#107000 From: Ken O Date: Wed Apr 21, 2010 5:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta and condition ashkenn2k Dear Rob and Alex Honestly, when I discuss actions with dinosaurs I just to express there is no such thing as no action.? Cetana will?direct as cetana is like the chief student of a class of students.?? it is to be understood clearly cetana that wills or the chief co-ordinator of cetasikas.?? ?If we think?a "we" can?direct the mind, then we?could fall into sakkayaditthi.? We have to be mindful here due to the nature of sakkaditthi to be very subtle.? That is why there is a stress of mindfulness and clear comprehension in any samatha bhavana be it metta or anapsati.? If these factors are not strong, one will likely to take metta as self, breath as self.? The other misconception that I find is that people think it is meditation that helps in mindulness and panna, in actual fact, it is the other way round as written in the texts.? So lets not get?the footing wrong.? It is always developing?understanding and minfulness first then developing?meditation subject. Kind regards Ken O #107001 From: "connie" Date: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:14 pm Subject: Sangiiti Sutta Fives (321, 24) nichiconn dear friends, DN 33 continues: CSCD 321. < Date: Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:06 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Learning Pali/ translating Sutta Pitika rrobinrb2000 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kevin Farrell wrote: > If time alllows, I will translate the whole Tipitika Ken, but first I will translate the Suttas. People who are not interested in Abhidhamma simply won't read Abhidhamma material. People who are interested in the suttas, at least may be able to gain from their Commentaries. > > Kevin > Kevin, If you do that, I would be intrigued to see how you translate terms. There is not a lot of consistency yet. I think Nina mentioned that how people translate terms reflects their practice. We might think we know what is meant; and choose an English word we think expresses that meaning. I wonder if there is an objective way? One could look at the verbal roots, the prefixes, the infixes, and the suffixes. There are familiar cognates in other related languages. However, there are 'borrowed words' imported from unrelated languages. Also, the nuances and idioms of cognates vary from language to language. and change over time. Individual words can change slightly in meaning, depending on context. There might be homonyms. It is a phonetic language, so there can be some homophones. The meaning of sankhara was discussed. It can broken down into parts with familiar cognates: Sam = Latin com or Greek syn, meaning 'with,' 'same,' or 'together.' kha = is thought to be from a common verbal root meaning 'to put;' a cognate of the Latin the Lain verb ponere, or the Enlish pound, meaning 'to put' 'to place,' or 'to shape.' ra / ara = a cognate of the suffix -er, but can have various meanings, including making a gerund {action noun}. Compounder could be an exact cognate-ive rendering of sankhara. Or compounding as a gerund, an action noun. Though the etymology is different, we might use conditioning, instead of compounding, to express the concept. The meaning of words changes. Condition originally meant 'with agreement.' One meaning is still 'the terms of a negotiated contract.' 'We' generalized from that, so condition{s} can now mean the state of circumstances of things. Conditioning, as a noun, can then be a gerund. meaning 'what brings about the state of things --the causes and existing conditions that generate new conditions or circumstances.' That probably conveys what is meant by samkhara in sankhara-khanda (often translated as 'will' or 'volition'); the motivators that shape activity. Whether these are willful or not is debatable. The Chinese word for the sanskrit samskara means to do an activity, such as travel. The same Chinese word can mean conduct, life, or biography {cariya}. It is also used as a synonym for another Chinese word meaning bhavana. It gets confusing. In Sabbe sankhara dukkhe, Sabbe samkhara anicca, Sabbe dhamma anatta, samkhara might have a different nuance. I see it translated as conditioned phenomena, and wondered why samkhata dhamma was not used instead. The -ta suffix can often be expressed in English by -ed. Samkhata = compounded, completed, conditioned, something fully formed. Just when you think you have it have it all figured out, you find out that there are irregular compound words,like samprajana; which have been condensed from even longer words, and that make no sense unless we read out something implied but not expressed. Then we must adduce from what we do have, plus context. opinions found in commentaries, and, gasp, experience. As someone mentioned, it could take life times. Does that mean give up, or get started? #107003 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Apr 21, 2010 11:05 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Learning Pali/ translating Sutta Pitika kenhowardau Hi Kevin, ----- <. . .> KH: > > While you are learning Pali you could, instead, be considering and discussing Dhamma. > > K: > Friend I heard the Dhamma and understood it already. ------------- That is not the way things happen in ultimate reality. There is no sudden right understanding. The Dhamma has to be heard and wisely considered again and again and again . . . --------------------- KH: > > We already have good sutta translations if we know where to look for them. Don't think of making a gift to the world. The world isn't very interested. > > K: > A lot of people use the internet these days. It is unsuitable that there are not accurate translations of the Blessed Ones words online with line by line Commentary in English. ---------------------- I hope my hastily written note didn't give the impression that we, at DSG, were not very interested. I was referring to people in general. Think, for example, of the number of Buddhists who look in on DSG and move on. They are not interested in understanding, they are interested in superficial religious trappings. -------------------------------- K: > There is so much wonderful stuff in the Suttas and Commentaries. <. . .> -------------------------------- Yes, of course there is. So the problem is not a shortage of material, the problem is a shortage of interest. -------------------- K: > The site will be large and attractive -------------------- Kevin, I have been waiting to make a joke about your appalling taste in music. Perhaps now is not the time, but I must say, if you think that song you linked us to was in any way attractive . . . :-) --------------------------- K: > and will be a presence on the internet eventually, I hope. <. . .> --------------------------- Why go past DSG? It is already accessible. If the true Dhamma is discussed here, what more could people want? Ken H #107004 From: Kevin Farrell Date: Wed Apr 21, 2010 11:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Learning Pali/ translating Sutta Pitika farrellkevin80 Hi Ken, Ken: Dear Kevin pse translate the commentaries and not the suttas as we already have many translation we could base on. I like to read the commentaries just that there are too little around. Commentaries contain many clarfications to the meaning of dhamma and it would be good if there are translation of it. There is already a good yahoo group that is now translating the AN in pali group. Pse do translate the commentaries as it is of immense value for the future generations. Kind regards Kevin: Ken, I'm going to translate the Suttas, Commentaries and Tikas (in most cases). I've got a lot of work to do first though. I am a real beginner at Pali so translation will still be a while out. It depends on how fast I can pick up the language. Luckily, I've go the help of a lot of great Pali speakers. Everything takes time. With metta, Kevin #107005 From: Kevin Farrell Date: Wed Apr 21, 2010 11:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Learning Pali/ translating Sutta Pitika farrellkevin80 Hi Rob, ________________________________ Rob: Kevin, If you do that, I would be intrigued to see how you translate terms... Does that mean give up, or get started? Kevin: Four thing: I was trained in three places: New York City as a youth, the military as a young man, and the Bujinkan when I got a little bit older, plus I'm a country boy (these days). I don't know how to give up and I don't quit until the job gets done. I never have before. I eat challenges. Literally. This model was not built, designed, trained, or programed to give up nor fail, only to destroy it's target and rest briefly when the mission is done before the next mission ensues. ; ) Just kidding (kind of). In truth, everything is conditioned. I think the conditions have fallen in place for this to occur. I feel lively and up to the challenge. All the best, Kevin #107006 From: Kevin Farrell Date: Wed Apr 21, 2010 11:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Learning Pali/ translating Sutta Pitika farrellