-consciousness is? Why isn't there 6th door adverting-consciousness? Why 2 and not 3 types of recieving consciousness? Is it possible to have recieving consciousness that is neither wholesome nor unwholesome? Thank you, With metta, Alex #101687 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 12:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: mind-element and mind-consciousness-element nilovg Dear Alex, Op 27-okt-2009, om 20:35 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > Can you explain in simple terms what 5 adverting-consciousness is? ------- N: When visible object impinges on the eye-door, there is not seeing immediately. In between processes bhavangacittas arise and fall away and then the stream of bhavangacittas is arrested when an new object impinges on a doorway. The first citta of a new process after the bhavangacittas are arrested is the sense-door adverting- consciousness, in this case the eye-door adverting consciousness. It does not see, it merely adverts, turns towards visible object and is followed by seeing. -------- > > A: Why isn't there 6th door adverting-consciousness? ------ N: Yes, there is, the mind-door adverting-consciousness. After the stream of bhavangacittas is arrested it is the first citta of a mind- door process and adverts through the mind-door to the object. The mind-door is naama, it is the last bhavangacitta before the mind-door adverting-consciousness arises. This bhavangacitta is called the bhavangupaccheda, arrest bhavanga. ------- > > A: Why 2 and not 3 types of recieving consciousness? Is it possible > to have recieving consciousness that is neither wholesome nor > unwholesome? ------ N: Yes, it is vipaakacitta, thus neither kusala nor akusala. It can either be kusala vipaaka or akusala vipaaka. It is always accompanied by indifferent feeling. There cannot be more than two types. It merely receives the object that is experienced by one of the sense- cognitions. ------- Nina. #101688 From: "Lukas" Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 1:09 pm Subject: Re: Sangiiti Sutta Fives (315, 1-2) and commentary. part 1. szmicio Dear Nina, Is it a three-fold or four-fold classification, when we speak about kamma, ruupa, aruupa-vacara cittas? Because I've heard that there is also lokuttara citta with this 3. But what I had quoted before, there is only kamma,ruupa,aruupa-vacara clasiification, but maybe it's because of that we speaking of ruupa, and it's never lokuttara as you said. Very helpful Nina. Do we usually speak about kamavacara,ruupavacara,aruupavacara and lokuttara as one classification? Does it refer to cittas only? Lukas > N: My english translation: Ruupa is characteristic of the plane of > desire, is not characteristic of the plane of form (ruupa), is not > characteristic of the formless plane. > > The aim of jhaana is being removed from, away from ruupa which is > bound up with defilements. Kaamaavacara cittas are mostly after sense > objects, they seek ruupa. Avacara means: frequenting. #101689 From: "Lukas" Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 1:17 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: mind-element and mind-consciousness-element szmicio Dear Nina, Alex > > Can you explain in simple terms what 5 adverting-consciousness is? > ------- > N: When visible object impinges on the eye-door, there is not seeing > immediately. In between processes bhavangacittas arise and fall away > and then the stream of bhavangacittas is arrested when an new object > impinges on a doorway. The first citta of a new process after the > bhavangacittas are arrested is the sense-door adverting- > consciousness, in this case the eye-door adverting consciousness. It > does not see, it merely adverts, turns towards visible object and is > followed by seeing. > -------- L: Alex, you can also see Fire Sermon. > > > > A: Why isn't there 6th door adverting-consciousness? > ------ > N: Yes, there is, the mind-door adverting-consciousness. After the > stream of bhavangacittas is arrested it is the first citta of a mind- > door process and adverts through the mind-door to the object. The > mind-door is naama, it is the last bhavangacitta before the mind-door > adverting-consciousness arises. This bhavangacitta is called the > bhavangupaccheda, arrest bhavanga. > ------- L: After mind-door adverting-consciousenss how many javana-cittas there are? 3 or 7? Lukas #101690 From: Herman Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 3:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: (dsg) charactoristic of citta egberdina Hi Sarah, 2009/10/27 sarah abbott > Hi Herman, > > --- On Mon, 26/10/09, Herman wrote: > > > >H: There are no citta... > > > ... > > >> S: So what is there? > > .. > > >H: There is dependent origination. > > ... > > S: What is dependent origination if there are no cittas? > > > > H:>Not a valid question, I'm afraid :-) > > >It is this entire mass of suffering that arises and ceases dependently (on > conditions). > ... > S: What is "this entire mass of suffering..." if not cittas, cetasikas and > rupas? > > What is D.O. if not cittas, cetasikas and rupas? > Just as a clarification, are you suggesting or implying that there are such things as an individual citta, an individual cetasika, an individual rupa? Or do you mean them only as categories of analysis, ways of thinking about things? Cheers Herman #101691 From: Herman Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 4:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Path, Ch 3, no 3. egberdina Hi Nina and all, 2009/10/27 Nina van Gorkom > Dear friends, > > Before studying the Buddhist teachings we only knew conventional > truth: the truth of the world populated by people and animals, the > world of persons, of self. Through the Buddhist teachings we learn > about the ultimate truth: the mental phenomena and physical phenomena > which are impermanent. > And unfortunately some, (not you), after having studied Buddhist teachings, agitate themselves with such mundane things as purity of lineages and who should be allowed to ordain???? Cheers Herman #101692 From: "ptaus1" Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] More questions about nimitta ptaus1 Dear Sarah, Thanks for you reply. > > Can it be said that a concept "exists" (is experienced) for the minimum duration of at least one mind-door process? That is, there can't be two different concepts in the same mind-door process? > S: One concept is experienced by the entire proces, i.e. same object for the cittas you mention. It is experienced, but it does not exist or "exist":-). pt: To take this further, can one and the same concept remain the object for several mind-processes in succession? Could this be a contributing factor to the illusion that objects (like a tree or an apple) are "real and lasting" rather than just momentary coming together and falling away of dhammas? > >How does it happen that a certain concept all of sudden just pops into my head, without any seeming relevance to the present situation for example? > S: Natural decisive support condition. Any object experienced can be recalled anytime later, even aeons later by this condition. pt: Is there a more detailed explanation in abhidhamma about this or is it really just that simple? And a couple of question: 1. In recent posts it was said that thinking is a dhamma, but concepts aren't. What's the Pali for these two terms - thinking and concepts? 2. I think I read somewhere that thoughts and dreams are "mental vipaka" - this doesn't seem right? Vipaka can only occur through the 5 sense-doors, it can't appear through the mind-door, right? I'm confused here because in ACMA pg297 it says: "Mind-contact is the contact associated with the twenty-two kinds of resultant consciousness, excluding the two sets of fivefold sense consciousness." This seems to say that there is mental vipaka, but I'm not sure what are these? Best wishes pt #101693 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:54 pm Subject: Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination lineage is unbroken! rjkjp1 Dear Lukas It is just a Commentary on that section of the Abhidhamma. Worth buying. http://www.wisdom-books.com/SiteSearchResults.asp?Keywords=debates&SearchType=2&\ Submit=+Go+ Debates Commentary Law , Bimala Charan Wisdom Price 20.60 A translation of the Kathavatthuppakarana-Atthakatha Robert --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear Robert, > That is my first time I deal with this book, the Katthavathuppakarana-Atthakatha (by Buddhoghosa). Could you give me a background of this book? > I #101694 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 2:44 am Subject: [dsg] The Buddha's Path, Ch 3, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, The truth of non-self is ultimate truth. It is deep and hard to penetrate. It has been taught by way of similes in the Buddhist scriptures and in the commentaries. The great commentator Buddhaghosa, in his book the Path of Purification (Visuddhimagga), illustrates the truth of non-self with similes from Buddhist scriptures. The Path of Purification is a comprehensive exposition of the Buddhas teaching based on old commentaries and the tradition of the monks in Sri Lanka, written in the fifth century A.D. Buddhaghosa explains that when one thinks of a whole of mind and body, one clings to the concept of person, whereas when this whole is seen as different elements which are impermanent, one will lose the perception of self: We read in the Path of Purification (XVIII, 25, 26): As with the assembly of parts The word chariot is countenanced, So, when the khandhas are present, A being is said in common usage. Again, this has been said: Just as when a space is enclosed with timber and creepers and grass and clay, there comes to be the term house, so too, when a space is enclosed with bones and sinews and flesh and skin, there comes to be the term material form. ****** Nina. #101695 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 2:48 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fives (315, 1, 2) and commentary, part 2. nilovg Dear friends, This is a continuation of the Visuddhimagga Ch XIV on the five khandhas and its subco. -------- In the preceding section (of the Visuddhimagga) it has been explained that five khandhas have been taught because all dhammas that resemble each other are classified as five different khandhas. In the following section, the second reason for there being five khandhas is explained. They are the field of the wrong view of self. Text Vis.218: (b) And this is the extreme limit as the basis for the assumption of self and what pertains to self, that is to say, the five beginning with materiality. For this is said: 'Bhikkhus, when matter exists, it is through clinging to matter, through insisting upon (interpreting) matter, that such a view as this arises: "This is mine, this is I, this is my self". When feeling exists ... When formations exist ... When consciousness exists, it is through clinging to consciousness, through insisting upon (interpreting) consciousness, that such a view as this arises: "This is mine, this is I, this is my self" ' (S.iii,181-82). So they are stated as five because this is the widest limit as a basis for the assumption of the self and what pertains to self. We cling and we have wrong view with regard to ruupas, including the sense-objects and the senses; we cling to the body from head to toe and we take it for self. We take cittas, feelings and the other cetasikas for self. When seeing arises we take it for my seeing. When akusala cetasika such as attachment or sobhana cetasika such as generosity arises, we take these cetasikas for self. There are numerous objects of clinging and of wrong view, but all of them have been classified as five khandhas. --------- We read in Vis. Ch XIV, 213: < for there are those people who, while teachable, have fallen into assuming a self among the five aggregates owing to failure to analyze them;... ------- N: As to the expression, by non-analysis (abhedena), the Tiika states that this means: by not analysing the khandhas, beginning with ruupa, by taking them together as a mass (pi.n.da). As to the expression, assuming a self (attagaaha), the Tiika states that they have fallen into the flood of wrong view (di.t.thogha)by the assuming of a self as mentioned. ---------- Text Vis.: and the Blessed One is desirous of releasing them from the assumption by getting them to see how the [seeming] compactness of mass [in the five aggregates] is resolved; --------- N: The Tiika explains that seeing the resolution of the mass or whole (of the five khandhas) is done by distinguishing (vivecento) ruupa from aruupa (naama)....> Thus, we believe that a person exists by failing to see that what we call a person is nama and rupa, or five khandhas that arise and fall away. So long as we take nama and rupa together, we believe in a self. By the development of insight the dhammas that are classified as the five khandhas will be seen as impermanent, dukkha and anattaa. ****** Nina. #101696 From: "freawaru80" Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 2:54 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. freawaru80 Hello Colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > > I think that "The Fourth" in Yoga refers to a high level vipassana state. It is also referred to as the "Witness". The Thai Forest Tradition also uses the name "Witness" for it. > > > > That is my exact point. THANK YOU! You are welcome :-) > YOU, "freawaru80", you take Yoga Nidra as being a resultant phenomena, a slave of, VIPASSANA. Yes. As long as you refer to the Yoga Nidra of deep sleep. I am not talking about astral projection - though of course it can happen in such a state, too. I don't remember which sutta it was, but in it the Buddha was asked wether he still sleeps and his answer was that a short time ago he even went into a "siesta" at midday but he was lucidly doing so. While the mind and physical body switched to the sleep and dream state he was aware of it. I don't know if Theravada has specific practices how to learn this as Tantra and Dzogchen has but the ability to lucidly enter and remain in sleep is clearly known here, too. >You qualify this state of consciousness as being a resultant >phenomena of a Vipissana practice? Wouldn't it be logical? During vipassana one takes "oneself" out of the system, one observes whatever arises and falls in the mind. The dhamma do not enter and do not remain but they are known. > For instance in Eastern philosphy and psychology we find TANTRA but in the WEstern philosophy and the Western psychology we find GNOSTICISM. There is even more than that. The Catholics have their mystics and the Orthodox their desert fathers. The Muslims have their sufism. Unfortionately, most Catholics will back away when one starts to quote Sant John of the Cross, claiming that they themselves are not ready for such deep theology. But both the "Widow" state (vipassana) and the Witness of God (arahat vipassana) are known in the scriptures (they are mentioned in the Bible after all), even if not known by the majority of "Christians". >If you mention GNOSTICISM to a christian, well, then, you've just >condemned yourself since Christianity will not allow a Gnostic or a >Cather to exist. In conversation with Christians I suggest to use their own official mystics, it is all there, too. :-) Freawaru #101697 From: "freawaru80" Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 2:57 am Subject: Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. freawaru80 Hi Mike, thank you very much. :-) Freawaru --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "freawaru80" wrote: > > > Ken: Do you have 'The Buddhist Dictionary' by Nyanatiloka? (It's on line.) > > > That would be a good place to start. It leaves no doubt that samadhi is > > > a universal mental state. > > > > Freawaru: Yes, I use it. But it does not discern between terminology used in the suttas, Abhidhamma, Visuddhimagga etc. And they don't seem to use the terms in an identical way. > > MikeNZ: In the Appendix http://what-buddha-said.net/library/Buddhist.Dictionary/dic4_append.htm there is a useful summary of terminology in the different layers. > > For example, related to samadhi: > "Samādhi: parikamma , upacāra and appanā-s.: are found only in the Com." > > See also entries for Citta-vīthi, Javana, Yogāvacara, etc... > > Mike > #101698 From: "freawaru80" Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 3:16 am Subject: Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. freawaru80 Hello Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote > > In Abhidhamma terminology, the lucidity you are referring to would be > just a form of thinking (pannatti). There is, however, something called > 'clarity of consciousness' (sampajanna) but that term applies to the way > consciousness can rightly understand its object. Right understanding > can happen only when the true Dhamma has been heard and wisely > considered. I still think that samadhi as used by the "meditation community" is closer to sampajanna than to thinking. There is no thinking involved. Dream lucidity means to know that the mind is dreaming while it is doing so. There is no thinking process involved: one simply knows than one is in dream. The object of mind, the dream state, is understood as it is and not confused with the wake state. And dream lucidity is just sampajanna's little sister. > Unfortunately you have only studied the modern, popular, versions of > Theravada. But never mind, you're in the right place now. :-) :-) > ---------------- > > As you know [from the doctrine of anatta] there is no self. Concepts of > "me" and "my practice" do not apply in the Dhamma. > > --------------- Do you think of the Buddha's Dhamma as a physicist does of Quantum Field Theory or a mathematician of algebra? A formal system? Freawaru #101699 From: "freawaru80" Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 3:32 am Subject: Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. freawaru80 Dear Alex, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> For example, most people seem to loose concentration when being >>angry or scared or any other intense emotion. I remember that this >>happend to me, too, when I was a child. But now when fear or anger >>(etc) arise concentration increases, too. The kind of concentration >>that accompanies insight. During emotions I can actually observe my >>mind better than without them. It is as if the emotion fuels the >>concentration, automatically. I don't have to do anything, I just >>"sit back" and observe. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > Buddhist concentration is wholesome and "un-emotional" . All >hindrances are temporary not there. It is different from worldly >concentration (ex: a hunter or a soldier being concentrated while >aiming) which is unwholesome. Yes, but that is not what I mean. Not what I experience. The object of concentration is different. There are two kinds of concentration appearing simultaniously: one is the concentration on the object, such as a worldy object aka hunter or the concentration on the situation and the emotional response itself. But simultaniously another concentration arises and increases in strengh, namely a concentraton that stabilizes the observation mode, the ability to stay detached and observe simultaniously to the first kind of concentration. Thus, while the first concentration is "emotional" the second one is not. But they both arise simultaniously. > > > > > > ""And what more is to be done? There is the case where a monk seeks out a secluded dwelling: a forest, the shade of a tree, a mountain, a glen, a hillside cave, a charnel ground, a jungle grove, the open air, a heap of straw. After his meal, returning from his alms round, he sits down, crosses his legs, holds his body erect, and brings mindfulness to the fore. > > Freawaru > > Yes, Physical. The long string of examples shows that it is physical. I would think that the long string of examples shows that it is not physical. The "forest/jungle" is a specific state in meditation language, so is the "open air" and "shade of a tree" and "mountain". After all, in the physical there are better places to be used as a secluded place than a heap of straw or a shade of a tree... >However, mental seclusion is also required, and the physical >seclusion helps the mental seclusion. I agree here :-) > To be blunt, it is very hard for a young guy to have mental >seclusion in a strip-club or for someone else to be mentally >secluded in a busy marketplace selling your favourite product. Sure >it is great to try to use any situation for understanding (which I >often call 'practice') but some situations are better than others. Yes, as with everything else one learns it is usefull to start small. Freawaru #101700 From: "freawaru80" Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 4:06 am Subject: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. freawaru80 Dear Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > N: It does not matter whether you use the word concentration or one- > pointedness, but it is useful to know that this one cetasika has > endless variations, as to intensity, levels, object, etc. It can be > of another plane of citta such as the plane of jhaanacitta or > lokuttara, experiencing nibbaana. Yes, it is usefull to know intellectually. :-) But isn't it even more usefull to know it directly? How did the Buddha know Abhidhamma? After all he didn't learn it intellectually, he saw it directly. And to see it directly he needed the high speed temporal discernment of samadhi. I think, all his Abhidhammic insights required samadhi - in the meditational sense. So obviously, samadhi accompanied all other dhammas that arose for him, in endless variations. And as samadhi can also arise in a multiple way (is one of the iddhis) it is possible to discern between samma samadhi and normal samadhi during it, too. > --------- > > F: Yes, the translation of citta as "mind" or "consciousness" is > > quite misleading. > > > > If I understand you correctly in Abhidhamma terminology "citta" is > > that what experiences. But there are two very different "modes", > > one is experiencing and the other is observing. What is the > > Abhidhammic name of that what observes. It cannot be citta as it is > > not experiencing. > ------- > N: Sarah explained about observing. Citta experiences an object. We > can also say: it cognizes an object. You use the term observing, but > it is still citta cognizing an object, no matter what word you prefer. > ------- Hmm. but what is that called that observes citta cognizing an object? > N: It is hard to answer this as you describe situations, such as > normal and disorder. The Abhidhamma describes moments, moments of > citta. Everything is momentary. In reality there are in our life only > citta, cetasika and rupa and these are momentary. Nama and rupa, > nothing else. Yes, like in physics we say that there are just Superstrings (or whatever theory one uses) but no persons, cars, etc. Still, the transfer from one system of describtion (such as the Quantum World) to everyday reality is a necessary way for verification. I think we can compare Abhidhamma to Quantum Physics as they both deal with high resolutions of time. To come back to the slow time resolution is - it seems to me - a requirement for it's implementation during everyday life. Otherwise it is just theory. >All the rest, world, people, situation, working, are > concepts different from ultimate realities. Concepts are objects >of > thinking but they are not realities. Visible object can be >directly > experienced, without having to think about it or to name it, >person > or car cannot be directly experienced, these are mind-constructs. But visible object is already a mind construct, too. Otherwise humans could not hallucinate or dream in a visible way. The brain can construe visible objects without sensory trigger just as with sensory trigger. Freawaru #101701 From: "freawaru80" Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:22 am Subject: Re: A not so short Hello freawaru80 Dear Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > ... > S: Again, I think we have to start at the beginning. Firstly, there's no 'one' who sees or observes anything. Oh, there is. annatavindriya is the ability of "him who knows". Or "him who sees". Seeing and knowing are arising together, sight refers to insight here. So there is a "knower" and this knower is a part of the arahant even. See: http://what-buddha-said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/g_m/indriya.htm I think one of the troubles is that in language we do not discern between seeing as by the two physical eyes and seeing as in dream-state and seeing as in understanding and seeing/observing as in insight. I think, when the Buddha talks about "no seer" He refers to the physical sense sight, obviously there is no seer as one can close the eyes. If we would call physical sight a "me" I would die whenever I close my eyes - thus this "seer" is no self. Vipassana is an impersonal state - but there is This impersonal one who observes just as there is The one realizing the path of Stream-winning (sotapattimagga). >There are dhammas arising and falling away, but first the clear distinction between namas and rupas have to be known. In the examples you gave, which are namas, which are rupas and which are concepts? For example, by 'image', do you mean just the visible object which is seen or a 'picture' or 'impression'? If it's the latter, it can only be thought about, it cannot be the object of insight. I use the term image as that what is constructed by the mind in what we call visible way. It is an object construed from a concept. Impression preceds concept and can be conceptless. Say, photons activate one's retina to send signals. At this point it is just a bunch of neural data like the zeros and ones in a computer. Then the data is filtered and altered and compared to previous sense data in an impersonal way. This process can be observed in the Impersonal Witness state. The outcome is something that preceds concept (like an impression), this is the level of nimittas and element, too. The pre-concept then is transformed into a concept and the concept is transformed into a visible object (image) which is the level of us experiencing seeing this object because here the patterns of the personality are linked to the whole process. Then a second recognition (as "I know this") and conceptualization (car) is happening, this time based on the personal memories (the first conceptualization was based on the impersonal memories). Finally, after the image is compared to personal memory (is it my car or someone else's? ) it is recognized as "my car" for example. Everything after the first process of filtering and altering and comparing to impersonal memory can and is construed by our mind without any sensory from the physical eyes, too. This is why it is so hard to discern between hallucination and physical reality. The personality cannot discern it - it has the wrong level and is too slow - one needs the Impersonal Witness to devellop insight and wisdom. The whole process moves through four levels: pre-Impersonal, Impersonal, Personality and Personal. What are nama and rupa in this example? On what level do they appear? Freawaru #101702 From: "Lukas" Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 6:17 am Subject: Re: A not so short Hello szmicio Dear Freawaru, > Oh, there is. annatavindriya is the ability of "him who knows". Or "him who sees". Seeing and knowing are arising together, sight refers to insight here. So there is a "knower" and this knower is a part of the arahant even. L: Only pa~n~na dhatu is the "knower". No one can understand. Only pa~n~na can understand. You can also see Milindapanha, that is speaking on pa~n~na. It has nothing to do with Self. Pa~n~na is the element who "knows" its object. It's like light that emanates in each direction. > Vipassana is an impersonal state - but there is This impersonal one who observes just as there is The one realizing the path of Stream-winning (sotapattimagga). L: Sotapattimagga is just consciousness. No person. Best wishes Lukas #101703 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. nilovg Dear freawaru, Op 28-okt-2009, om 12:06 heeft freawaru80 het volgende geschreven: > But visible object is already a mind construct, too. Otherwise > humans could not hallucinate or dream in a visible way. The brain > can construe visible objects without sensory trigger just as with > sensory trigger. ------- N: Visible object is seen through the eye-door, it is a reality. Seeing, not you, sees what is visible. Dreaming is thinking and remembering what was experienced before. It seems that we see in a dream, but it is only citta that thinks. The brain is a mere ruupa, it does not know anything. Nina. #101704 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sangiiti Sutta Fives (315, 1-2) and commentary. part 1. nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 27-okt-2009, om 21:09 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > Is it a three-fold or four-fold classification, when we speak about > kamma, ruupa, aruupa-vacara cittas? ------ N: You mean kaama, not kamma. We read about tibhuumi, three planes, and then it is the above. -------- > > L: Because I've heard that there is also lokuttara citta with this > 3. But what I had quoted before, there is only kamma,ruupa,aruupa- > vacara clasiification, but maybe it's because of that we speaking > of ruupa, and it's never lokuttara as you said. Very helpful Nina. > > Do we usually speak about kamavacara,ruupavacara,aruupavacara and > lokuttara as one classification? Does it refer to cittas only? ------- N: It depends on the context, different classifications in different contexts. What you say above refers to planes of citta. We should not get lost in classifications, we can only have cittas of the sense sphere at this moment. Nina. #101705 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: mind-element and mind-consciousness-element nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 27-okt-2009, om 21:17 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > L: After mind-door adverting-consciousenss how many javana-cittas > there are? 3 or 7? ------ N: Usually seven, but we cannot count these. Before death there are five, these are weak. But now, when there is citta rooted in attachment there is not only one type but seven types. Nina. #101706 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 6:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Frawaru) - In a message dated 10/28/2009 11:31:43 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear freawaru, Op 28-okt-2009, om 12:06 heeft freawaru80 het volgende geschreven: > But visible object is already a mind construct, too. Otherwise > humans could not hallucinate or dream in a visible way. The brain > can construe visible objects without sensory trigger just as with > sensory trigger. ------- N: Visible object is seen through the eye-door, it is a reality. Seeing, not you, sees what is visible. ----------------------------------------------- Yes, there is no seeing agent. There is just the seeing. I wonder, though, what you would answer were someone to ask you what the difference is between the seeing that is "Howard's" and the seeing that is "Nina's". These are distinguishable, and the distinction isn't an illusion, though too much might be made of it. ------------------------------------------------ Dreaming is thinking and remembering what was experienced before. It seems that we see in a dream, but it is only citta that thinks. The brain is a mere ruupa, it does not know anything. ------------------------------------------------- Actually, the brain is a conceptual construct, not rupa, is it not? ------------------------------------------------ Nina ========================== With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #101707 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 12:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 28-okt-2009, om 18:40 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > N: Visible object is seen through the eye-door, it is a reality. > Seeing, not you, sees what is visible. > ----------------------------------------------- > H: Yes, there is no seeing agent. There is just the seeing. I wonder, > though, what you would answer were someone to ask you what the > difference is > between the seeing that is "Howard's" and the seeing that is > "Nina's". These > are distinguishable, and the distinction isn't an illusion, though too > much might be made of it. > ------------------------------------------------ N: No difference at all. The cat's seeing, the dog's seeing, Howard's seeing, just the reality that is seeing-consciousness. It sees what is visible. After it has fallen away there can be thinking in different ways and that is conditioned by one's accumulated inclinations. Thinking is different in the case of this or that individual. --------- > > N: Dreaming is thinking and remembering what was experienced > before. It > seems that we see in a dream, but it is only citta that thinks. > The brain is a mere ruupa, it does not know anything. > ------------------------------------------------- > H: Actually, the brain is a conceptual construct, not rupa, is it not? ------- > N: There are rupas we call brain. You can take it out of the skull > and touch it, and then hardness is experienced, or softness. ------ Nina. #101708 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 9:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 10/28/2009 3:32:10 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 28-okt-2009, om 18:40 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > N: Visible object is seen through the eye-door, it is a reality. > Seeing, not you, sees what is visible. > ----------------------------------------------- > H: Yes, there is no seeing agent. There is just the seeing. I wonder, > though, what you would answer were someone to ask you what the > difference is > between the seeing that is "Howard's" and the seeing that is > "Nina's". These > are distinguishable, and the distinction isn't an illusion, though too > much might be made of it. > ------------------------------------------------ N: No difference at all. The cat's seeing, the dog's seeing, Howard's seeing, just the reality that is seeing-consciousness. It sees what is visible. After it has fallen away there can be thinking in different ways and that is conditioned by one's accumulated inclinations. Thinking is different in the case of this or that individual. ----------------------------------------------------- No doubt all seeing is the same *sort* of thing. But, Nina, the visible objects you and I see are not the same, and thus the seeings are not identical, not just the thinking. How do you characterize the difference? It seems to me that you ignore conditionality and interrelationships, specifically those that hold among the dhammas that constitute distinguishable namarupic streams. The streams called "Nina" and "Howard" are not one and the same. -------------------------------------------------- --------- > > N: Dreaming is thinking and remembering what was experienced > before. It > seems that we see in a dream, but it is only citta that thinks. > The brain is a mere ruupa, it does not know anything. > ------------------------------------------------- > H: Actually, the brain is a conceptual construct, not rupa, is it not? ------- > N: There are rupas we call brain. You can take it out of the skull > and touch it, and then hardness is experienced, or softness. ------------------------ It seems to me that my brain is no less pa~n~natti than is my whole body, my house, my car, and the tree in my backyard. ------------------------- ------ Nina. ======================== With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #101709 From: "Lukas" Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 1:40 pm Subject: Re: Sangiiti Sutta Fives (315, 1-2) and commentary. part 1. szmicio Dear Nina, > > Is it a three-fold or four-fold classification, when we speak about > > kamma, ruupa, aruupa-vacara cittas? > ------ > N: You mean kaama, not kamma. We read about tibhuumi, three planes, > and then it is the above. > -------- L: Only tibhuumi? So no lokuttara bhumi. just tibhumi. and if we speak on different cittas, then it's four-fold classification. > > > > L: Because I've heard that there is also lokuttara citta with this > > 3. But what I had quoted before, there is only kamma,ruupa,aruupa- > > vacara clasiification, but maybe it's because of that we speaking > > of ruupa, and it's never lokuttara as you said. Very helpful Nina. > > > > Do we usually speak about kamavacara,ruupavacara,aruupavacara and > > lokuttara as one classification? Does it refer to cittas only? > ------- > N: It depends on the context, different classifications in different > contexts. What you say above refers to planes of citta. > We should not get lost in classifications, we can only have cittas of > the sense sphere at this moment. L: Those different vibhangas are very helpful. Nina, for me it's like not remembering and not trying to grasp the meaning or not to try to remember. There is nothing to remember. I just read, and allow this all to be forgoten. That's very natural. Last few days I am spending my time with vibhanga. It's so wonderful, this different vibhangas can condition kusala bhavana. I read on ruupa, it makes me to not forget the characteristic. yoniso manasikara. Best wishes Lukas #101710 From: "Lukas" Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 1:48 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. szmicio Dear Nina, Howard > ------- > N: Visible object is seen through the eye-door, it is a reality. > Seeing, not you, sees what is visible. > ----------------------------------------------- > Yes, there is no seeing agent. There is just the seeing. I wonder, > though, what you would answer were someone to ask you what the difference is > between the seeing that is "Howard's" and the seeing that is "Nina's". These > are distinguishable, and the distinction isn't an illusion, though too > much might be made of it. > ------------------------------------------------ L: I have a question on this "Howard's" seeing "Nina's" seeing. It looks like thinking in the javana-process of sense-door and then mind -door. But Buddha said also ruupasa~n~na,...dhammasa~n~na. those are 6 different dhatus. What is the function of that in cognizing. It should be very important, cause buddha made this distinction. very subtle I wonder. This should be in satipatthana and then in Vibhanga. ruupasa~n~na. Best wishes Lukas #101711 From: "Lukas" Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 2:01 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. szmicio Dear Nina and Howard, > > ------------------------------------------------ > N: No difference at all. The cat's seeing, the dog's seeing, Howard's > seeing, just the reality that is seeing-consciousness. It sees what > is visible. After it has fallen away there can be thinking in > different ways and that is conditioned by one's accumulated > inclinations. Thinking is different in the case of this or that > individual. > ----------------------------------------------------- > No doubt all seeing is the same *sort* of thing. But, Nina, the > visible objects you and I see are not the same, and thus the seeings are not > identical, not just the thinking. How do you characterize the difference? L: And ruupa that is seen was characterised as "changing"? "altering"? There is a change in what we call ruupa, isnt it? rupayati maybe?? There was something in Vism. On bases. The cakkhu and the ruupa. The word deriviations. Best wishes Lukas #101713 From: A T Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 2:15 pm Subject: Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. truth_aerator Hello Freawaru, Nina and all, > "freawaru80" wrote: > > > > Dear Nina, > >Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > > > N: It does not matter whether you use the word concentration or >one- >pointedness, but it is useful to know that this one cetasika Not really correct. It is almost offensive for a meditator to hear about samadhi being mere one-pointedness. The more correct thing to say is samadhi is stillness of the mind through temporary switching off avijja and the 3 sankharas (kaya, vaci, citta). The mind becomes still because there is no avijja to blow it away toward kama, akusala and other things. The bliss that is experienced is proprtional to the amount of craving that is let go. Through analysis and experience, the meditator can really experience the 4NT - especially the 2nd and 3rd. > Yes, it is usefull to know intellectually. :-) Yes and no. While I am against "don't study", I also question the approach of "study and don't practice". How useful is arm-chair knowledge? Imagine a turtle trying to teach a fish what dry land is like. Dry land is something that fish has not experienced and turtle can. It is very different and turtle would be at a loss on how to properly explain. What would be even more comical is if the fish tried to convince the turtle on what dry land truly is. Hopefully this simile is not offensive to anyone. > > But isn't it even more usefull to know it directly? How did the >Buddha know Abhidhamma? After all he didn't learn it intellectually, >he saw it directly. And to see it directly he needed the high speed >temporal discernment of samadhi. I think, all his Abhidhammic >insights required samadhi - in the meditational sense. Exactly. Only when 5 hindrances are switched off can there truly be panna. Prior to that it is merely "impotent" concepts, which may be right, but useless until they actually give results. What sort of panna can be if it cannot abandon 5 hindrances and enter at least 1st Jhana? > > ------- > > Hmm. but what is that called that observes citta cognizing an >object? Very interesting question. If citta knows and object, than what knows the citta? Probably the answer would be that the presence of namarupa -> vinnana ; and vinnana as a presence implies there is namarupa. With metta, Alex #101714 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 3:59 pm Subject: Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "freawaru80" wrote: > > > > Hello Ken, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" kenhowardau@ wrote > > > > In Abhidhamma terminology, the lucidity you are referring to would be > > just a form of thinking (pannatti). There is, however, something called > > 'clarity of consciousness' (sampajanna) but that term applies to the way > > consciousness can rightly understand its object. Right understanding > > can happen only when the true Dhamma has been heard and wisely > > considered. > > I still think that samadhi as used by the "meditation community" is closer to sampajanna than to thinking. There is no thinking involved. ---------- Hi Frewaru, Just to recap: We had been talking about how meditators "tried" to bring about samadhi. I pointed out that there was no need to try because, ultimately, samadhi was already present (in all consciousness). I still agreed, however, that samadhi, as the ultimately real form of one-pointedness of mind, was a wonderful thing to know. ---------------------- F: > Dream lucidity means to know that the mind is dreaming while it is doing so. There is no thinking process involved: one simply knows that one is in dream. ----------------------- That is one kind of knowing, but in Abhidhamma terminology it is nonetheless pannatti (thinking, concept). In your example the dream is different from the lucid experience of knowing there is a dream. That cannot be denied; and we certainly shouldn't confuse things experienced in dreams with things experienced while awake. However, in the final analysis, all of those things are pannatti. Only dhammas (citta, cetasika, rupa and nibbana) are ultimately real. --------------- F: > The object of mind, the dream state, is understood as it is and not confused with the wake state. And dream lucidity is just sampajanna's little sister. --------------- Yes, there is a similarity. An ordinary person can know a dream state from an awake state just as an enlightened person can know a pannatti state from a paramattha state. --------------------- <. . .> KH: > > As you know [from the doctrine of anatta] there is no self. Concepts of "me" and "my practice" do not apply in the Dhamma. > > F: > Do you think of the Buddha's Dhamma as a physicist does of Quantum Field Theory or a mathematician of algebra? A formal system? ---------------------- Good point! There is a great danger that we will see Abhidhamma as something to be found in a book. In fact (as people at DSG constantly remind us) it is to be seen here now, in daily life. Ken H #101715 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 3:39 pm Subject: Flash in & then splash out... bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Only Momentary Causes & Effects passes by... Life, person, pleasure, pain, just these join in a conscious moment that flicks by. Even gods, that live for 84.000 aeons, are not the same even for 2 such moments! Ceased aggregates of those dead & alive are all alike, gone for never to return... And those states and accumulations that break up meanwhile, and in any future, have no traits different from those ceased before. All states are equally brief! No world is born if consciousness is not produced! When consciousness is present, then the world appears as living! When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead! This is the highest sense, this concept of ever blinking re-becoming, can justify... No store of broken states exist anywhere, & no future stock of states to come! Those phenomena that are momentarily born balance like seeds on a needle point. Fall and breakup of all states is surely foredoomed, even at their fleeting birth... Those present states decay now, unmingled with those past states, just gone by. They come from nowhere, break up, & back to nowhere they inevitably then go... Reality flash in & then flash out, as a lightning in the sky... Not ever to be kept!!! Even for a single moment! Vism 625, Nd I 42 Momentary states flashes in and then immediately flashes out! <...> Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri <...> #101716 From: Herman Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 4:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. egberdina Hi freawaru, 2009/10/28 freawaru80 > > > > N: Sarah explained about observing. Citta experiences an object. We > > can also say: it cognizes an object. You use the term observing, but > > it is still citta cognizing an object, no matter what word you prefer. > > ------- > > Hmm. but what is that called that observes citta cognizing an object? > > A very useful question to ask. If we conceive of such a "that", then we have arrived at either annihilationism or eternalism. The Buddha's middle way avoids these extremes, but explains the arising and ceasing of suffering in terms of dependent origination, not in terms of existents. Cheers Herman #101717 From: Herman Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fives (315, 1, 2) and commentary, part 2. egberdina Hi Nina, > Thus, we believe that a person exists by failing to see that what we > call a > person is nama and rupa, or five khandhas that arise and fall away. > So long > as we take nama and rupa together, we believe in a self. > By the development of insight the dhammas that are classified as the > five khandhas will be seen as impermanent, dukkha and anattaa. > > I didn't understand something in the above. In saying that we believe a person exists, are you talking about a first person perspective ie that I believe I am a person, or a third person perspective ie I believe my mother is a person? The reason I ask is that a third person, such as my mother, is only ever rupa for me, I know nothing of her namas, so to speak. So I never take nama and rupa together in her case, but still believe there to be a person. Cheers Herman #101718 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 6:13 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Herman wrote: > > Hi freawaru, > > 2009/10/28 freawaru80 freawaru80@... > > > > > > > > N: Sarah explained about observing. Citta experiences an object. We > > > can also say: it cognizes an object. You use the term observing, but > > > it is still citta cognizing an object, no matter what word you prefer. > > > ------- > > > > Hmm. but what is that called that observes citta cognizing an object? > > > > > A very useful question to ask. ------------ Hi Freawaru and Herman, The answer is simple. Mind-door citta, and its co-arising cetasikas, can take another citta as their object. They can also take another cetasika - or a rupa, or nibbana or pannatti as their object. ------------------- H: > If we conceive of such a "that", then we have > arrived at either annihilationism or eternalism. The Buddha's middle way > avoids these extremes, but explains the arising and ceasing of suffering in > terms of dependent origination, not in terms of existents. -------------------- Anatta means 'no self' or 'no persisting soul.' It does not mean 'no paramattha dhamma.' All this talk about "non-duality" (no difference between nama and rupa) and "no own being" (no ultimate existence) is antithetical to Theravada. And so it seems to me that any conversation between a Mahayana student and a Theravada student is doomed to go nowhere. We have to make up our minds and study one or the other. Or at least, study them separately. Ken H #101719 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Discussions with K.Sujin in Bangkok ptaus1 Dear Sarah, Thanks for the notes from Bangkok. I'd like to ask some questions, so I'll split this in two parts so that it's not too long: > 6. Studying and following the Dhamma for oneself (attaaadhipateyya), for the sake of the world (lokaadhipateyya) or for the sake of Dhamma (dhammaadhipateyya)? See #96730 (Nina). Developing for the sake of Dhamma is right dhamma, just to understand about realities. Very deep:-). pt: Developing for the sake of Dhamma - is it possible before stream-entry? If so, how can it be distinguished from greed for knowledge and understanding how things work? > 2. On akasa rupa (space) - 2 kinds. Both have the same characteristic, both are akasa dhatu. last visit there was some confusion over KS's comment: "Think about it, there's nothing, completely nothing at all and then there arise the rupas, the 4 elementary rupas and the rest, see? But before tht, nothing and that is real and it's akasa." By nothing, it means, no kalapas, no conditioned rupas arise. Akasa, nothing, the unconditioned akasa. Nothing - no 'things', no kalapas. Unconditioned aksasa whenever there is nothing. ... > Simply, 2 realities. Where nothing, it's the second kind of akasa. Again, both have the same characteristic. pt: So then, this second meaning of akasa where there's nothing (unconditioned one) is pretty much the same as a common designation of space - three-dimensional empty space (so, space with no things/kalapas in it)? > 8. Kaya and vaci-vinnatti -bodily and speech intimations, not just when conveying a meaning to others. Like now, if we use bodily movements intending a purpose, such as walking with a straight back or combing our hair in a particular style, there's kaya-vinnatti. (Thx, Rob for raising it!) pt: What does "intending a purpose" mean exactly? Here are a few examples in gradation, I'm wondering at which point there's no more intending a purpose: 1 signaling to someone with hands 2 hand gestures while rehearsing a speech in front of a mirror 3 learning to play a song on a piano 4 Scratching an itch (intentional movement) 5 Scratching an itch while talking to someone 6 Scratching an itch while sleeping All 6 seem to me like they have an intentional purpose, though 5 and 6 might be commonly called "unintentional" or "unconscious" movements. I'm not sure whether "intending a purpose" (and thus, kaya-vinnatti) applies in 5 and 6 or not? Thanks. Best wishes pt #101720 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Discussions with K.Sujin in Bangkok ptaus1 Dear Sarah, (Part 2) > 4. Sabhava and asabhava dhammas that are known. Sabhava dhammas have to be known before asabhava dhammas. At the third stage of insight, asabhava dhammas,such as the akasa can be known, all depending on accumulations. So, is the 3rd stage of insight advanced or not? pt: Third stage of insight would be "knowledge of dissolution", bhanganana, right? > 6. Passadhi (calm) and (kusala)ekaggata, pt #97045. Passadhi conditions ekaggata to be stronger and stronger. Concentration appears with calm. Samatha is passadhi, kusala calm. When calm is strong, concentration is clear. Sometimes when samadhi is mention, actually it is samatha which is being referred to. pt: Is there a particular principle to determine when one is meant and not the other? > When the object is clearly comprehended (by developed panna), only then does concentration appear clearly. pt: What does this mean exactly? That the object is understood as a concept? Or maybe a paramattha dhamma? > When samatha is highly developed, samadhi is a dominant cetasika with the object clearly 'focussed on'. pt: I guess you mean that passadhi is a dominant cetasika, not samadhi. The object being clearly "focused on" means that there is a clear understanding of the object as a concept? Or something different? Thanks. Best wishes pt #101721 From: "Lukas" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:28 am Subject: Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. szmicio Dear Freawaru, > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote > > > > In Abhidhamma terminology, the lucidity you are referring to would be > > just a form of thinking (pannatti). There is, however, something called > > 'clarity of consciousness' (sampajanna) but that term applies to the way > > consciousness can rightly understand its object. Right understanding > > can happen only when the true Dhamma has been heard and wisely > > considered. > > I still think that samadhi as used by the "meditation community" is closer to sampajanna than to thinking. There is no thinking involved. > > Dream lucidity means to know that the mind is dreaming while it is doing so. There is no thinking process involved: one simply knows than one is in dream. The object of mind, the dream state, is understood as it is and not confused with the wake state. And dream lucidity is just sampajanna's little sister. L: Lucid dream is just another thinking. It does not differ from usual dream. It's not even kusala. It has pannati as its object. It looks like sati and pa~n~na is like "being aware" , "being present", like be not "forgetful of walking", "being attentive", being with "what there is". But that is not so, when we let all those ideas to go away, there are conditions to sati. Right understanding is most helpful. Gradually it eradites, the wrong idea of Self. The wrong idea of Self is nama, it's real. It is cetasika. It can be know. "Being present at the moment" cannot be known. Just my few words. Best wishes Lukas #101722 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 7:31 am Subject: [dsg] The Buddha's Path, Ch 3, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, Further on (XVIII, 28) we read: So in many hundred suttas it is only mentality-materiality that is illustrated, not a being, not a person. Therefore, just as when the component parts such as axles, wheels, frame, poles, etc. are arranged in a certain way, there comes to be the mere term of common usage chariot, yet in the ultimate sense when each part is examined, there is no chariotand just as when the component parts of a house such as wattles, etc. are placed so that they enclose a space in a certain way, there comes to be the mere term of common usage house, yet in the ultimate sense there is no house,so too, when there are the five khandhas of clinging, there comes to be the mere term of common usage a being, a person, yet in the ultimate sense, when each component is examined, there is no being as a basis for the assumption I am or I; in the ultimate sense there is only mentality-materiality. The vision of one who sees in this way is called right vision. If life can be considered as existing in just one moment, it will be less difficult to understand the truth of non-self. In the Mah- Niddesa (number 6, Decay) the Buddha explains that life is extremely short. In the ultimate sense it lasts only as long as one moment of consciousness. Each moment of consciousness which arises falls away completely, to be succeeded by the next moment which is different. We read in the Path of Purification (XX, 72) a quotation from the Mah-Niddesa text about the khandhas which are impermanent: No store of broken states, no future stock; Those born balance like seeds on needle points. Break-up of states is fore-doomed at their birth; Those present decay, unmingled with those past. They come from nowhere, break up, nowhere go; Flash in and out, as lightning in the sky. One is used to thinking of a self who coordinates all the different experiences through the senses and the mind, a self who can see, hear and think all at the same time, but in reality there can be only one moment of consciousness at a time which experiences one object. ******* Nina. #101723 From: Herman Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 8:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. egberdina Hi KenH, 2009/10/29 kenhowardau > > All this talk about "non-duality" (no difference between nama and rupa) > and "no own being" (no ultimate existence) is antithetical to Theravada. > And so it seems to me that any conversation between a Mahayana student > and a Theravada student is doomed to go nowhere. We have to make up our > minds and study one or the other. Or at least, study them separately. > > In broad terms, I very much agree with what you said above, and I also think that what you have said you said very well. My purpose in writing and questioning etc is not to question Theravadan theory as such, or any theory for that matter. To me, it is no problem that Theravadan theory posits 7, 5, 3 or whatever number of javana cittas as part of whatever other process. It's fine. It's a bit like physicists positing Boson Higgs elementary particles, clearly in order fill gaps that other positings have created. And there's the key for me, why it is that I write, it is only to make sense of the theory. If there is no connection between the theory and what is experienced, why do the positing to begin with? And as long as there is mention of the realities of the present moment in the dsg charter, I feel welcome to write about the incrongruities between the theory and reality. Or are you here to study a theory only? Cheers Herman #101724 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Every word...satipatthana ( was characteristic of thinking) sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, (& Mike N) #101527 We're not quite on the same wave-length here...:) ... --- On Wed, 21/10/09, kenhowardau wrote: > > >Ken H: "I think K Sujin is quoted as having said: "The Buddha taught > satipatthana, and every word of his teaching is to be understood in > terms of satipatthana. " <. . .> ------------ --- K:> It could be argued that the word "understood" was a synonym for satipatthana, in which case there would be no argument. :-) >But to be fair I'll admit we are also talking about understanding in the conventional sense of "comprehending" or "following a line of reasoning." ... S: I think we're just talking about understanding what is heard/read "in terms of satipatthana" for those with developed pa~n~naa. Now, there can be awareness of visible object or hardness or thinking if sati has been developed. ... >And so it could be asked "did the Buddha ever engage in conversations (or lines of reasoning) that were to be understood as *not* satipatthana? " ... S: There are two points of relevance: the Buddha's cittas and the listeners' cittas. Whatever was being said and discussed, even if daily pleasantries, could be understood as namas and rupas for the wise. ... >That might not be an important question, but anyway . . . >Mike has suggested that the Buddha's remarks on teeth cleaning were not part of satipatthana. I think they could have been. Satipatthana (panna; the ultimate traveller on the Middle Way) is neither of the two extremes, and, therefore, a monk could be seen to be observing panna outwardly by neither pandering to, nor neglecting, his physical welfare (including his oral hygiene). >We have also mentioned "friendly greetings" as possible non-satipatthana- related conversations. But such greetings could be taken as *part of* ensuing conversations about satipatthana. ... S: I wish Mike would pursue this with you/us. I'd like to hear more of his comments. Again, I would differentiate between the Buddha's comments which may well have just been "friendly greetings" with metta, for example, vs. the listeners' cittas, which may have been with sati and panna, depending on accumulations. "Every word is to be understood in terms of satipatthana", i.e even when we think we hear a friendly greeting, there are just namas and rupas. ... >What if someone had no interest in satipathana, and wanted to talk to the Buddha solely about the weather, or some other mundane matter? Would there still have been friendly greetings? Or would the Buddha's attendants have kept that person away, denying him an audience? ... S: There are examples of people that "the Buddha's attendants" attempted to keep away because they thought they were beyond hope and disreputable, but the Buddha still encouraged them to approach, understanding the various accumulations better than anyone else. For example, the woman who was naked and totally distraught having just lost all her family was encouraged to come forward and pour out her story. Later she was able to listen to the Buddha and became enlightened. ... >Anyway, thanks for raising these questions at the meetings. I have read the answers/comments several times. Whether I have learnt anything is another matter; I might be just interpreting them the way I want to. :-) ... S: I think the truth is that we can't analyse or know the Buddha's cittas behind all such examples. We know he had unimaginable metta and karuna and with his omniscient powers, knew what was suitable. This doesn't mean that he might not have just been making a simple enquiry or exchanging a greeting at times. Anyway, I think it's clear what KS means by her statement - definitely referring to the understanding of the listener, the understanding now as we read these messages:-). Metta Sarah ======= #101725 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 11:14 am Subject: Re: Anger management jonoabb Hi Phil Good to see you around again. A couple of points from your post to Han. (101617) > =============== > Look at this sutta for example, AN III, 25, which says there are three kinds of persons found in the world. There is one with a mind like an open sore; one with a mind like lightning; one with a mind like a diamond: "Of what nature is the person with a mind like an open sore? He is one who is irascible and irritable. If he is criticized even slightly he loses his temper and becomes angry and upset; he is stubborn and displays anger, hatred and resentment. Just as, for instance, a festering sore, if struck by a stick or a shard, will discharge mattter all the more...." According to the commentary, the person with the mind like lightning is the sekka, and the mind like a diamond is the arahant. In other words, if we are to believing the commmentary (which is not always a sure thing, perhaps) all of us non-Ariyan worlldlings have minds like open sores which, if they haven't spewed their pus, have only been spared by fortuitous conditions. So who are we to believe that protection lies in our understanding of fleeting paramattha dhammas? I believe that is unwise, and constitutes the appropriation of or playing around with degrees of wisdom that don't belong to us. > =============== I think you might be drawing the wrong conclusion here. As I see it, if all worldlings have minds like open sores (and I think this is something we can verify as being the case for ourselves at least), then the only real remedy is to get beyond the state of being a worldling. 'Anger management' techniques will not achieve anything of any lasting value. =============== > I think protection - and the protective aspect of the Dhamma is something that is not appreciated here nearly enough - is provided by such factors as appamada, another word that I don't see here at DSG nearly enough. It was of course the Buddha's final emphasis, so where is it at DSG? =============== To my understanding, appamada is a synonym for mindfulness (see Nyanatiloka extract below). Plenty of mention of this here on DSG ;-)) =============== Perhaps it is because appamada as a fleeting dhamma that rises and falls away in a flash of an eye has no sense. Appamada that protects is far closer to conventional heedfulness. We must be aware of situations and people that are more likely than not to cause transgression rooted in anger. In my case, I learned that when I am near cars, I must be careful, very heedful. I've learned to reflect that by being heedful I can protect the driver from the harsh kamma that would be involved in his or her hitting me. Heedfulness is not "sexy" (fascintating and deep) the way paramattha dhammas are, but it is necessary *all* the time, and some times more than that. > =============== I'm very glad for you that there is more restraint than before. But I don't think that avoiding 'provocative' situations is the path taught by the Buddha as being the way out of samsara. Jon Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictinary Appamāda ******************** 'zeal', non-laxity, earnestness, diligence, is considered as the foundation of all progress. Just as all the footprints of living beings are surpassed by the footprint of the elephant, and the footprint of the elephant is considered as the mightiest amongst them, just so have all the meritorious qualities zeal as their foundation, and zeal is considered as the mightiest of these qualities'' (A. X, 15). Cf. the Chapter on Zeal (Appamāda Vagga) in Dhp., and the Buddha's last exhortation: "Transient are all formations. Strive zealously!" (appamādena sampādetha: D. 16) - In the commentaries, it is often explained as the presence (lit. 'non-absence') of mindfulness (satiyā avippavāsa). ******************** #101726 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 11:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Physical Phenomena (17) sarahprocter... Dear pt & all, --- On Thu, 22/10/09, ptaus1 wrote: #101557 >Glad to continue. ... S: Likewise :-) ... > S: So can we say in any case, any situation, that the bhavana (samatha >or vipassana) only refers to moments of kusala accompanied by understanding accordingly? I wouldn't refer to any so-called "formal" or "informal" practice as bhavana. >pt: Yes, I think we can say that, but only if distinguishing factors are kusala and understanding. If we also consider the factors of concentration and panna (their kinds/levels in particular), then I don't think we can say that. ... S: We agree then that any kind of bhavana, as far as "kusala and understanding" are concerned, refers to cittas, not to "formal" or "informal" practices. If we consider the kinds and levels of concentration and panna, what is it that distinguishes moments of samatha/vipassana bhavana from other moments if not the kusala qualities and accompanying understanding? For example, a trapeeze performer or a bank robber have high degrees of concentration and skill, don't they? On the other hand, there may be many moments of samatha and panna in our day, such as when showing kindness to others and understanding the value of such metta, as opposed to its near and far enemies, with a far weaker level of concentration. The point I'm making is that without a clear understanding of kusala and akusala, the concentration appearing during the day or during a special practice is most likely akusala. ... > >> S: Again, I think that samatha bhavana comes down to moments of right understanding and calm, such as if we happen to be wisely reflecting on the Buddha's virtues now. I don't think it has anything to do with deciding to have a "samatha bhavana sitting/practice" now or later. pt: >Similarly, I don't think that absorption level, or even access levels of concentration can occur unless the body is still ... ... S: In my opinion, there's far too much talk about access and absorption concentration when we don't even understand what samatha is, what kusala cittas are, what momentary wholesome calm is. Just concentrating on an object, such as the breath, while keeping still, hoping for access or absorption is bound to be with very strong attachment, isn't it? What is the kusala involved here? .... >So if we are considering the level/kind of concentration, it seems there's a necessity to distinguish between bhavana of dry insight practice (since it relies mostly on momentary concentration) and bhavana of samatha development or however we call it (which relies first on momentary concentration, then access, and then absorption levels). So, this would be the basic difference on single citta level I guess. ... S: As I understand them, both kinds of bhavana rely not on concentration, but on understanding. Nyantiloka gives this definition in his dictionary: "bhaavanaa: 'mental development' (lit. 'calling into existence, producing') is what in English is generally but rather vaguely called 'meditation'. One has to distinguish 2 kinds: development of tranquillity (samatha-bhaavanaa), i.e concentration (samaadhi) and development of insight (vipassanaa-bhaavanaa), i.e wisdom (pa~n~naa)." S: So, it means "producing" (kusala) calm or insight. It is only right understanding which can know when the pleasant calm feeling now is kusala or akusala, for example. When there is no understanding developed, usually the concentration, such as when studying a language, academic subject or focussing on a particular object is taken to be kusala. ... >pt: While I agree in principle, perhaps we are conflating things a bit here. I mean chanda can be both wholesome and unwholesome. So, even if a person sits down to meditate with an unwholesome chanda - it will still not last for longer than one citta, so I don't necessarily see the need to immediately assume that the entire 2 hours of a formal sitting will be uniformly made out of unwholesome cittas. Especially since the issue at stake is to notice if the present moment has unwholesome elements in the first place. Hence my previous liking of the expression that kusala bhavana can happen "in spite of" unwholesome habits. ... S: Yes, I agree. Kusala bhavana "can happen "in spite of" unwholesome habits". This is why we cannot judge the cittas from the situation, whether that be studying a text in Pali, sitting formally, exchanging friendly greetings or any other time. In other words, bhavana cannot be defined in terms of "formal" or "informal" practice, but only in terms of various kusala qualities, beginning with right understanding. Isn't this where we started?:-). Metta Sarah p.s Pls don't be concerned about others "being sick" of the discussion. They'll be glad that you're pursuing it and challenging my comments, I assure you:-)). ========= #101727 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 11:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours (314, sutta 50)and commentary. jonoabb Hi Howard (101659) > I think you are rushing to judgment here. The interpretation you are > giving to this passage does not seem consistent with the commentaries as I > know them. Is it possible you are misreading the reference to "unfavorable > outward appearance"? > --------------------------------------------------- > It would be wonderful if that were the case. How do you read it? > =============== I can't be sure of the exact reading, without further studying the text. However, I certainly wouldn't jump to the conclusion that the comment is a racist one, unless I was quite sure that no other interpretation was reasonably open. Jon #101728 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 11:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta jonoabb Hi Howard (101660) > ================================ > Seeing is the experiential presence of visual content, and visible > object is that content. There is no seeing without visual content, and there > is no unseen sight. > =============== It is difficult to get the meaning of your statement. Would you mind explaining the difference between "visual content" and visible object, as you have used these terms. Also, what is an "experiential presence" (not a term I'm familiar with, I'm afraid)? Thanks. Jon #101729 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 11:24 am Subject: Re: Two truths sarahprocter... Hi Alberto (Mike N & Connie). #98950 You addressed the following message to us a while back and I think it's interesting and of significance. Would you summarise the points you are addressing, hopefully for further discussion. Thanks in advance, Sarah --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sprlrt" wrote: >> I'm posting these bits from the Vinaya, Book of discipline, vol 1, Horner trans. (http://www.archive.org/details/bookofdiscipline10hornuoft) > > Alberto > > > TRANSLATOR S INTRODUCTION (page ix) > [...] > This limitation of the Suttavibhanga to an outward and objective field is amply indicated by the striking absence from it, of any passage stating that the observance of the courses of training "made known for monks by the lord" will conduce to the realisation of desirable subjective states. > [...] > Never once is it said, in the Suttavibhanga, that the courses of training should be followed so as to lead, for example, to the rejection of passion, of hatred, of confusion, to the destruction of the asavas (cankers), to making the Way (one, fourfold, eightfold) become, to the mastery of dhamma, to the attainment of perfection. Always the recurrent formula of the Suttavibhanga declares that breaches of a course of training are "not fitting, not suitable, not worthy of a recluse, not to be done," and so on, and that such lapses are not "for the benefit of non-believers nor for increase in the number of believers." > [...] > The word Suttavibhanga means analysis or classification (vibhanga) of a sutta, a term here applied to each rule or course of training included in the Patimokkha. > [...] > > Parajika II. 4. 30. (pag 88) > [...] > The 'making of a rendezvous' [sanketa_kamma] means : he makes a rendezvous (for a time) either before or after a meal, or during the night or the day; > [...] > [sanketa: plan, schedule, to-do list] > #101730 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 11:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta jonoabb Hi Herman Welcome back. Good to be talking to you again ;-)) (101667) > Howard has already answered, and in the way I would have. > > I would just like to add that consciousness of any kind (seeing, hearing) > has no characteristic other than it's object, so to talk about the > consciousness of the object is superfluous, talking about the object > suffices. > =============== OK, understood. Is this something you get from the texts (and, if so, which texts), or is it a self-evident matter for you? =============== > In English, that translates into "consciousness of blue" and "blue" meaning > exactly the same thing. =============== This is not the sense I get from my reading of the suttas and other texts. To my understanding, there is consciousness and there is the object of consciousness. =============== > The danger in the more wordy formulation is that some (at dsg, for example > :-)) proceed to then take consciousness to be something separate, > independent, with it's own characteristic. But in so doing they have > introduced something that isn't there. Subject/object dualism (as in "seeing > consciousness sees blue") is a feature of language, not a feature of reality > :-) =============== I'm afraid I have no idea what "subject/object dualism" means, and why it should not be a feature of reality. Care to elaborate? Thanks. Jon #101731 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 11:26 am Subject: Re: What is kaya / citta viveka? Citta Viveka = JHANAS jonoabb Hi Alex (101684) > I did a search on definitions of "what is *seclusion" and I see only > MahaNiddessa to define citta, kaya and upadhi viveka. > > In any case you can do some checking with a dictionary. A word-for-word dictionary translation is not likely to give a good sense of the meaning of the passage. If a translation becomes available, I'd be happy to continue the discussion. Jon #101732 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 11:22 am Subject: Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination re-establishment of original lineage ~ Ajahn Brahmavamso jonoabb Hi MikeNZ (101666) > Mike: Yes, but the Theravada Bhikkhus have an unbroken lineage. There is an argument that it is not clear that the double ordination is required (taking vows before both Bhikkhus and Bhikkhunis) or whether that's a later custom. Besides, an unbroken unbroken lineage of Bhikkhunis does exist (they happen to not be Theravada, but the Vinaya is not specific to Theravada). > =============== Thanks for this. I'm haven't really studied the details of the issues. I just understand the orthodox Theravada position to be that the original Bhikkhuni lineage was broken several hundred years ago. Now, if there's an existing unbroken lineage in another sect, that lineage could of course be adopted and continued, but it would not constitute a re-establishment of the lineage previously existing within the Theravada tradition. Jon #101733 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 7:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. upasaka_howard Hi, Lukas (and Freawaru) - In a message dated 10/29/2009 12:30:29 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, szmicio@... writes: L: Lucid dream is just another thinking. It does not differ from usual dream. It's not even kusala. It has pannati as its object. It looks like sati and pa~n~na is like "being aware" , "being present", like be not "forgetful of walking", "being attentive", being with "what there is". But that is not so, when we let all those ideas to go away, there are conditions to sati. Right understanding is most helpful. Gradually it eradites, the wrong idea of Self. The wrong idea of Self is nama, it's real. It is cetasika. It can be know. "Being present at the moment" cannot be known. Just my few words. ================================ I disagree with you, Lukas, when you say that lucid dreaming is "just" another instance of thinking. It certainly does differ from usual dreaming. What characterizes lucid dreaming is being clearly aware that dreaming is underway. This then often leads, for me at least, to conscious experimentation with the state such as 1) testing out how realistic mind-produced textures are, 2) intentionally recollecting facts about one's regular life such as one's name, address, the appearance of one's home and the room in which one is sleeping, and the events of the previous day - all the while "being in" the dream scene, and 3) intentionally changing the content of the dream, including flying, confronting dream dangers and threatening "dream entities," and even total scene changing. This is FAR from ordinary dreaming. With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #101734 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:19 pm Subject: Re: Lukas and the present moment. jonoabb Hi again Phil (101618) > Ph: Of course right understanding is important. But please remember that if you were to meet the Buddha, he would teaching you about right understanding in terms that would be in line with conventional stories about people and things, not in paramattha terms. > =============== Yes, many suttas contain a teaching about right understanding expressed in terms of conventional stories about people and things. But this was not the invariable approach. There are plenty of suttas where the teaching is given pretty much entirely in terms of paramattha dhammas (see for example some of the suttas in SN 12, Niddaanasamyutta, SN 14 Dhaatusamyutta). =============== He didn't even teach the four noble truths to people until he knew their minds were ready for the deep teachings, that's very clear in the suttanta. =============== You perhaps have in mind the "gradual teaching" (anupubbi-katha). That is a teaching that was given to persons who are hearing the dhamma for the first time, whom the Buddha has seen are ready for enlightenment because of their accumulated wisdom. But there are other suttas which teach the four noble truths without going through the preliminary bits found in the gradual teaching (see for example some of the suttas in SN 56 Saccasamyutta). Jon #101735 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours (314, sutta 50)and commentary. sarahprocter... Hi Howard & all, I'm glad you've persisted with this issue, because clearly it's remained a concern and others have raised the same points. Please be patient with yet another attempt to 'clarify'! Here, Nina quoted from a sutta: --- On Sat, 24/10/09, upasaka@... wrote: N: >We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the Fours, chapter IX, 5, Darkness): >Monks, these four persons are found existing in the world. What four? He who is in darkness and bound for darkness; he who is in darkness but bound for light; he who is in light but bound for darkness; he who is in light and bound for light. And how, monks, is a person in darkness bound for darkness? In this case a certain person is born in a low family, the family of a scavenger or a hunter or a basket-weaver or wheelwright or sweeper, or in the family of some wretched man hard put to it to find a meal or earn a living, where food and clothes are hard to get. Moreover, he is ill-favoured, ugly, dwarfish, sickly, purblind, crooked, lame or paralysed, with never a bite or sup, without clothes, vehicle, without perfumes or flower-garlands, bed, dwelling or lights. He lives in the practice of evil with body, speech and thought; and so doing, when body breaks up, after death, he is reborn in the waste, the way of woe, the downfall, in hell. Thus, monks, is the person who is in darkness and bound for darkness. <...> S: And the B. Bodhi (Bk of 4s 85)translation puts it in a similar way: "....Here some person has been reborn in a low family - an outcast family or a family of bamboo workers or a family of hunters or a family of carters or a family of flower-scavengers - a poor family in which there is little food and drink and which subsists with difficulty, one where food and garments are obtained with difficulty. And he is ugly, unsightly, deformed, chronically ill - purblind or crock-armed or lame or crippled. He is not one who gains food, drink, clothing and vehicles; garlands, scents and unguents; bedding, housing and lighting....." ... >Nina, the section *common* to the first and second cases, that says "Moreover, he is ill-favoured, ugly, dwarfish, sickly, purblind, crooked, lame or paralysed ..." is very disappointing to me, for it asserts that whether bound for darkness or bound for light, a person in a "low class" of society, whether of bad character or good, is ugly. .... S: I don't read it as saying this at all. It is using conventional language to describe the worst kind of results of kamma for a human, the greatest "darkness" that some are born into, indicating as the sutta goes on, how even these people can perform kusala kamma and find "light". It is referring to both akusala vipaka, the experiences of the senses, such as bodily experiences which encounter undesirable tangible objects, through hunger, for example. It also refers to to rupas, bodily phenomena conditioned by akusala kamma in the past. For example, we know that being born paralysed or blind is (usually) a result of unwholesome kamma. It is not referring to aspects of beauty which are in the "eye of the beholder". It is not saying that everyone who is born into a poor family and experiences akusala vipaka by way of seeing, hearing and experiencing of unpleasant objects also has to endure rupas, such as in paralyis, conditioned by kamma. Clearly, this would be nonsense. It is also not saying that those born into poverty only experience akusala vipaka, whilst those born into wealth only experience kusala vipaka. This too would clearly be nonsense. It is just saying, as I read it, that those dealt the worst hand as a human, in terms of results of kamma, may or may not perform various kinds of wholesome deeds, leading to further good or bad results. The same applies to those dealt the best hand as a human. ... >The other characteristics mentioned are due to being disadvantaged, so I am deemphasizing them. The main problem that I have with this, even with regard to the other physicaL characteristics of "dwarfish, sickly, purblind, crooked, lame or paralysed" is the universality of application. I doubt that this section is the word of the Buddha, for it is inconsistent with what he has taught elsewhere, and moreover it is clearly false. ... S: He could have referred to more categories, such as a) those born into poor, hungry families, but with good features and strong bodies, b) those born into rich families with good food, but paralysed and sickly. The point is just to show that whatever the combination, whatever the results of kamma, the "true brahmin" is the one that "engages in good conduct with the body, speech and mind". In turn, it is such behaviour which leads to good results in future. This is what all the suttas and commentaries quoted so far on this topic indicate as I read them. Metta Sarah ======== #101736 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 8:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 10/29/2009 7:20:05 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Howard (101660) > ================================ > Seeing is the experiential presence of visual content, and visible > object is that content. There is no seeing without visual content, and there > is no unseen sight. > =============== It is difficult to get the meaning of your statement. Would you mind explaining the difference between "visual content" and visible object, as you have used these terms. Also, what is an "experiential presence" (not a term I'm familiar with, I'm afraid)? Thanks. Jon ============================= The term 'visible object' suggests some entity that exists independently of being known - an "unseen." The term 'visual content' does not. By the term 'experiential presence', I mean existing as content of consciousness. I hope you follow this, Jon, for I cannot clarify it further. With metta, Howard Emptiness of Consciousness /"Thus, monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't construe an [object as] seen. He doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-seen. He doesn't construe a seer. "When hearing... "When sensing... "When cognizing what is to be cognized, he doesn't construe an [object as] cognized. He doesn't construe an uncognized. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-cognized. He doesn't construe a cognizer./ (From the Kalaka Sutta) #101737 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 8:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours (314, sutta 50)and commentary. upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Nina) - In a message dated 10/29/2009 8:21:57 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard & all, I'm glad you've persisted with this issue, because clearly it's remained a concern and others have raised the same points. Please be patient with yet another attempt to 'clarify'! =================================== Thank you for writing on this, Sarah. I do indeed hope your analysis is correct, though it doesn't seem so to me. Perhaps the translation is faulty or the formulation of the Pali as recorded was less than optimal or, less likely, the Buddha was unclear in his original formulation, or perhaps the sutta became corrupted in it's being passed down. In any case, for the record, I do *not* believe that the Buddha himself had a racist perspective. In fact he made it quite clear in other suttas that he did not in the slightest - quite the opposite in fact. With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #101738 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 1:36 pm Subject: Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! abhidhammika Dear Nina, Robert K, Uncle U Han Tun, Phil, Howard, Freawaru, Alex, Jon, Sarah, How are you? I have translated the Pali Commentary passages on the topic of `defecating and urinating chore' under the Four Comprehensions. This translation is a first take fresh version so the English words for the technical terms such as saatthakasampajaam are provisional. As usual, I made sure that the syntax of the translation is as lateral as possible while taking some liberty in rendering Pali word and phrases as in natural English as possible so as to hopefully offer a smoother effortless reading of Pali commentarial literature. And, this translation has been specially done for the benefit of Nina, Uncle U Han Tun, Robert K (who first asked me to elaborate on the topic of how one could defecate formally) and traditional followers of Theravada. CATUSAMPAJAAPABBAVA.N.NANAA Uccaarapassaavakammeti uccaarassa ca passaavassa ca kara.ne. Tattha pattakaale uccaarapassaavam akarontassa sakalasariirato sedaa muccanti, akkhiini bhamanti, cittam na ekaggam hoti, ae ca rogaa uppajjanti. Karontassa pana sabbam tam na hotiiti ayamettha attho. Tassa vasena saatthakasampajaam veditabbam. A.t.thaane uccaarapassaavam karontassa pana aapatti hoti, ayaso va.d.dhati, jiivitantaraayo hoti, patiruupe .thaane karontassa sabbam tam na hotiiti idamettha sappaayam tassa vasena sappaayasampajaam. Kamma.t.thaanaavijahanavaseneva ca gocarasampajaam veditabbam. Abbhantare attaa naama uccaarapassaavakammam karonto natthi, cittakiriyavaayodhaatuvipphaareneva pana uccaarapassaavakammam hoti. Yathaa pana pakke ga.n.de ga.n.dabhedena pubbalohitam akaamataaya nikkhamati. Yathaa ca atibharitaa udakabhaajanaa udakam akaamataaya nikkhamati. Evam pakkaasayamuttavatthiisu sannicitaa uccaarapassaavaa vaayuvegasamuppii.litaa akaamataayapi nikkhamanti. So panaayam evam nikkhamanto uccaarapassaavo neva tassa bhikkhuno attano hoti, na parassa, kevalam sariiranissandova hoti. Yathaa kim? Yathaa udakatumbato puraa.nudakam cha.d.dentassa neva tam attano hoti, na paresam; kevalam pa.tijagganamattameva hoti; evam pavattapa.tisankhaanavasenettha asammohasampajaam veditabbam. COMMENTARY ON THE FOUR COMPREHENSIONS The expression `defecating and urinating chore' means the discharging of post-digestive waste and urine. There, to the one who does not discharge those bodily waste products at the time of nature calling, sweats ooze from the whole body, the eyes turn, the mind does not focus, and other sicknesses happen. To the one who does discharge, all those issues do not arise. This is here the benefit in defecating and urinating. In terms of that benefit, beneficial comprehension should be understood. To the one who does defecating and urinating at the wrong place, ecclesiastical offense ensues (if a monk), disgrace spreads, and even danger to life can happen. To the one who does them at the suitable place, all those issues do not arise. This is here appropriateness in defecating and urinating. In terms of that appropriateness, sensible comprehension should be understood. And, in terms of not relinquishing the chosen meditation object, pasture comprehension should be understood. Inside the body, there isn't anything called self that does the defecating and urinating chore. Only by the expansive pressure of mind-made wind element, defecating and urinating chore happens. Like pus and blood come out desirelessly due to a boil breaking when the boil ripens, and like water spills over desirelessly from the over-filled water pot, so do feces and urine gathering in the bowel and the bladder come out desirelessly due to the downward push of the wind force. Moreover, those feces and urine thus coming out are neither the property of that monk nor of anybody else, but, are merely bodily secretion only. Like how? Like the old water is neither one's property nor of others and is only a mere case of hygienic care for the one who depletes that water from the water bottle. In terms of deep consideration thus arising, disillusive comprehension should be understood here. Section 109, Catusampajaapabbava.n.nanaa, Mahaasatipa.t.thaana Suttam, Muulapa.n.naasa A.t.thakathaa, Majjhimanikaayo. Robert K asked: "About the awareness when defecating and urinating- perhaps you could spell out any particular formal action/method that the bhikkhu should do." Suan answered: Anyone who reads the above commentary on the Four Comprehensions regarding `defecating and urinating chore' will notice that there are four requirements for a serious practitioner of samatha and vipassanaa. The four requirements are 1) beneficial comprehension, 2) sensible comprehension, 3) pasture comprehension, and 4) disillusive comprehension. A practitioner of vipassanaa need to meet all the four requirements while a samatha practitioner need to meet only the first three requirements because the chores in question are only temporary and fall outside the forty samatha object (cattaaliisakamma.t.thaanaanam). For a list of the forty samatha objects, please see Section 47, Visuddhimaggo. Any activity that is undertaken under the constraints of a set of requirements qualifies as a formal activity. The commentary on the Four Comprehensions is clearly describing the chores of defecating and urinating as those to be undertaken in line with those four comprehensions: a set of requirements. Therefore, I declare that we can undertake defecating and urinating chores formally. Best wishes, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org #101739 From: "Lukas" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 1:52 pm Subject: Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. szmicio Dear Howard, > ================================ > I disagree with you, Lukas, when you say that lucid dreaming is "just" > another instance of thinking. It certainly does differ from usual > dreaming. What characterizes lucid dreaming is being clearly aware that dreaming is > underway. L: When Lucid Dreaming, you can know that is a dream, but its just another thinking. thinking that knows it's a dream. Just it. It's not awarness if you try to say this. That's what i think. I was involved in Lucid Dream for a long time. You know I did whatever I could imagine, flying, fighting, matrix at school ;>. Nice. But it doesnt eradicted my misery. This then often leads, for me at least, to conscious > experimentation with the state such as 1) testing out how realistic mind-produced > textures are, 2) intentionally recollecting facts about one's regular life such > as one's name, address, the appearance of one's home and the room in which > one is sleeping, and the events of the previous day - all the while "being > in" the dream scene, and 3) intentionally changing the content of the > dream, including flying, confronting dream dangers and threatening "dream > entities," and even total scene changing. This is FAR from ordinary dreaming. L: As I said, for sure it's a good fun. But In my opinion it's just another mind-door-process thinking. Best wishes Lukas #101740 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 28-okt-2009, om 21:31 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > No doubt all seeing is the same *sort* of thing. But, Nina, the > visible objects you and I see are not the same, and thus the > seeings are not > identical, not just the thinking. ------- N: : Visible object is just visible object or colour. When you go with the dog in the wood, you and the dog are seeing what is visible, no difference. Just colours all around. When we consider just seeing, the experience of what is visible, seeing is the same for everybody. It is an impersonal element that sees. It does not belong to 'my unique personality'. I am glad you brought up this question. It helps me to consider more what seeing is, what visible object is. Seeing is only one moment of vipaakacitta that is extremely short. Quite different from defining the object that is seen. Here differences in accumulations appear. --------- > H: How do you characterize the difference? It > seems to me that you ignore conditionality and interrelationships, > specifically those that hold among the dhammas that constitute > distinguishable > namarupic streams. The streams called "Nina" and "Howard" are not > one and the > same. -------- N: Seeing is conditioned I would not deny it. It is produced by kamma. It is dependent on visible object and eyesense. When you speak about namarupic streams, I know what you mean. You think of different accumulations of different individuals. It would be better to leave out rupic here. Cittas succeed one another without interval. Rupas do not succeed one another. When considering accumulated inclinations, this relates to the defining and thinking after seeing, not to seeing itself. I know that this must be a bit hard to swallow, it is hard for everybody who is not a sotaapanna. I heard Kh Sujin say: your seeing and the dog's seeing, it is just seeing. We say: Oh, yes, but we do not really, really consider it. The characteristic of just seeing, not mixed with thinking, has to be known precisely, and then doubts will disappear. **** Nina. #101741 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sangiiti Sutta Fives (315, 1-2) and commentary. part 1. nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 28-okt-2009, om 21:40 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > We read about tibhuumi, three planes, > > and then it is the above. > > -------- > > L: Only tibhuumi? So no lokuttara bhumi. just tibhumi. and if we > speak on different cittas, then it's four-fold classification. ------- N: In connection with samsara the tebhuumis are spoken of. Not nibbaana. I shall give a threefold classification in the Sangiitisutta: Sutta: DN 33.1.10(13) 'Three more elements: the element of sense desire, the element of form, the formless element (Aparaapi tisso dhaatuyo - kaamadhaatu, ruupadhaatu, aruupa dhaatu.) ----- The Co begins to state that these three elements are empty, su~n~natta. It deals with the question in which planes kaama-dhaatu arises (See Dsg, Pali: 1280). As the Atthasaalinii explains: the planes of existence of the kaamaavacara dhammas, thus, the sensuous planes of existence, extend from the lowest plane, which is the avci hell, up to the highest sensuous plane which is a heavenly plane, called the paranimmita vasavatti deva plane (the plane of heavenly beings with power over the creations of others). In all these planes there are sense objects. These are called sensuous becoming, kaama-bhava, or kaama-dhaatu. The Co states that there are the two classes of planes of ruupa- brahmas and aruupa-brahmas, those born as result of ruupa-jhaana and of aruupa-jhaana. Thus there are ruupa-dhaatu and aruupa-dhaatu. He classified as dhaatuu the location of becoming or birth. In this classification there are: kaama-dhaatu, ruupa-dhaatu and aruupa-dhaat ---------- sutta: 'Three more elements: the element of form, the formless element, the element of cessation (Aparaapi tisso dhaatuyo - ruupadhaatu, aruupadhaatu, nirodhadhaatu.) ------- N: The Co. states that ruupadhaatu and aruupadhaatu are becoming (bhava) , thus rebirth as result of ruupajhaana and of aruupajhaana. Moreover, there is nirodhadhaatu, the element of cessation, which is nibbaana. -------- > Nina. #101742 From: "Lukas" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:09 pm Subject: Re: Lukas and the present moment. szmicio Dear Jon, Phil > > Ph: Of course right understanding is important. But please remember that if you were to meet the Buddha, he would teaching you about right understanding in terms that would be in line with conventional stories about people and things, not in paramattha terms. > > =============== > > Yes, many suttas contain a teaching about right understanding expressed in terms of conventional stories about people and things. But this was not the invariable approach. L:Yes, and even bad people without siila, could start understand. Not only the good ones. >There are plenty of suttas where the teaching is given pretty much >entirely in terms of paramattha dhammas (see for example some of the suttas in SN 12, Niddaanasamyutta, SN 14 Dhaatusamyutta). L: I am not sure Jon, that everybody will like this paramattha dhammas term here. This is old commentarial thing, so we can just say that realities were taught in there. So that's much more easier to deal with for some people. I think so. Best wishes Lukas p.s Jon sorry I ignored your 'vineya loke' quotation request. I was wrong with this katame vineya loke abhijadomanssam. sorry. I meant the passage from the beginning of Vibhanga, Satipatthanavibhanga. It is a bit different, but I think it still has the same sense. #101743 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 28-okt-2009, om 21:48 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > I have a question on this "Howard's" seeing "Nina's" seeing. > It looks like thinking in the javana-process of sense-door and then > mind -door. But Buddha said also ruupasa~n~na,...dhammasa~n~na. > those are 6 different dhatus. What is the function of that in > cognizing. It should be very important, cause buddha made this > distinction. very subtle I wonder. This should be in satipatthana > and then in Vibhanga. > ruupasa~n~na. -------- N: We should have the context here. Sa~n ~naa arises with the citta that cognizes the object, with each citta. It marks and remembers each object. The objects experienced through the six doors must be distinguished from one another. ------- Nina. #101744 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 28-okt-2009, om 22:01 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > And ruupa that is seen was characterised as "changing"? "altering"? > There is a change in what we call ruupa, isnt it? rupayati maybe?? > There was something in Vism. On bases. The cakkhu and the ruupa. > The word deriviations. --------- Visuddhimagga Ch XV, 3: First there has to be seeing and after that one draws conclusions about someone's citta, when the colour of his face changes. Nina. #101745 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. upasaka_howard Hi, Lukas - In a message dated 10/29/2009 9:54:33 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, szmicio@... writes: Dear Howard, > ================================ > I disagree with you, Lukas, when you say that lucid dreaming is "just" > another instance of thinking. It certainly does differ from usual > dreaming. What characterizes lucid dreaming is being clearly aware that dreaming is > underway. L: When Lucid Dreaming, you can know that is a dream, but its just another thinking. thinking that knows it's a dream. Just it. It's not awarness if you try to say this. That's what i think. I was involved in Lucid Dream for a long time. You know I did whatever I could imagine, flying, fighting, matrix at school ;>. Nice. But it doesnt eradicted my misery. ------------------------------------------------ Of course not. Dhamma practice does. -------------------------------------------- This then often leads, for me at least, to conscious > experimentation with the state such as 1) testing out how realistic mind-produced > textures are, 2) intentionally recollecting facts about one's regular life such > as one's name, address, the appearance of one's home and the room in which > one is sleeping, and the events of the previous day - all the while "being > in" the dream scene, and 3) intentionally changing the content of the > dream, including flying, confronting dream dangers and threatening "dream > entities," and even total scene changing. This is FAR from ordinary dreaming. L: As I said, for sure it's a good fun. But In my opinion it's just another mind-door-process thinking. ------------------------------------------------- There is thinking involved, to be sure, because, for the most part, only mind door is open, but there is also a degree of clear comprehension of what is occurring, which is somewhat better even than what goes on most of the time while awake! ;-) In lucid dreaming, one is dreaming but is not *lost* in dreaming. One *knows* that what is observed is mere mental concoction. At ordinary times even while awake, we typically are not actually aware of the distinction between reality and illusion, even to quite a gross degree. Knowing what's what is always useful. --------------------------------------------------- Best wishes Lukas ============================= With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #101746 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 10/29/2009 10:01:29 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 28-okt-2009, om 21:31 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > No doubt all seeing is the same *sort* of thing. But, Nina, the > visible objects you and I see are not the same, and thus the > seeings are not > identical, not just the thinking. ------- N: : Visible object is just visible object or colour. When you go with the dog in the wood, you and the dog are seeing what is visible, no difference. Just colours all around. When we consider just seeing, the experience of what is visible, seeing is the same for everybody. It is an impersonal element that sees. It does not belong to 'my unique personality'. I am glad you brought up this question. It helps me to consider more what seeing is, what visible object is. Seeing is only one moment of vipaakacitta that is extremely short. Quite different from defining the object that is seen. Here differences in accumulations appear. ------------------------------------------------ And these differences result in our not seeing exactly the same things, though, of course they are the same *sort* of things. Somehow you are not getting my point, Nina. ------------------------------------------------- --------- > H: How do you characterize the difference? It > seems to me that you ignore conditionality and interrelationships, > specifically those that hold among the dhammas that constitute > distinguishable > namarupic streams. The streams called "Nina" and "Howard" are not > one and the > same. -------- N: Seeing is conditioned I would not deny it. It is produced by kamma. It is dependent on visible object and eyesense. ---------------------------------------------------- Okay! -------------------------------------------------- When you speak about namarupic streams, I know what you mean. You think of different accumulations of different individuals. -------------------------------------------------- Yes. ------------------------------------------------ It would be better to leave out rupic here. Cittas succeed one another without interval. Rupas do not succeed one another. When considering accumulated inclinations, this relates to the defining and thinking after seeing, not to seeing itself. I know that this must be a bit hard to swallow, it is hard for everybody who is not a sotaapanna. I heard Kh Sujin say: your seeing and the dog's seeing, it is just seeing. We say: Oh, yes, but we do not really, really consider it. The characteristic of just seeing, not mixed with thinking, has to be known precisely, and then doubts will disappear. **** Nina. ============================= With metta, Howard ============================= With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #101747 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! nilovg Dear Suan, Op 29-okt-2009, om 14:36 heeft abhidhammika het volgende geschreven: > The four requirements are 1) beneficial comprehension, 2) sensible > comprehension, 3) pasture comprehension, and 4) disillusive > comprehension. ------- N: Thank you. These are the four sampaja~n~nas as explained in the Co to the satipa.t.thaanasutta. The gocaara, pasture, is the field or object of sati and pa~n~naa. No problems. It is the word formal that has different word associations for different individuals. That is why there was so much debate about it. Nina. #101748 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 29-okt-2009, om 15:31 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > And these differences result in our not seeing exactly the same > things, though, of course they are the same *sort* of things. > Somehow you are not > getting my point, Nina. > ------------------------------------------------- > N: You may look upward at the sky, the dog downward. Not the same > colours, but all of them just colour. That is what you mean by the > same sort, I believe? > -------------------------------------------------- > > N:When you speak about namarupic streams, I know what you mean. You > think of different accumulations of different individuals. > -------------------------------------------------- > H: Yes. > ------------------------------------------------ N: No more problems :-)) Nina. #101749 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fives (315, 1, 2) and commentary, part 2. nilovg Hi Herman, Op 29-okt-2009, om 1:10 heeft Herman het volgende geschreven: > I didn't understand something in the above. In saying that we > believe a > person exists, are you talking about a first person perspective ie > that I > believe I am a person, or a third person perspective ie I believe > my mother > is a person? ------- N: So long as we are not sotaapanna we cling to the idea of person. ------- > > H: The reason I ask is that a third person, such as my mother, is > only ever > rupa for me, I know nothing of her namas, so to speak. So I never > take nama > and rupa together in her case, but still believe there to be a person. ------ N: Still, the way leading to have less clinging to person is being aware and understand nama as nama and rupa as rupa, and this is only the first stage of insight. Nina. #101750 From: "Lukas" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 3:42 pm Subject: Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. szmicio Dear Howard, > L: As I said, for sure it's a good fun. But In my opinion it's just > another mind-door-process thinking. > ------------------------------------------------- > There is thinking involved, to be sure, because, for the most part, > only mind door is open, but there is also a degree of clear comprehension of > what is occurring, which is somewhat better even than what goes on most of > the time while awake! ;-) In lucid dreaming, one is dreaming but is not > *lost* in dreaming. One *knows* that what is observed is mere mental > concoction. At ordinary times even while awake, we typically are not actually aware > of the distinction between reality and illusion, even to quite a gross > degree. Knowing what's what is always useful. > --------------------------------------------------- L: What's what? What's the object of this clear comprehansion? The preparation to Lucid Dream, this trying to not be "forgetful" is not the same as right understanding and right awarness. I understand what you mean, but no one can acquire right awarness from trying to be in "present moment". The right understanding is to not try to be in "present moment". This is not the characteristic of right awarness. Also listening is not right awarness. When you try all those Lucid Dream methods or try to "be at present". It's ditthi. It does not help to right understanding. But the right understanding, to hear more on citta cetasika and ruupa, can help right understanding to develop more and more and with that there is samma sati. I am saying this because if you try this and that without right understanding, that never condition right sati. best wishes Lukas #101751 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. upasaka_howard Hi, Lukas - In a message dated 10/29/2009 11:42:46 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, szmicio@... writes: Dear Howard, > L: As I said, for sure it's a good fun. But In my opinion it's just > another mind-door-process thinking. > ------------------------------------------------- > There is thinking involved, to be sure, because, for the most part, > only mind door is open, but there is also a degree of clear comprehension of > what is occurring, which is somewhat better even than what goes on most of > the time while awake! ;-) In lucid dreaming, one is dreaming but is not > *lost* in dreaming. One *knows* that what is observed is mere mental > concoction. At ordinary times even while awake, we typically are not actually aware > of the distinction between reality and illusion, even to quite a gross > degree. Knowing what's what is always useful. > --------------------------------------------------- L: What's what? What's the object of this clear comprehansion? ---------------------------------------------------- I already said it. One is aware that what is perceived is mental concoction, illusion. One is not taken in. (Everything is a matter of degree, of course.) ----------------------------------------------------- The preparation to Lucid Dream, this trying to not be "forgetful" is not the same as right understanding and right awarness. I understand what you mean, but no one can acquire right awarness from trying to be in "present moment". The right understanding is to not try to be in "present moment". This is not the characteristic of right awarness. Also listening is not right awarness. -------------------------------------------------------- I honestly don't understand your point here. Preparation/cultivation that conditions lucidity while dreaming or waking is useful. Sometimes lucidity can occur without recent preparation, but more often recent preparation is needed. ---------------------------------------------------------- When you try all those Lucid Dream methods or try to "be at present". It's ditthi. It does not help to right understanding. But the right understanding, to hear more on citta cetasika and ruupa, can help right understanding to develop more and more and with that there is samma sati. I am saying this because if you try this and that without right understanding, that never condition right sati. ---------------------------------------------------------- I find what you are saying here to be too general for me to grasp any useful content. Could be my fault, of course. ============================== With metta, Howard ============================= With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #101752 From: "Lukas" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 5:27 pm Subject: Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. szmicio Hi Howard, > L: What's what? What's the object of this clear comprehansion? > ---------------------------------------------------- > I already said it. One is aware that what is perceived is mental > concoction, illusion. One is not taken in. (Everything is a matter of degree, of > course.) > ----------------------------------------------------- L: Why it's not taken in? The problem with "being at present moment" is like it's very tricky. You can think, I am "aware" and in reality it's just another dream. Arising in mind-door-process of course. > > The preparation to Lucid Dream, this trying to not be "forgetful" is not > the same as right understanding and right awarness. I understand what you > mean, but no one can acquire right awarness from trying to be in "present > moment". The right understanding is to not try to be in "present moment". This > is not the characteristic of right awarness. > Also listening is not right awarness. > -------------------------------------------------------- > I honestly don't understand your point here. Preparation/cultivation > that conditions lucidity while dreaming or waking is useful. Sometimes > lucidity can occur without recent preparation, but more often recent preparation > is needed. > ---------------------------------------------------------- L: Ok but what you call lucidity is just another thinking ;> lucidity of what?? of ruupa? of mental dhamma, of citta thinking of pannati? This is the only awarness. So when you realise in a dream that there is citta dreaming, for sure, awarness ;> But all this lucidity of you dreaming, of a dream, does not help at all. is just another dream. Best wishes Lukas #101753 From: "freawaru80" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 7:35 pm Subject: Re: A not so short Hello freawaru80 Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > L: Only pa~n~na dhatu is the "knower". No one can understand. Only pa~n~na can understand. You can also see Milindapanha, that is speaking on pa~n~na. It has nothing to do with Self. Pa~n~na is the element who "knows" its object. It's like light that emanates in each direction. Exactly. A program, pattern ... something like that. It can run or not. One can be absorbed into it or not. But it is useful to have it running and cool to be absorbed into it. ;-) Freawaru #101754 From: "Lukas" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 8:08 pm Subject: Re: A not so short Hello szmicio Dear Freawaru, > > L: Only pa~n~na dhatu is the "knower". No one can understand. Only pa~n~na can understand. You can also see Milindapanha, that is speaking on pa~n~na. It has nothing to do with Self. Pa~n~na is the element who "knows" its object. It's like light that emanates in each direction. > > Exactly. A program, pattern ... something like that. It can run or not. One can be absorbed into it or not. But it is useful to have it running and cool to be absorbed into it. ;-) L: Yes. I like very much venerable Nagasena, distinction on pa~n~na. It is like a light. It's characteritic is to distinguish, to know and also to sever kilesas. Whatever it "touches" is purified. I like to hear on object of pa~n~na. It can only understand it's object. I think there can be processes of thinking accompanied by pa~n~na. Different concepts after hearing Dhamma, can condition different cittas. One of them is the wise thinking. It's paryiatti we usualy refer to. Best wishes Lukas #101755 From: "freawaru80" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 8:23 pm Subject: Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. freawaru80 Hello Lukas and Howard, it seems to me that you are both right, lol. Just talking about slightly different things. As far as I can discern it, the lucidity during lucid dreaming is not identical to the lucid awareness of sati-sampajanna - but it is similar enough to serve as an analogy. Scripture usually uses this similarity, too, and the term "light" or lucid is often used by teachers as well. We find the same in Tibetan Buddhism, that has some extended lore on lucid dreaming and how to use it as a means for Liberation: the so-called Clear Light is described as "lucid" awareness, in analogy to lucid dreaming. Samatha (zhine), too, is described as "lucid". I think there are several reasons why lucidity in dream can serve as an analogy. First, lucidity in dream and sati-sampajanna both appear as an addition to the state that is happening, in the case of dream-lucidity the dreaming goes on as before (except if we choose to take control of course) and in the case of sati-sampajanna our mind state is not altered either (except if we choose to control): when it appears during work, work is going on, when it appears during a depression the depression is not changed, when it appears during having fun, that is not changed either. Second, in both cases, dream lucidity and sati-sampajanna, we find we get an additional information about the state our mind is presently in. While it happens. After dream we are usually able to know it HAD BEEN dream, we can discern, but only in a lucid dream we know it at the present, NOW, we know NOW we dream. Again, this is similar to the workings of sati-sampajanna: we know what we think or feel or experience WHILE it happens, NOW. Not just afterwards we know "I was angry", when sati-sampajanna is active we know "there is anger in my mind" while it is there, NOW. We know "this reaction and behaviour is stupid and not what I want, it just arises because the emotion is influencing the system" and this is the reason why there is control, NOW, not just after calming down again. And finally, just as during a lucid dream one can investigate every dream content, to see where it comes from, to see where it leads, to see how useful or not, how real (or not) it feels, when the lucidity of sati-sampajanna is there we can investigate how our mind works, what leads to what, how does a dhamma arise, how does it fall away, what does it cause: in short, insight meditation, discernment. But it seems that more people know lucid dream than sati-sampajanna so I think to describe sati-sampajanna and it's benefits it is a good idea to compare it to lucidity during dream. Freawaru #101756 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:36 pm Subject: The 18 Principal Insights! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Understanding comes by the 18 principal insights: 1: Reflection on impermanence leaves the illusion of permanence, 2: Reflection on pain renounces the misapprehension of pleasure, 3: Reflection on no-self evaporates the imagination of a my-self, 4: Reflection on dispassion & disillusion abandons naive delighting, 5: Reflection on disgust eradicates voracious insatiable greed, 6: Reflection on ceasing desists from blind initiating origination, 7: Reflection on relinquishment releases the lock of grasped clinging, 8: Reflection on fragility leaves the misconception of compact solidity, 9: Reflection on the breakup of all constructions shuts down accumulation, 10: Reflection on change corrects the deception of any lasting constancy, 11: Reflection on the signless eliminates the captivating appearance of a sign, 12: Reflection on the desireless diminishes the feverish urge within all craving, 13: Reflection on voidness erases the insistence on the self-deception: 'I am...', 14: Reflection on higher understanding uproots clinging to the fix idea of a core, 15: Reflection on direct knowledge & vision removes confused misinterpretation, 16: Reflection on danger extirpates false assumption of reliance on the unsafe, 17: Reflection on thorough contemplation shelves neglect of non-contemplation, 18: Reflection on turning away exterminates mistaken insistence on bondage... Source: The Path of Purification: Visuddhimagga. An excellent if not legendary translation by Bhikkhu Nanamoli. Written by 'the Great Explainer' Buddhaghosa in 5th century AC: http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=771100 <...> Have a nice reflecting day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri <...> #101757 From: Herman Date: Thu Oct 29, 2009 11:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta egberdina Hi Jon, 2009/10/29 jonoabb > Hi Herman > > Welcome back. Good to be talking to you again ;-)) > Thank you, Jon. It is good to be talking to you as well. > > (101667) > > Howard has already answered, and in the way I would have. > > > > I would just like to add that consciousness of any kind (seeing, hearing) > > has no characteristic other than it's object, so to talk about the > > consciousness of the object is superfluous, talking about the object > > suffices. > > =============== > > OK, understood. Is this something you get from the texts (and, if so, > which texts), or is it a self-evident matter for you? > > It is a natural extension of the well known statement from the Vis that 'mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; the deed is, but no doer of the deed is there.' > =============== > > In English, that translates into "consciousness of blue" and "blue" > meaning > > exactly the same thing. > =============== > > This is not the sense I get from my reading of the suttas and other texts. > To my understanding, there is consciousness and there is the object of > consciousness. > > What is the characteristic of consciousness, other than the object? > =============== > > The danger in the more wordy formulation is that some (at dsg, for > example > > :-)) proceed to then take consciousness to be something separate, > > independent, with it's own characteristic. But in so doing they have > > introduced something that isn't there. Subject/object dualism (as in > "seeing > > consciousness sees blue") is a feature of language, not a feature of > reality > > :-) > =============== > > I'm afraid I have no idea what "subject/object dualism" means, and why it > should not be a feature of reality. Care to elaborate? Thanks. > Subject/object dualism is the belief that objects happen to subjects, or that subjects do things to objects. But just like it says in the Vis, 'mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; the deed is, but no doer of the deed is there.' There is not a subject to which the object is happening. Blue doesn't happen to consciousness, there is just blue. No consciousness is found. I hope that is clearer, and if not, I'm happy to continue discussing. Cheers Herman #101758 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:03 am Subject: Third kind of nibbana element and cessation ptaus1 Hi all, 1. Usually it's said there are two kinds of nibbana element (from post #8487): "In 'As it was said' ('ltivuttaka', Ch. II, par. 7, 'Khuddaka Nikaya') two 'conditions of nibbana' (dhatu, which literally means element) are explained. Sa-upadi-sesa nibbana is nibbana with the five khandhas still remaining. For the arahat who has not finally passed away yet, there are still citta, cetasika and rupa arising and falling away, although he has eradicated all defilements. An-upadi-sesa nibbana is nibbana without the khandhas remaining. For the arahat who has finally passed away, there are no longer citta, cetasika and rupa arising and falling away." However, there's this interesting passage from Nyanatiloka's dictionary entry on Gotama http://palikanon.com/english/pali_names/g/gotama.htm: "It is said (E.g., DA.iii.899) that just before the Buddha's Sāsana disappears completely from the world, all the relics will gather together at the Mahācetiya, and travelling from there to Nāgadīpa and the Ratanacetiya, assemble at the Mahābodhi, together with the relics from other parts. There they will reform the Buddha's golden hued body, emitting the six-coloured aura. The body will then catch fire and completely disappear, amid the lamentations of the ten thousand world-systems." How is this passage explained in terms of abhidhamma, as it seems to imply that not all khandas cease for a Buddha while his sasana lasts? 2. Regarding cessation (nirodha samapatti), there are two contradicting things said in UP: (a) This is from Htoo (post #38159): "Even though there is a single nibbana as its nature, nibbana is talked to have two different forms, saupadisesa nibbana and anupadisesa nibbana. Saupadisesa nibbana is nibbana when sattas are still in the samsara are when they are alive. This nibbana is only present in arahats or anagams while they are in nirodha samapatti. Nirodha means disappearance and samapatti means to be in a state of. Anupadisesa nibbana is the state immediately after cuti citta of arahats." (b) This is from Swee Boon (post #18398): "It should be noted that the cessation of perception and feeling is not nibbana and it does not experience anything, not even nibbana. For nibbana can only be experienced by means of cittas; in the cessation of perception and feeling, even cittas (consciousness) is stopped, though temporarily." So, is there nibbana during cessation or not? Thanks. Best wishes pt #101759 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:44 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. ptaus1 Hi Howard, Lukas, Freawaru, > > I disagree with you, Lukas, when you say that lucid dreaming is > "just" > > another instance of thinking. It certainly does differ from usual > > dreaming. What characterizes lucid dreaming is being clearly aware that > dreaming is > > underway. > ... > There is thinking involved, to be sure, because, for the most part, > only mind door is open, but there is also a degree of clear comprehension of > what is occurring, which is somewhat better even than what goes on most of > the time while awake! ;-) In lucid dreaming, one is dreaming but is not > *lost* in dreaming. One *knows* that what is observed is mere mental > concoction. At ordinary times even while awake, we typically are not actually aware > of the distinction between reality and illusion, even to quite a gross > degree. Knowing what's what is always useful. pt: I was wondering how to define such experiences of being "aware" (like during lucid dreaming or while awake) in terms of abhidhamma. My take on it is that at such moments: 1. there might be sati, but not necessarily panna - i.e. it might be a kusala citta, but it has only two kusala roots of adosa and alobha, but not amoha (panna) which would understand the presently arisen dhammas as anatta. 2. there might be sati, and there might be basic panna, which understands whether the present state is kusala or not, and some basic understanding of anatta, but it is still not of the vipassana level that liberates. 3. (and this one happens the most often I think) After a flash of the above, there comes thinking roted in lobha - "I'm aware", "this is just knowing", etc. Even if it's without words, there's usually some sort of identification with this "aware" state (which is essentially a combination of impersonal dhammas) and so conceiving an "I" in that state, which would also mean that ditthi is present, etc. Anyway, this is just my take on it from my experiences. Best wishes pt #101760 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:59 am Subject: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. ptaus1 Hi Howard and Nina, > N: : Visible object is just visible object or colour. When you go > with the dog in the wood, you and the dog are seeing what is visible, > no difference. Just colours all around. When we consider just > seeing, the experience of what is visible, seeing is the same for > everybody. It is an impersonal element that sees. It does not belong > to 'my unique personality'. > I am glad you brought up this question. It helps me to consider more > what seeing is, what visible object is. Seeing is only one moment of > vipaakacitta that is extremely short. Quite different from defining > the object that is seen. Here differences in accumulations appear. > ------------------------------------------------ > And these differences result in our not seeing exactly the same > things, though, of course they are the same *sort* of things. Somehow you are not > getting my point, Nina. > ------------------------------------------------- pt: I was wondering about this. While it can be said that seeing is the same kind of a process for the dog and man (at least according to abhidhamma), I'm wondering if it can be said that they see the same thing. Afaik, dogs are color-blind, so if both me and my dog are looking at the same green apple, the kalapas of the apple which come into contact with my eye and the dog's eye will be the same or different? I mean, the apple kalapa that comes into contact with my eye would have rupa color green, but the dog's kalapa will have some shade of grey instead. Or is it that the rupa color in apple kalapa is the same for both, but due to different eye kalapas between the dog and me, there comes a difference in colors? Best wishes pt #101761 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 2:44 am Subject: Re: Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! rjkjp1 Dear Suan thanks for this. The 4th sampajanna - which is always stressed in satipatthana - is that of non-delusion (you translate as disilluisive comprehension). This 4th type is all about the understanding the anattaness/uncontrollability of the elements. Study what Khun Sujin talks and writings and you will see this understanding of anatta- both at the theretical and direct levels is stressed. It doesn't help to see anatta if one has the idea that sati can be directed here and there, after all as we know from theory all elements arise and passes away instantly- they cant be made to go anywhere. So when one focuses on say elements of the body this is merely sanna and ekaggata cetasika, which arise with all cittas. Sati (of satipatthana) on the otherhand is not so common, it has to arise with sampajanna related to anatta. That is why the emphasis should be on anatta. I showed Khun sujin the citations you found about the decline and she asked if you could also supply the actual pali sections - as they seem not to have some of the texts. Robert --- #101762 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:41 am Subject: Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. szmicio Dear pt, Howard, Freawaru, > 1. there might be sati, but not necessarily panna - i.e. it might be a kusala citta, but it has only two kusala roots of adosa and alobha, but not amoha (panna) which would understand the presently arisen dhammas as anatta. L: samma-sati and sati. > 2. there might be sati, and there might be basic panna, which understands whether the present state is kusala or not, and some basic understanding of anatta, but it is still not of the vipassana level that liberates. L: Possible! all cittas are possible during LD.(Lucid Dream). But mostly cittas with somanassa arises. There are mostly citta with somanassa vedana. LD is very pleasant. And I think we can take this feelings for awarness, or kusala. But of course there can be kusala. Why not. But even when you brush your teeths there can be kusala ;> > 3. (and this one happens the most often I think) After a flash of the above, there comes thinking roted in lobha - "I'm aware", "this is just knowing", etc. Even if it's without words, there's usually some sort of identification with this "aware" state (which is essentially a combination of impersonal dhammas) and so conceiving an "I" in that state, which would also mean that ditthi is present, etc. L: For sure there is ditthi. How can one have right sati without right understanding first? It's really impossible. The point is to "put constantly your attention in daily life to become more comprehending and not forgetful.". This is what people involved in LD try to to. And I can say madness. Never, never it can condition right sati. Impossible. Right sati needs right understanding to arise. It has nothing to do with "putting" "awarnees" somewhere. That's the point. And LD is very good example of miccha-sati, not samma-sati. But pt, you're right there can be sati that accompanies kusala citta. There can be also kusala cittas with samma-sati. Why not? But those "tryings" are not the Path. They make sati not to arise. And we dont know that. Best wishes Lukas #101763 From: "sprlrt" Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:51 am Subject: Re: Two truths sprlrt Hi Sarah, Patimokkha sla sets out rules for restraining the last two doors of kamma, speech and body. But complying to the precepts (refraining from lieing, stealing and killing intentionally, from sexual misconduct etc.) can be accomplished by both kusala and akusala cittas, the first door through which kusala or akusala kamma is carried out, according to conditions. On the other end not complying to the precepts can be accomplished only with akusala cittas, according to conditions, I think. Alberto #101764 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 8:01 am Subject: Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. szmicio Dear pt, Howard, Freawaru and friends, Just couple of words. Look what we are discussing now. Lucid Dream, that is the kind of thinking arising in mind door process. > > 2. there might be sati, and there might be basic panna, which understands whether the present state is kusala or not, and some basic understanding of anatta, but it is still not of the vipassana level that liberates. > > L: Possible! all cittas are possible during LD.(Lucid Dream). L: I said: All cittas possible. But who knows. Maybe not all. The sense-door-processes usually not arises in LD. So it's another reduction. Only Buddha knew what kind of cittas arises in some different circumstances or beings. He made his very subtle differenctiation. He said bhumi. kamavacara, ruupavacara, arupavacara, lokuttara. Remember always that those different planes classifications is not about beings, gods somewhere, it's always about right understanding. This is the point of classification. They were made, but we dont need to know them. Only Buddha can. But they can help us understand. No one knows when. People can realize 4 Noble Truths and become Arahat, and still they can dont know all this planes classification cittas. There is no need to. Like Nina said we are now, at kamavacara bhumi. Some people can experience ~nana and still said that there is no different planes. That's OK. The bhumi classification is the domain of Buddha. Best wishes Lukas #101765 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:46 am Subject: [dsg] The Buddha's Path, Ch 3, no 6. nilovg Dear friends, At one moment life is seeing, at another moment life is hearing and at another moment again life is thinking. Each moment of our life arises because of its own conditions, exists for an extremely short time and then falls away. Seeing arises dependant on eye-sense, on colour and on other factors. It exists just for a moment and then it is gone. Seeing arises and falls away very rapidly, but then there are other moments of seeing again and this causes us to erroneously believe that seeing lasts. The seeing of this moment, however, is different from seeing which is just past. Colour which appears at this moment is different from colour which is just past. How could there be a self who exerts control over seeing or any other reality? Realities such as kindness and anger arise because of their own conditions, there is no self who could exert control over them. We would like to speak kindly, but when there are conditions for anger, it arises. We may tell ourselves to keep silent, but, before we realize it, angry words have been spoken already. There was anger in the past and this has been accumulated. That is why it can arise at any time. Anger does not belong to a person, but it is a reality. We are used to identifying ourselves with realities such as anger, generosity, seeing or thinking, but it can be learnt that they are mental phenomena, arising because of their own conditions. We are used to identifying ourselves with our body, but the body consists of changing physical phenomena, arising because of their own conditions. Bodily phenomena are beyond control; ageing, sickness and death cannot be prevented. Realities come and go very rapidly, they can be compared with a flash of lightning. One cannot exercise any power over a flash of lightning, it is gone as soon as it has been noticed. Evenso, one cannot exert control over the mental and physical phenomena of ones life. ****** Nina. #101766 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Boycott by the monks sarahprocter... Hi Dieter, #101258 I meant to thank you for your further helpful comments. --- On Mon, 12/10/09, Dieter Moeller wrote: >D: seeming similarities catch my interest ....besides providing an opportunity to say Hello .. thanks I am fine and hope you are likewise ;-) ... S: Yes, doing well, thanks ;-) I got behind (again!) whilst visiting Bangkok and then having my brother to stay, but should have fewer excuses now:-). Hope other threads catch your interest too... Perhaps the one between Suan & RobK! ... >The offering of food to one or more monks may be well understood as a communion with the Triple Gem ( as gratitude for sharing the Buddha Dhamma) hence turning the bowl upside down and so rejecting 'Sambhoga ' seems to be quite similar , even when thinking about food (vs Last Supper), isn't it? ... S: I see your point and it makes sense. .... >Hence , although there a major differences too limiting the comparison , I am not really agreeing with T.B.'s conclusion ' There is no direct equivalent to excommunication in Buddhism'. ... S: It's all a bit beyond me, actually... ... >B.T.W. lay people cannot eat (the offered food) together with the monks (but will wait until they finished ..) ... S: Yes, I think this is why the "sense" was not conveyed by Horner's translation, even though she might have added a foot-note. It could be misleading... ... >>S: As I recall you either ordained or had close association with the bhikkhus in Thailand before. Were there any examples? >D: I can't remember .. but unlike cases of disrobments , the public hardly wouldn't note it due to its local interest. >Another story was the action of Burmese monks by turning the bowl upside down for the military during the demonstrations some time ago. ... S: I tend to think that the turning upside down of the bowl to certain individuals for a specific purpose through the procedures mentioned in the Vinaya text is likely to be rather different to turning the bowl upside down to the entire military and the involvement in demonstrations and politics. However, it's a very sensitive topic. Thanks again for joining in the discussion, Dieter. Metta Sarah ======== #101767 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Discussions with K.Sujin in Bangkok sarahprocter... Dear pt, --- On Thu, 29/10/09, ptaus1 wrote: >Thanks for the notes from Bangkok. I'd like to ask some questions, so I'll split this in two parts so that it's not too long: ... S: Thank you very much for your interest. You pick up all the subtle points very quickly. ... >> 6. Studying and following the Dhamma for oneself (attaaadhipateyya) , for the sake of the world (lokaadhipateyya) or for the sake of Dhamma (dhammaadhipateyya) ? See #96730 (Nina). Developing for the sake of Dhamma is right dhamma, just to understand about realities. Very deep:-). >pt: Developing for the sake of Dhamma - is it possible before stream-entry? If so, how can it be distinguished from greed for knowledge and understanding how things work? .... S: I think it begins with the development of understanding of namas and rupas as anatta. In the beginning, we may be interested in understanding the Dhamma to become a better person, to find peace for oneself or in order to help others or the world at large. The more we appreciate that there is no 'onself', 'no others', 'no world', but only fleeting namas and rupas, the more understanding develops just for the sake of understanding such namas and rupas. I think a large burden is lifted when the true purpose of understanding becomes clearer, because it then becomes apparent (through such understanding of realities) that this is very different from the greed you mention, which actually is greed for oneself. Of course, there are bound to be lots of "cheating dhammas" along the way - we take for wisdom, what is ignorance, we take for detachment, what is indifference, we take for calm, what is attachment and so on. Pls ask anything else on this. ... >> 2. On akasa rupa (space) - 2 kinds. Both have the same characteristic, both are akasa dhatu. last visit there was some confusion over KS's comment: "Think about it, there's nothing, completely nothing at all and then there arise the rupas, the 4 elementary rupas and the rest, see? But before that, nothing and that is real and it's akasa." By nothing, it means, no kalapas, no conditioned rupas arise. Akasa, nothing, the unconditioned akasa. Nothing - no 'things', no kalapas. Unconditioned aksasa whenever there is nothing. ... >> Simply, 2 realities. Where nothing, it's the second kind of akasa. Again, both have the same characteristic. >pt: So then, this second meaning of akasa where there's nothing (unconditioned one) is pretty much the same as a common designation of space - three-dimensional empty space (so, space with no things/kalapas in it)? .... S: Akasa rupa is a reality, what you describe is a concept. However, without the reality, we wouldn't have such a concept. ... >> 8. Kaya and vaci-vinnatti -bodily and speech intimations, not just when conveying a meaning to others. Like now, if we use bodily movements intending a purpose, such as walking with a straight back or combing our hair in a particular style, there's kaya-vinnatti. (Thx, Rob for raising it!) >pt: What does "intending a purpose" mean exactly? ... S: Sounds like any oxymoron doesn't it? lol! How about "if we use bodily movements purposely...."? .... >Here are a few examples in gradation, I'm wondering at which point there's no more intending a purpose: 1 signaling to someone with hands 2 hand gestures while rehearsing a speech in front of a mirror 3 learning to play a song on a piano 4 Scratching an itch (intentional movement) 5 Scratching an itch while talking to someone 6 Scratching an itch while sleeping All 6 seem to me like they have an intentional purpose, though 5 and 6 might be commonly called "unintentional" or "unconscious" movements. I'm not sure whether "intending a purpose" (and thus, kaya-vinnatti) applies in 5 and 6 or not? Thanks. ... S: Possibly not. Yes, 1-4, but I'm not sure we can be entirely specific when using such situational examples. Rob gave a good example with his swimming - sometimes one might be really focussing on one's style (with kaya-vinnatti), whilst other times one just does the laps without thinking about one's style at all. Of course, different moments, different cittas... Metta Sarah ========== #101768 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Discussions with K.Sujin in Bangkok sarahprocter... Dear pt, --- On Thu, 29/10/09, ptaus1 wrote: >(Part 2) >> 4. Sabhava and asabhava dhammas that are known. Sabhava dhammas have to be known before asabhava dhammas. At the third stage of insight, asabhava dhammas,such as the akasa can be known, all depending on accumulations. So, is the 3rd stage of insight advanced or not? >pt: Third stage of insight would be "knowledge of dissolution" , bhanganana, right? ... S: It's good you asked because there are different classifications. You are counting from the balava (powerful) stages of insight, beginning with samasana ~naa.na (comprehension of groups). In this classification, bhanga ~naa.na is the third stage as you point out. We were counting from the first taru.na (tender) stage of insight, that of naama-ruupa pariccheda-~naa.na (knowledge of difference between nama and rupa). In this classification samasana ~naa.na is the third stage of insight and the one being referred to. So my point was that even this stage of insight, the first balava vipassana ~naa.na, is very advanced. The rapid succession of namas and rupas as they arise and fall away is known directly. If namas and rupas have not been clearly understood directly and distinctly, such advanced panna can never arise. .... >> 6. Passadhi (calm) and (kusala)ekaggata, pt #97045. Passadhi conditions ekaggata to be stronger and stronger. Concentration appears with calm. Samatha is passadhi, kusala calm. When calm is strong, concentration is clear. Sometimes when samadhi is mentioned, actually it is samatha which is being referred to. >pt: >Is there a particular principle to determine when one is meant and not the other? .... S: I think it depends on the context. If the context is that of samatha bhavana, even when samadhi is referred to, the samatha (calm, passadhi cetasika) is already implied. As is often pointed out, there is concentration with each citta. As the note suggests, it is the passadhi which conditions the concentration to become stronger, not the other way round. ... >> When the object is clearly comprehended (by developed panna), only then does concentration appear clearly. >pt: What does this mean exactly? That the object is understood as a concept? Or maybe a paramattha dhamma? ... S: (Very cryptic notes, I note - I really appreciate the chance to elaborate and consider further.) What I meant in the note was that the characteristic of concentration that appears now is akusala concentration only, such as when we focus on the keyboard or concentrate on our exercise. KS often stresses that the characteristic of kusala concentration only appears (becomes known), when panna has really developed in either samatha or vipassana bhavana. The object may be a concept or a reality, but it has to be clearly known in a wholesome way, with calm and detachment. In the development of insight, this is when samatha and vipassana become 'yoked' at moments of insight and the kusala concentration is apparent. (This relates somewhat to our other discussion - we think we're developing wholesome concentration, but are we? A sensitive topic...) ... >> When samatha is highly developed, samadhi is a dominant cetasika with the object clearly 'focussed on'. >pt: I guess you mean that passadhi is a dominant cetasika, not samadhi. The object being clearly "focused on" means that there is a clear understanding of the object as a concept? Or something different? Thanks. ... S: Here, I mean that passadhi is highly developed and at such times kusala ekaggata (samadhi) then becomes dominant in focussing on the object. Yes, there is clear understanding of the object in a wholesome way. If the object were, say, the Buddha's virtues, I think it would just be those qualities as object. No thought or concern about whether they were concepts or realities. We considered the example of metta whereby through the development of metta towards beings when there are opportunities (concepts as object), the quality of metta itself (the reality of metta) can be known and developed more and more. This may just be by way of samatha without any understanding of metta as a conditioned dhamma, not atta. Great and deep questions as usual, pt. I'll look forward to hearing any furthher comments from you or anyone else. Metta Sarah p.s have you listened to any of the edited recordings we've uploaded to www.dhammastudygroup.org (not to be confused with DSG here)? If not, I think you'd really appreciate them. ====== #101769 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: (dsg) charactoristic of citta sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- On Wed, 28/10/09, Herman wrote: > > > >H: There are no citta... > > > ... > > >> S: So what is there? > > .. > > >H: There is dependent origination. > > ... > > S: What is dependent origination if there are no cittas? ... > H:>Not a valid question, I'm afraid :-) > > >It is this entire mass of suffering that arises and ceases dependently (on conditions). > ... > S: What is "this entire mass of suffering... " if not cittas, cetasikas and rupas? > What is D.O. if not cittas, cetasikas and rupas? .... H:> Just as a clarification, are you suggesting or implying that there are such things as an individual citta, an individual cetasika, an individual rupa? Or do you mean them only as categories of analysis, ways of thinking about things? ... S: At this moment is there seeing? Or hearing? Or thinking, regardless of any analysis of thinking about them? Is there attachment or annoyance or pleasant feeling, regardless of any analysis? Is there ignorance? This is the first link of D.O. It's not a category or analysis, it's the reality which may be arising now. If there's not-knowing about seeing or hearing or thinking or attachment, there's ignorance for sure. Metta Sarah ======== #101770 From: han tun Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 12:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! hantun1 Dear Suan, I thank you very much for including my name in the addressee of your message. I really appreciate your elaborate explanation of the Four Comprehensions. Up until now, my understanding of the Four Comprehensions is based on The Way of Mindfulness: The Satipatthana Sutta and Its Commentary by Ven Soma Thera The following are some excerpts from that book. ---------------------------- (1) Among these four kinds of clear comprehension, the clear comprehension of purpose [satthaka sampaja~n~na], is the comprehension of (a worthy) purpose after considering what is worthy and not worthy, with the thought, "Is there any use to one by this going or is there not?" One does this not having gone immediately, just by the influence of the thought, at the very moment the thought of going forwards is born. (2) Clear comprehension of suitability [sappaya sampaja~n~na], is the comprehension of the suitable after considering what is suitable and not. For instance, the visiting of a relic shrine could be quite (worthily) purposeful. But when a great offering is made to a relic shrine, a multitude of people in a ten or twelve yojana area gather, and men and women according to their position go about adorned like painted figures. And if in that crowd greed could arise for the bhikkhu in an attractive object, resentment in a non-attractive one, and delusion through prejudice; if he could commit the offence of sexual intercourse; or if harm could come to the holy life of purity; then, a place like that relic shrine would not be suitable. When there could be no such harm it would be suitable. (3) Resort [gocara sampaja~n~na] Literally, pasturing ground. This word is applied to the wandering for alms of a bhikkhu and to the subject of meditation in the sense of the locus (sphere, range or scope) of contemplative action. For making manifest this clear comprehension of resort the following set of four should be understood: In the Dispensation of the Buddha a certain bhikkhu on the journey out for alms takes along with him in the mind the subject of meditation, but on the journey back from the work of alms-gathering he does not bring it along with him, having become unmindful of it. Another does not take it along with him on the outward journey, but returns from the alms-tour with the subject of meditation in his mind. Still another neither takes it along with him on the outward journey nor returns with it on the journey home. And, lastly, there is the fourth kind of bhikkhu who both takes the subject of meditation along with him on the journey out for alms and brings it back with him on the journey home. (4) Further, non-confusion in going forwards and so forth is the clear comprehension of non-delusion [asammoha sampaja~n~na]. That should be understood in the following way: In this Dispensation, a monk, without confusing himself, like a blinded worldling who, while going forwards or backwards, becomes muddle-headed, and believes thus: "The soul (or self) goes forward" or "The act of going forwards is produced by the soul," or "I go forwards" or "The act of going forwards is produced by me," and the like, thinks: "When there is the arising in one of the thought 'I am going forwards,' just with that thought, appears the process of oscillation originating from mind which brings to birth bodily expression (or intimation). Thus by the way of the diffusion of the process of oscillation due to mental activity, this skeleton called the body goes forward." ------------------------------ Han: I will include your message for my study of the Four Comprehensions. Thank you very much once again. with metta and respect, Han #101771 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 8:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. upasaka_howard Hi, pt (and Lukas & Freawaru) - In a message dated 10/29/2009 9:47:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ptaus1@... writes: Hi Howard, Lukas, Freawaru, > > I disagree with you, Lukas, when you say that lucid dreaming is > "just" > > another instance of thinking. It certainly does differ from usual > > dreaming. What characterizes lucid dreaming is being clearly aware that > dreaming is > > underway. > ... > There is thinking involved, to be sure, because, for the most part, > only mind door is open, but there is also a degree of clear comprehension of > what is occurring, which is somewhat better even than what goes on most of > the time while awake! ;-) In lucid dreaming, one is dreaming but is not > *lost* in dreaming. One *knows* that what is observed is mere mental > concoction. At ordinary times even while awake, we typically are not actually aware > of the distinction between reality and illusion, even to quite a gross > degree. Knowing what's what is always useful. pt: I was wondering how to define such experiences of being "aware" (like during lucid dreaming or while awake) in terms of abhidhamma. My take on it is that at such moments: 1. there might be sati, but not necessarily panna - i.e. it might be a kusala citta, but it has only two kusala roots of adosa and alobha, but not amoha (panna) which would understand the presently arisen dhammas as anatta. 2. there might be sati, and there might be basic panna, which understands whether the present state is kusala or not, and some basic understanding of anatta, but it is still not of the vipassana level that liberates. 3. (and this one happens the most often I think) After a flash of the above, there comes thinking roted in lobha - "I'm aware", "this is just knowing", etc. Even if it's without words, there's usually some sort of identification with this "aware" state (which is essentially a combination of impersonal dhammas) and so conceiving an "I" in that state, which would also mean that ditthi is present, etc. Anyway, this is just my take on it from my experiences. ------------------------------------------------- I'll have to leave Abhidhammic discussions to those who know what they are talking about. When it comes to Abhidhamma, I do not. :-) ------------------------------------------------ Best wishes pt ================================ With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #101772 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 8:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. upasaka_howard Hi, pt (and Nina) - In a message dated 10/29/2009 9:59:51 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ptaus1@... writes: Hi Howard and Nina, > N: : Visible object is just visible object or colour. When you go > with the dog in the wood, you and the dog are seeing what is visible, > no difference. Just colours all around. When we consider just > seeing, the experience of what is visible, seeing is the same for > everybody. It is an impersonal element that sees. It does not belong > to 'my unique personality'. > I am glad you brought up this question. It helps me to consider more > what seeing is, what visible object is. Seeing is only one moment of > vipaakacitta that is extremely short. Quite different from defining > the object that is seen. Here differences in accumulations appear. > ------------------------------------------------ > And these differences result in our not seeing exactly the same > things, though, of course they are the same *sort* of things. Somehow you are not > getting my point, Nina. > ------------------------------------------------- pt: I was wondering about this. While it can be said that seeing is the same kind of a process for the dog and man (at least according to abhidhamma), I'm wondering if it can be said that they see the same thing. Afaik, dogs are color-blind, so if both me and my dog are looking at the same green apple, the kalapas of the apple which come into contact with my eye and the dog's eye will be the same or different? I mean, the apple kalapa that comes into contact with my eye would have rupa color green, but the dog's kalapa will have some shade of grey instead. Or is it that the rupa color in apple kalapa is the same for both, but due to different eye kalapas between the dog and me, there comes a difference in colors? Best wishes pt ============================== From my perspective, the rupas that are seen are the rupas that are SEEN. No two beings ever see the literally same eye-door rupas. What is seen is whatever is the content of eye-door consciousness. With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #101773 From: Ken O Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 2:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. ashkenn2k Dear Howard the reality of seeing and the process is the same, just like it mention in the suttas. However, the ability to see clearly, colour recognition etc we see is due to kamma. Just like one of my friends is colour blind or when we are old the faculty of seeing has dimished, visible rupas are not so clear as when we are young Cheers Ken O > >From: Lukas >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Thursday, 29 October 2009 5:01:05 >Subject: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. > > >Dear Nina and Howard, > >> > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- >> N: No difference at all. The cat's seeing, the dog's seeing, Howard's >> seeing, just the reality that is seeing-consciousnes s. It sees what >> is visible. After it has fallen away there can be thinking in >> different ways and that is conditioned by one's accumulated >> inclinations. Thinking is different in the case of this or that >> individual. >> ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ----- >> No doubt all seeing is the same *sort* of thing. But, Nina, the >> visible objects you and I see are not the same, and thus the seeings are not >> identical, not just the thinking. How do you characterize the difference? > >L: And ruupa that is seen was characterised as "changing"? "altering"? >There is a change in what we call ruupa, isnt it? rupayati maybe?? >There was something in Vism. On bases. The cakkhu and the ruupa. >The word deriviations. > >Best wishes >Lukas > > > > #101774 From: Ken O Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 3:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta ashkenn2k Dear Herman H: Subject/object dualism is the belief that objects happen to subjects, or that subjects do things to objects. But just like it says in the Vis, 'mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; the deed is, but no doer of the deed is there.' There is not a subject to which the object is happening. Blue doesn't happen to consciousness, there is just blue. No consciousness is found. K: If there is no consciousness, how do we known it is blue? Then blue colour we see in the sky, should also be human because no consciouness is found. So the object should be within us, then why we cannot get the sky out of our mind, why is there an external blue? If it is inside, where is it then? Cheers Ken O #101775 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 5:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: #101774 Hello Ken O, and all, Visual consciousness is functional meeting of working eye-sense organ with appropriate visual sense object. The external sense objects are there, whether cognized or not. With metta, Alex #101776 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta jonoabb Hi Howard (101736) > The term 'visible object' suggests some entity that exists > independently of being known - an "unseen." The term 'visual content' does not. By the > term 'experiential presence', I mean existing as content of consciousness. > I hope you follow this, Jon, for I cannot clarify it further. > =============== OK, I understand that you don't like the term "consciousness" (you prefer to speak of "experiential presence") or "visible object" (you prefer the term "visual content"). But my question relates to specific terms that are used in the suttas. What I was asking is, how is the difference between cakkhu-vinnana (usually translated as "seeing consciousness") and rupa (usually translated as "form" or "visible object"), or between sota-vinnana (usually translated as "hearing consciousness") and sadda (usually translated as "sound" or "audible object"), to be known? I think you'd agree that there's frequent mention in the suttas of these dhammas (and the corresponding dhammas related to the other sense-doors) and of the importance of their being directly known with insight. Jon #101777 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:58 pm Subject: Re: Lukas and the present moment. jonoabb Hi Lucas (and Phil) (101742) > L:Yes, and even bad people without siila, could start understand. Not only the good ones. > =============== Yes, quite so. But this is a sticking point for many! They think that kusala of the level of sila and samatha need to be developed individually and separately from the development of awareness. Whereas we understand that the development of any kind of kusala at any time or occasion may occur, without there being a need to choose one or the other. To my understanding, the development of awareness necessarily involves the development of kusala of all lesser kinds, and leads to their "purification", so there is no question of emphasising one at the expense of the others. =============== > L: I am not sure Jon, that everybody will like this paramattha dhammas term here. This is old commentarial thing, so we can just say that realities were taught in there. So that's much more easier to deal with for some people. I think so. =============== Thanks for the suggestion, which I'll keep in mind. In this instance, however, it was Phil who introduced the term "paramattha" in his post to you, and I was simply picking up on that use of the term. =============== > Jon sorry I ignored your 'vineya loke' quotation request. I was wrong with this katame vineya loke abhijadomanssam. sorry. I meant the passage from the beginning of Vibhanga, Satipatthanavibhanga. > It is a bit different, but I think it still has the same sense. =============== Thanks, Lucas. No problem. Jon #101778 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 3:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 10/30/2009 2:55:32 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Howard (101736) > The term 'visible object' suggests some entity that exists > independently of being known - an "unseen." The term 'visual content' does not. By the > term 'experiential presence', I mean existing as content of consciousness. > I hope you follow this, Jon, for I cannot clarify it further. > =============== OK, I understand that you don't like the term "consciousness" (you prefer to speak of "experiential presence") or "visible object" (you prefer the term "visual content"). But my question relates to specific terms that are used in the suttas. What I was asking is, how is the difference between cakkhu-vinnana (usually translated as "seeing consciousness") and rupa (usually translated as "form" or "visible object"), or between sota-vinnana (usually translated as "hearing consciousness") and sadda (usually translated as "sound" or "audible object"), to be known? I think you'd agree that there's frequent mention in the suttas of these dhammas (and the corresponding dhammas related to the other sense-doors) and of the importance of their being directly known with insight. Jon =================================== The difference is the difference between between a mental activity or event, and its content. They are inseparable but distinguishable. With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #101779 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta jonoabb Hi Herman (101757) > It is a natural extension of the well known statement from the Vis that > 'mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; the deed is, but no doer of > the deed is there.' > =============== Thanks for this explanation. The passage you mention is from the chapter dealing with the Four Noble Truths (hence the references to the 4 kinds of experiencer/doer). It reads (Nanamoli translation): ******************* 90. "...in the ultimate sense all the truths should be understood as void because of the absence of (i) any experiencer, (ii) any doer, (iii) anyone who is extinguished, and (iv) any goer. Hence it is said 'For there is suffering, but none who suffers; Doing exists although there is no doer; Extinction is but no extinguished person; Although there is a path, there is no goer'. Visuddhimagga XVI, 90 (Quoted by Scott at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/70566) ******************* To my reading, the emphasis of the passage is on the absence of a person or being, rather than on consciousness and its object being one and indistinguishable in characteristic (if I've understood you correctly). =============== > What is the characteristic of consciousness, other than the object? =============== I would say the characteristic of consciousness is the experiencing of an object. =============== > Subject/object dualism is the belief that objects happen to subjects, or > that subjects do things to objects. But just like it says in the Vis, 'mere > suffering exists, no sufferer is found; the deed is, but no doer of the deed > is there.' There is not a subject to which the object is happening. Blue > doesn't happen to consciousness, there is just blue. No consciousness is > found. =============== Thanks for this explanation. For reasons mentioned above, I do not see this the Vism passage as denying the notion of consciousness as a dhamma that has the function of experiencing an object. =============== > I hope that is clearer, and if not, I'm happy to continue discussing. =============== Yes, clearer, thanks. There are numerous references in the suttas to consciousness and its object (e.g., seeing and visible object, hearing and sound), as dhammas to be known each for what they are. I'd be interested to know what you make of these. Jon #101780 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: colour, seeing. was: samaadhi in a wider sense. nilovg Dear pt (and Howard), Op 30-okt-2009, om 2:59 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > Afaik, dogs are color-blind, so if both me and my dog are looking > at the same green apple, the kalapas of the apple which come into > contact with my eye and the dog's eye will be the same or different? ------- N: Each split second colour has changed, never the same, not even for one person. But it is the object of seeing. And in this sense seeing that has the function of experiencing colour is the same for every being. No need to think of colour blind or kalapas of apple. An apple is not seen, it is defined as apple through the mind-door. When speaking of kalapas it is the tiniest group of rupas, we do not speak of kalapas of an apple. I know what you mean: seeing the green of an apple. Perhaps I can clarify something about visible object. There is not only the green of apple, but also background colours and seeing sees them all. No focussing on the green of apple. -------- Howard: From my perspective, the rupas that are seen are the rupas that are SEEN. No two beings ever see the literally same eye-door rupas. What is seen is whatever is the content of eye-door consciousness. ---------- N: Right, except that I would say object, aaramma.na, instead of content. (I read your dialogue with Jon) In the Abhidhamma aaramma.na is used. --------- N: I just posted this morning: The seeing of this moment, however, is different from seeing which is just past. Colour which appears at this moment is different from colour which is just past. ------- Nina. #101781 From: "freawaru80" Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:51 pm Subject: Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. freawaru80 Hello Nina, Howard and All, it seems to me that "seeing" in Abhidhamma refers to the "lower" processes of the brain, those in the evolutional old part (reptile brain, etc). These are generally unconscious and not accessible by the higher functions of the brain, including our personality. In this sense a dog's seeing and a human's seeing are identical because we share this part of our brain genetically. These processes are very fast and impersonal, again a reason to assume that Abhidhamma refers to them. "Just seeing" is not a function our personality is able to comprehend or consider, as it has no access to these lower functions. The probem for me is now, if this is true the teaching of Abhidhamma is way beyond most. I am sure it is possible to access the functions of those parts of the brain, too, (though not with the personality) but it is even more difficult than accessing the functions of our inner organs such as heart or liver or digestion system (which can be accessed by the personality). To put it bluntly, so far I see no reason to assume that someone who is not aware of his inner organs could be able to understand nama-rupa as in Abhidhamma. It would be like teaching Relativity Theory to a three year old. It won't work - it is too early. So my rather personal question is: apart from the fun of learning a formal system called Abhidhamma and discussing it what is it's use for those of us who are no Sotapanna? Wouldn't it be more efficient to first reach Sotapanna, to first become aware of our inner organs (like through the practice of Hatha yoga) and whatever else is required for Sotapanna before learning about nama-rupa and citta and all that? Wouldn't it be more efficient to practice jhana so that one's next rebirth is likely to be a deva (to whom Abhidhamma was taught in the first place)? Freawaru #101782 From: "freawaru80" Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:59 pm Subject: Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. freawaru80 Hello Alex, > > > Yes, it is useful to know intellectually. :-) > > Yes and no. While I am against "don't study", I also question the approach of "study and don't practice". > I would expect that for someone who can really see all these fast processes the term "study" gets a completely new dimension... > How useful is arm-chair knowledge? > > Imagine a turtle trying to teach a fish what dry land is like. Dry land is something that fish has not experienced and turtle can. It is very different and turtle would be at a loss on how to properly explain. What would be even more comical is if the fish tried to convince the turtle on what dry land truly is. Hopefully this simile is not offensive to anyone. > I see what you mean - and agree. Imagination only gets one so far. > > Hmm. but what is that called that observes citta cognizing an >object? > > Very interesting question. If citta knows and object, than what knows the citta? Probably the answer would be that the > presence of namarupa -> vinnana ; and vinnana as a presence implies there is namarupa. > But isn't Dependent Origination always present? I mean, to see DO don't we need some extra factor, external to DO? Freawaru #101783 From: "freawaru80" Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 8:19 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: samaadhi in a wider sense. freawaru80 Hello Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Herman wrote: > > Hi freawaru, > > 2009/10/28 freawaru80 > > > > > > > > N: Sarah explained about observing. Citta experiences an object. We > > > can also say: it cognizes an object. You use the term observing, but > > > it is still citta cognizing an object, no matter what word you prefer. > > > ------- > > > > Hmm. but what is that called that observes citta cognizing an object? > > > > > A very useful question to ask. If we conceive of such a "that", then we have > arrived at either annihilationism or eternalism. I do not understand this conclusion of yours. What has observing citta to do with eternalism or annihilationism? Otherwise, I agree with you on the necessity to verify the theory of Abhidhamma by own experience :-) Freawaru #101784 From: "colette" Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:05 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. ksheri3 Hi "freawaru80", WOW, a very interesting reply. i only have a few minutes remaining in this schedule but have another scheduled appointment a few minutes after this one ends. Good time to confront me with your vast awareness of the reality which shrouds us all. I haven't experienced the pleasure of speaking with somebody on the same conscious level in a very long time yet your applications of "vipissana" and YOGA NIDRA proved some of my own personal hypothesis and questions. Allow me a few minutes but trust that I will come back and enjoy your reply to me. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "freawaru80" wrote: > > > > > Hello Colette > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > > > > I think that "The Fourth" in Yoga refers to a high level vipassana state. It is also referred to as the "Witness". The Thai Forest Tradition also uses the name "Witness" for it. > > > > > > <.....> #101785 From: Staisha Perry Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] (dsg) charactoristic of citta staisha_perry Hello Sarah: Thank you for the reply, so is it safe to say that namas ands rupas are both realities. when citta w/ (eye, ear, nose,tongue,touch,mind door arise) and sense(seeing, hearing,taste, contact, consciousness, thinking) the experience arise based on the conditions hopefully i am not confusing the question? thank you -staisha RE) Sarah: Still, even when thinking about the shape or anything else, there are cittas experiencing these concepts, one at a time. Cittas are namas - they can experience any kind of object. We can keep this very short and simple if you'd like to ask for any clarification on this or anything else. Metta Sarah #101786 From: Staisha Perry Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] (dsg) charactoristic of citta staisha_perry sarah: also adding, so if one has mindfulness then one is aware of reality all realites, if there is not mindfulness then there is no understanding? peace in the way-staisha #101787 From: "colette" Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 8:10 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. ksheri3 Hi freawaru80, Lets get one ground rule out in the open before I go too far: I think you're using several different versions of 'vipassana' to use as definitions and thus to ensnare me in a labirynth as if you were a greek mythological creature, creation, manifestation. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "freawaru80" wrote: > > > > > YOU, "freawaru80", you take Yoga Nidra as being a resultant phenomena, a slave of, VIPASSANA. > > Yes. As long as you refer to the Yoga Nidra of deep sleep. I am not talking about astral projection - though of course it can happen in such a state, too. > colette: so which is it: did vipassana create yoga nidra or did yoga nidra create vipassana? Throughout your application you made it clear that VIPASSANA was the state of consciousness to OBJECTIFY to use as a GOAL and therefore I naturally saught to find out what gets the practitioner this prize, this reward, of Vipassana. I chose to apply Yoga Nidra which is also a state of consciousness as vipassana is a state of consciousness. If I can achieve vipassana without the coarse, without the path, without the prerequisites and costly slavery that you may choose to advertise, then what good is it to bother selling your snake oil here, in the DSG? --------------------------------------------- > I don't remember which sutta it was, but in it the Buddha was asked wether he still sleeps and his answer was that a short time ago he even went into a "siesta" at midday but he was lucidly doing so. While the mind and physical body switched to the sleep and dream state he was aware of it. I don't know if Theravada has specific practices how to learn this as Tantra and Dzogchen has but the ability to lucidly enter and remain in sleep is clearly known here, too. > colette: this is YOGA NIDRA not the Vippassana that you were/are concerned about. Vipissana is a very specific thing and different from the very specific thing which is YOGA NIDRA. --------------------------------- > > >You qualify this state of consciousness as being a resultant >phenomena of a Vipissana practice? > > Wouldn't it be logical? During vipassana one takes "oneself" out of the system, one observes whatever arises and falls in the mind. The dhamma do not enter and do not remain but they are known. > > colette: vipissana is not my fortey or specialty at the moment, eventhough I am blessed enough to have such a vipissana scholar as Nina around, I can only rely upon her mindfullness of what's goin' on to help me keep my whits about me if I'm under attack from hostile bardo-beings. I do not know if removing ones-self from the reality to view the reality as a "third-person" is the correct way to understand the practice of VIPISSANA. If a practioner attempts what you suggest then what similarities are they looking for concerning shunyata? While the dharma do not exist and are worthless during what I consider to be the Vipissana state of consciousness they do exist in the form of warnings -- for instance I worked on the flight deck of an aircraft carrier when I was a sailor in the USN; there were signs everywhere that said "BEWARE OF JET BLAST", and I kindof got the message, but it wasn't until I saw a brown shirt blown across the flight deck as if he were nothing more than a reciept from a store clerk or a yuppie food stamp distributor (cash station), THUS, THAT SIGN HAS A LOT OF MEANING TO ME SINCE I HAVE WITNESSED THE REALITY OF THE STATEMENT and/or I have been practicing now for 30 years, since 1980, probably 1978, so I got this schtick down pretty good. ---------------------------------- > > For instance in Eastern philosphy and psychology we find TANTRA but in the WEstern philosophy and the Western psychology we find GNOSTICISM. > > There is even more than that. The Catholics have their mystics and the Orthodox their desert fathers. colette: NOT TRUE! <...> ------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------- claiming that they themselves are not ready for such deep theology. But both the "Widow" state (vipassana) and the Witness of God (arahat vipassana) are known in the scriptures (they are mentioned in the Bible after all), even if not known by the majority of "Christians". > > colette: boulderdash! or is it "sufferin' suckatash"? You can't mix a creationist line of thought with the buddhist line of thought. THE THREE JEWELS cannot be found in the Western <...>theologies. <...> BUT SORRY, THAT AIN'T WORKIN' IN BUDDHISM THERE IS NOT A GOD. ----------------------------------- >If you mention GNOSTICISM to a christian, well, then, you've just >condemned yourself since Christianity will not allow a Gnostic or a >Cather to exist. > > In conversation with Christians I suggest to use their own official mystics, it is all there, too. :-) > colette: that must be where you enslave yourself: "I suggest to use their own official mystics, " You have already fallen victim to their HEIRARCHY, to their VALUE STRUCTURE since you clearly RE-COGNIZE THEIR heirarchy or chain of cmmand by saying that they have an "official" label and a chest to pin that label on. Thanx for the discussion! toodles, colette #101788 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:24 pm Subject: Evident yet Subtle... bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Evident yet Subtle are the Facts of the Dhamma! Dependent origination becomes evident, when really seeing & understanding: When this exists, that also comes into being. The seed initiates the plant... When this does not exist, that neither comes into being. No seed no plant... Wrong view of annihilation becomes evident, when seeing and understanding: All causes are connected with their resulting effect. Nothing just disappears! Wrong view of eternity becomes evident, when seeing and understanding: All states arise instantly as new phenomena. They were not there before... The characteristic of no-self becomes evident, when seeing & understanding: That all states have no core and that their being depends on other conditions. The characteristic of impermanence becomes evident, when understanding: States rise & fall instantly. After having been, they do never exist again! The characteristic of suffering becomes evident, when comprehending: All liked phenomena rise and fall . Their inevitable loss is an oppressive pain. When these several truths, all aspects of the dependent origination, have become evident to the Buddhist disciple, then constructions appear to him as perpetually renewed: So all these states, it seems, not ever having been, come into existence and then immediately cease... Vism 632 <..> Have a nicely evident day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri <...> #101789 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta jonoabb Hi Howard (101778) > What I was asking is, how is the difference between cakkhu-vinnana (usually > translated as "seeing consciousness") and rupa (usually translated as "form" > or "visible object"), or between sota-vinnana (usually translated as > "hearing consciousness") and sadda (usually translated as "sound" or "audible > object"), to be known? I think you'd agree that there's frequent mention in > the suttas of these dhammas (and the corresponding dhammas related to the > other sense-doors) and of the importance of their being directly known with > insight. > > Jon > =================================== > The difference is the difference between between a mental activity or > event, and its content. > =============== I'm not aware of any reference in the texts to the content/object of vinnana as having a knowable feature or characteristic (call it what you will). I'd be interested to know the basis for suggesting that it does. To my understanding, cakkhu-vinnana or sota-vinnana can be known as the kind of dhamma that experiences something, while form/visible object or sound/audible object can be known as the kind of dhamma that does not experience something. Each dhamma can also be known as distinctively itself, so that cakkhu-vinnana is known as an experiencing through the eye-door and sota-vinnana as an experiencing through the eye-door. Likewise for form/visible object and sound/audible object. =============== > They are inseparable but distinguishable. =============== I would certainly agree that cakkhu-vinnana and rupa (form/visible object) are distinguishable. As regards "inseparable", however, the concept of inseparableness is not one I've come across in the texts. Mutual dependence, yes (but inseparableness is not a synonym for that). There are texts that describe how cakkhu-vinnana comes into existence dependent upon rupa (form/visible object), but none that I know of saying that rupa (form/visible object) comes into existence dependent upon cakkhu-vinnana. Have you come across any? Jon #101790 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Oct 31, 2009 12:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] More questions about nimitta sarahprocter... Dear pt, (Lukas, Alberto, Scott & all) --- On Wed, 28/10/09, ptaus1 wrote: >> S: One concept is experienced by the entire proces, i.e. same object for the cittas you mention. It is experienced, but it does not exist or "exist":-). >pt: To take this further, can one and the same concept remain the object for several mind-processes in succession? Could this be a contributing factor to the illusion that objects (like a tree or an apple) are "real and lasting" rather than just momentary coming together and falling away of dhammas? .... S: Leaving aside processes of jhana cittas, then the various successive mind-door processes are experiencing different concepts as I understand. KS once gave Nina and I and others the example of "e-l-i-s-a-b-e-th". Multiple mind door processes follow in succession when we think of a name even. I think that the reason that objects are taken as "real and lasting" is because there is not the understanding of namas and rupas, let alone their rapid rising and falling away in succession. This is why the beginning of the path has to start with the understanding of any nama or rupa now, so that the distinction between, say, seeing and visible object is clearly known. .... > >How does it happen that a certain concept all of sudden just pops into my head, without any seeming relevance to the present situation for example? >> S: Natural decisive support condition. Any object experienced can be recalled anytime later, even aeons later by this condition. >pt: Is there a more detailed explanation in abhidhamma about this or is it really just that simple? ... S: This is the main condition which affects all our accumulations from moment to moment. When a dozen people read the same message now, why do they all respond and react in different ways? Natural decisive support condition. Of course other conditions are also important, but this is the key one. Other friends like Alberto have quoted very detailed posts on this condition from the Patthana. Lots in U.P. under "Decisive support condition", I think. Perhaps Lukas, Alberto, Scott and others might add more quotes or re-quotes. ... >And a couple of question: 1. In recent posts it was said that thinking is a dhamma, but concepts aren't. What's the Pali for these two terms - thinking and concepts? ... S: The "thinking" is usually referring here to the cittas in the mind-door process which experience these concepts. Thinking sometimes is particularly referring to vitakka (and vicara) cetasikas. Concepts refers to pa~n~natti. There are many kinds of pa~n~natti (see "Concepts" in U.P), but they're all concepts, not realities. ... >2. I think I read somewhere that thoughts and dreams are "mental vipaka" - this doesn't seem right? ... S: No, not right. Vipaka is mental result only, but this means it refers the cittas (and accompanying cetasikas) which are the results of kamma, not to any thoughts or dreams which are conceived. ... >Vipaka can only occur through the 5 sense-doors, it can't appear through the mind-door, right? ... S: Yes, the following are the vipaka cittas in the sense-door processes: - sampaticchana citta (receiving consciousness), santiirana citta (investigating consciousness), the 7 javana cittas and the tadaarammana cittas (registering consciousness) when they arise. Also, the patisandhi citta, bhavanga cittas and cuti citta are vipaka cittas, but these are "process-freed", not arising through a door-way in a process. ... I'm confused here because in ACMA pg297 it says: "Mind-contact is the >contact associated with the twenty-two kinds of resultant consciousness, excluding the two sets of fivefold sense consciousness. " This seems to say that there is mental vipaka, but I'm not sure what are these? ... S: Let's be clear that all vipaka is mental (i.e nama), even seeing or the phassa that accompanies seeing is nama (mental). The note is referring to the phassa arising with any of the vipaka cittas above other than the dvi-pa~nca-vi~n~naana cittas (the five pairs of sense consciousness, such as seeing consciousness). [I just checked the ref in CMA and I think the entire paragraph for (5) is confusing - but that's another thread. Just keep in mind, that the Guide is not the "Scripture":-)]. I really appreciate all these qus. Pls pursue any points not clear or which you're not satisfied with. Metta Sarah ===== #101791 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] (dsg) charactoristic of citta sarahprocter... Hi Howard, Scott, Connie, Suan, Mike N & other Pali researchers, --- On Tue, 27/10/09, upasaka@... wrote: ><....>"...'Tam pi kho bhikkhave cara.na.m citta.m citten'eva cintita.m.' Tena pi kho bhikkhave cara.nena cittena citta.m yeva citataran ti." " Bhikkhus, that masterpiece of art is designed by the mind. Indeed, Bhikkhus, the mind is even more artistic than that masterpiece [SN iii 151]' " ============ ========= ========= === >Sarah, thank you for the foregoing. :-) What I was after, though, were instances of pluralization of 'citta' in the suttas. I had no doubt that it occurred elsewhere. ... S: Can anyone help? I think that vi~n~naana is far more commonly used in the suttas. While citta is sometimes used in suttas (as in the above), I have no idea whether the plural is used in suttas as well. Metta Sarah ========= #101792 From: "sprlrt" Date: Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:22 pm Subject: Dhs. The arising of consciousness - 5 resulting from kamma sprlrt Dhammasangani: Kusala dhammas, akusala dhammas and abykata [neither kusala nor akusala] dhammas. .... The arising of consciousness (cittuppada) ... [54 cittas of the sensous plane] ... The two mind elements: one resulting from kusala [455.]; one from akusala [562.] Three of the mind-consciousness elements: two resulting from kusala, one accompanied by mental plesasure [469.], one by neutral feeling [484.]; one resulting from from akusala and accompanied by neutral feeling [564.] 455. / 562. / 469. / 484. / 564. - Which dhammas are abykata? At the moment when a resultant mind element [455, 562.] / mind-consciousness element [469, 484, 564.] has arisen, due to stored-up kusala kamma [455, 469, 484.] / akusala kamma [562, 564.] pertaining to the sensous sphere, and accompanied by mental pleasure [469., one mind-consciousness element resulting from kusala] / neutral feeling [all others], and concerned about an object which is [either] visible, or udible, or smellable, or tastable, or tangible [all five cittas/elements], or any other dhamma [469, 484, 564., the three mind-consciousness elements]. At that moment there is: contact, feeling, memory, intention, consciousness, initial, and sustaining application, one-pointedness of mind, joy [469.], pleasant feeling [469.], / neutral feeling [455, 562, 484, 564.], the faculty of the mind, the faculty of pleasantness [469.], / of disinterestedness [455, 562, 484, 564.], and the faculty of life. These, and any other non-rpa dhammas arisen by conditions, are the dhammas that there are at that moment. These dhammas are abykata. Atthaslin [Cy]: ... 455. The mind element [result of a past kusala kamma, cetana cetasika] It is just that, a means for [the occurence of] empty-of-self, natural phenomena. Its own inherent characterstic is that of cognizing the visible...tangible object in sequence after the seeing... body-consciousness [has fallen away]. It has the function of receiving (sampaticchana) the visible... tangible object It manifests itself in the same manner . Its proximate cause is the falling away of the [resultant] seeing... body-consciousness [that preceeded it]. ... 469., 484. The [two] mind-consciousness elements [results of kusala kamma] The first mind-consciousness element include joy (pti cetasika) and the feeling is pleasant, since it experience a [very] desiderable object. The second consciousness of this type experience a medium-desiderable object, hence it is accompanied by neutral feeling. The terms are the same as those of the mind-element. ... Its own inherent characterstic is that of cognizing all the six classes of objects [visible...tangible, and also any other dhamma, i.e. through all the six doors]. Its functions include that of investigating (santirana) [the visible... tangible object of the five sense doors processes]. It manifests itself in the same manner . Its proximate cause is the heart base [its physical base]. The first mind-consciousness element [accompanied by mental pleasure] results in two instances: - In a five-sense door, after a sense-consciousness [eye... body-consciousness] etc., once the resultant mind-element has received the object and has fallen away, it results with the function of investigating that very object. - It can also results in any of the six doors [processes experiencing] a powerful object (balava rammana) as registration (tadrammana) [function]. How is that? Like when a boat crosses a strong stream which changes its flow for a while, running along its side before resuming its course. ... The second mind-consciousness element [results of (weak) kusala kamma, accompanied by neutral feeling] results in five instances: - it results as re-linking [to a new life] at the time of conception/birth in the human plane with physical or mental disabilities. - It results as life-continuum (bhavanga) following that same re-linking. - As investigating [moderately] desiderable objects of the 5 sense door processes. - As registering powerful objects through any of the six doors. - It can result as terminating [the life] at the time of death. #101793 From: "freawaru80" Date: Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:49 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: On Khun Sujin, from another board. freawaru80 Hello Colette, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > > Hi freawaru80, > > Lets get one ground rule out in the open before I go too far: I think you're using several different versions of 'vipassana' to use as definitions and thus to ensnare me in a labirynth as if you were a greek mythological creature, creation, manifestation. I am sorry. It was not my intention to confuse you. I use the term "vipassana" in it's original meaning, i.e. a STATE of experience. I know that some Buddhists use the term to describe a technique of a specific tradition but that is not how I use it. Vipassana - to me - means insight, an ability to see one's own mind as if it was a computer program. > colette: so which is it: did vipassana create yoga nidra or did yoga nidra create vipassana? I think vipassana is the skill, the ability, the power to experience yoga nidra (yogic sleep). Here I am using the definition of yoga nidra as lucid deep sleep like described on this site (if you use a different definition please tell me): "Yoga Nidra means Yogic Sleep. It is a state of conscious Deep Sleep. In Meditation, you remain in the Waking state of consciousness, and gently focus the mind, while allowing thought patterns, emotions, sensations, and images to arise and go on. However, in Yoga Nidra, you leave the Waking state, go past the Dreaming state, and go to Deep Sleep, yet remain awake. http://www.swamij.com/yoga-nidra.htm#not " While alive we usually experience the states of wake, dream and deep sleep, including hybrid states like the astral bardo in which one can contact (or be contacted by) bardo beings and beings of other realms (such as devas). Vipassana on the other hand, the state, is beyond all this, so one can observe (see) samsara in all it's colorfull variety from an external perspective (supramundane right view). So while all humans experience deep sleep, it takes vipassana to be able to experience it lucidly, and this experience is called yoga nidra. >Throughout your application you made it clear that VIPASSANA was the >state of consciousness to OBJECTIFY to use as a GOAL and therefore I >naturally saught to find out what gets the practitioner this prize, >this reward, of Vipassana. As far as I know traditionally the first step is to practice concentration. We find this both in Theravadan schools as well as in Tibetan schools. >I chose to apply Yoga Nidra which is also a state of consciousness >as vipassana is a state of consciousness. If I can achieve >vipassana without the coarse, without the path, without the >prerequisites and costly slavery that you may choose to advertise, What cost do you refer to? >then what good is it to bother selling your snake oil >here, in the >DSG? I don't think that vipassana is caused by Kundalini. > colette: vipissana is not my fortey or specialty at the moment, >eventhough I am blessed enough to have such a vipissana scholar as >Nina around, I can only rely upon her mindfullness of what's goin' >on to help me keep my whits about me if I'm under attack from >hostile bardo-beings. Hmm... I remember once I was waking up on my bed from sleep but couldn't move. I could barely open my eyes. Then the door opened and some kind of snake-human hybrid monster entered my room and I was sure it was going to attack me... sounds familiar??? > I do not know if removing ones-self from the reality to view the >reality as a "third-person" is the correct way to understand the >practice of VIPISSANA. It is what the techniques lead to. Concentration linked with observation will induce it. For example, when one walks one can do a lot of other things, such as talking, thinking, looking for someone, the walking happens without a "me" doing it, without a self. When instead of thinking about other stuff one instead concentrates on observing how one walks the impression is not "I walk" but "the body walks", and one knows "this body not me, it is not what I am". With increasing concentration on this, turning the attention to where the impulse to take the next step comes from, one finds that even now there is no "I" that wills the next step, it just happens, it comes, and one recognises "it is not me who controls the step, I am not whatever controls it". Then one might turn one's attention to how the foot is placed next step and finds that the eyes have recognised a stone and again, automatically, the next step is enlarged, the foot is placed without a "me" choosing it so. And just as one knew "This body is not me, I am not the body" one knows "I am not what coordinates the eye and the feet, this coordinator is not me". This way one slowly extracts oneself from everything one usually considers to be oneself, the body, the mind, the emotions, the thoughts, the personality and whatever one observes one finds "this is not me, it is not what I am". >If a practioner attempts what you suggest >then what similarities >are they looking for concerning shunyata? Shunyata, also called Clear Light, is also described as "space". Sooner or later one finds that whatever one observes does not really appear outside but inside, inside a kind of space. That space does not change, all change happens inside the space. The Tibetans compare all change to the ever changing clouds and shunyata to the sky. > colette: boulderdash! or is it "sufferin' suckatash"? You can't mix a creationist line of thought with the buddhist line of thought. I don't see what creationist line of thought has to do with mysticsm. > IN BUDDHISM THERE IS NOT A GOD. God - as used by the majority of Christians - is a concept, an image. Dhamma is about the conceptless. > colette: that must be where you enslave yourself: "I suggest to use >their own official mystics, " You have already fallen victim to >their HEIRARCHY, to their VALUE STRUCTURE since you clearly >RE-COGNIZE THEIR heirarchy or chain of cmmand by saying that they >have an "official" label and a chest to pin that label on. I simply consider it useful to talk in the language of the one I communicate with. Freawaru #101794 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:50 pm Subject: Fw: dsg) citta/nama & rupa sarahprocter... F/W from Staisha --- On Sat, 31/10/09, Staisha Perry wrote: > hi > sarah: > also adding, so if one has mindfulness then one is aware of > reality all realities, and the phenomena that arise > > if there is not mindfulness then there is no > understanding of realities? > > once one is aware then you don't forget, because the > conditions for mindfulness are there, which also condition > further conditions for awareness? > > peace in the way-staisha > > --- On Fri, 10/30/09, Staisha Perry > wrote: > Hello Sarah: > > > > Thank you for the reply, > > so is it safe to say that namas ands rupas are both > realities. <...> #101795 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Oct 31, 2009 2:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] (dsg) charactoristic of citta sarahprocter... Hi Staisha, --- On Sat, 31/10/09, Staisha Perry wrote: >so is it safe to say that namas ands rupas are both realities. ... S: Very safe to say so. The only realities. ... >when citta w/ (eye, ear, nose,tongue, touch,mind door arise) and sense(seeing, hearing,taste, contact, consciousness, thinking) the experience arise based on the conditions hopefully i am not confusing the question? .... S: Yes, (leaving aside nibbana), there are two kinds of namas: citta and cetasika. So eye consciousness (i.e seeing) is a citta which is always accompanied by 7 cetasikas, including contact. It experiences visible object, a rupa. All these realities depend on conditions to arise and then fall away. We're used to think there is a self who sees, but actually there is just seeing which experiences the visible object for a moment. Pls let me know whether this is clear or not. If not, let's simplify it further. Metta Sarah ======= #101796 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Oct 31, 2009 2:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] (dsg) charactoristic of citta sarahprocter... Hi Staisha, I like your qus. :-) --- On Sat, 31/10/09, Staisha Perry wrote: >also adding, so if one has mindfulness then one is aware of reality all realites, if there is not mindfulness then there is no understanding? ... Sarah: Just to repeat, we use 'one' for convenience as in the above, but remember that there is no 'I' to have awareness or be aware. Just as it is seeing which sees, not 'I', so it is awareness which is aware, not 'I'. If there is awareness of a reality now, such as seeing or visible object, it doesn't mean that there is awareness of 'all realities'. Just one object at a time can be known. Gradually, such awareness develops to become aware of more and more realities. It's true, as you say, that "if there is not mindfulness then there is no understanding". So we have to learn more about the characteristic of mindfulness (sati in Pali) and more about the realities which sati can be aware of, so that the understanding can grow to know when there is and when there is not mindfulness. Metta Sarah ======== #101797 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Oct 31, 2009 2:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Fw: dsg) citta/nama & rupa sarahprocter... Hi Staisha, >Staisha: once one is aware then you don't forget, because the > conditions for mindfulness are there, which also condition > further conditions for awareness? ... S: Awareness (sati) may arise, but falls away immediately. Later there may be further moments of sati or there may be moments of forgetfulness. We never know what may arise - it all depends on conditions. It's true that awareness 'accumulates', i.e conditions further awareness, just as anger or any other mental states 'accumulate'. If we wish for awareness to arise again or expect it to do so, then it is attachment accumulating at that moment. Keep asking and enquiring - helpful for us all. Metta Sarah p.s. pls remember to trim off the old messages in the thread. ========== #101798 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 10/31/2009 5:59:00 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Howard (101778) > What I was asking is, how is the difference between cakkhu-vinnana (usually > translated as "seeing consciousness") and rupa (usually translated as "form" > or "visible object"), or between sota-vinnana (usually translated as > "hearing consciousness") and sadda (usually translated as "sound" or "audible > object"), to be known? I think you'd agree that there's frequent mention in > the suttas of these dhammas (and the corresponding dhammas related to the > other sense-doors) and of the importance of their being directly known with > insight. > > Jon > =================================== > The difference is the difference between between a mental activity or > event, and its content. > =============== I'm not aware of any reference in the texts to the content/object of vinnana as having a knowable feature or characteristic (call it what you will). I'd be interested to know the basis for suggesting that it does. --------------------------------------------------- Ahh. It seems, then, that you must not be able to distinguish between knowing and known, because the Buddha didn't tell you how to! ;-) How do you distinguish a fearful state from the knowing of it, Jon, if there are no distinguishing characteristics to tell apart the knowing from the content (or object) of that knowing - the knowing of a fearful state from the fearful state? This is nama knowing nama, so the attempt to side step by saying nama knows but rupa does not know fails, since there is no rupa involved. I believe the Buddha may also not have discussed the features of red and blue - so I presume you countenance none? How is it you can distinguish them? Jon, do you realize that you are saying that there is no characteristic that enables the distinguishing of consciousness from it's object? Well, no - you're not exactly saying that; you're saying that there is no reference in "the texts" to such. (And for you, what isn't mentioned in the texts, even what is trivially obvious, must be false. I happen to consider that absurd, but, hey, to each his own! ;-) ------------------------------------------------ To my understanding, cakkhu-vinnana or sota-vinnana can be known as the kind of dhamma that experiences something, while form/visible object or sound/audible object can be known as the kind of dhamma that does not experience something. ---------------------------------------------------- Well, I *knew* you'd run to that, which is why I gave the example of the object being nama. Jon, you know darn well that you can distinguish knowing from known, regardless of whether the object is rupa or nama, and thus there is a distinction to be made. Oh, and BTW, when knowing hardness and knowing it as distinct from the knowing of it, there is NOT the knowing then the insentience of the hardness - and so the iinsentence is not the basis for distinguishing it as object even in that case. ---------------------------------------------------- Each dhamma can also be known as distinctively itself, so that cakkhu-vinnana is known as an experiencing through the eye-door and sota-vinnana as an experiencing through the eye-door. Likewise for form/visible object and sound/audible object. ------------------------------------------------------ What? When you see visible object (or what I call visual content), there is *not* known at that time that there is "experiencing through the eye-door" - there is only the seeing of the sight. ------------------------------------------------------- =============== > They are inseparable but distinguishable. =============== I would certainly agree that cakkhu-vinnana and rupa (form/visible object) are distinguishable. ------------------------------------------------- And so is the knowing of angry consciousness distinguishable from that angry consciousness, the latter being the object (or content). There IS a consciousness/content (or object) distinction that holds, independent of whether the object is rupa or nama. -------------------------------------------------- As regards "inseparable", however, the concept of inseparableness is not one I've come across in the texts. ------------------------------------------------- Burn the dictionaries, Jon!! And throw out the mind as well. Just read the texts, memorizing them if possible! ;-) ------------------------------------------- Mutual dependence, yes (but inseparableness is not a synonym for that). ---------------------------------------------- Nor does it mean identical or one and the same! It means co-occurring. Main Entry: inseparable (+)in-!se-p(u-)ru-bul Pronunciation: \ (ˌ)in-ˈse-p(ə-)rə-bəl \ Function: adjective Etymology: Middle English, from Latin inseparabilis, from in- + separabilis separable Date: 14th century Results 1. 1incapable of being separated or disjoined - ∼ issues 2. 2seemingly always together : very intimate - ∼ friends ------------------------------------------- There are texts that describe how cakkhu-vinnana comes into existence dependent upon rupa (form/visible object), but none that I know of saying that rupa (form/visible object) comes into existence dependent upon cakkhu-vinnana. Have you come across any? -------------------------------------------- Sorry, can't write now - too busy trying to get the noose properly set around my neck! ;-) ------------------------------------------- Jon ============================= With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #101799 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] (dsg) charactoristic of citta upasaka_howard Thank you, Sarah! :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 10/31/2009 9:02:07 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard, Scott, Connie, Suan, Mike N & other Pali researchers, --- On Tue, 27/10/09, upasaka@... wrote: ><....>"...'Tam pi kho bhikkhave cara.na.m citta.m citten'eva cintita.m.' Tena pi kho bhikkhave cara.nena cittena citta.m yeva citataran ti." " Bhikkhus, that masterpiece of art is designed by the mind. Indeed, Bhikkhus, the mind is even more artistic than that masterpiece [SN iii 151]' " ============ ========= ========= === >Sarah, thank you for the foregoing. :-) What I was after, though, were instances of pluralization of 'citta' in the suttas. I had no doubt that it occurred elsewhere. ... S: Can anyone help? I think that vi~n~naana is far more commonly used in the suttas. While citta is sometimes used in suttas (as in the above), I have no idea whether the plural is used in suttas as well. Metta Sarah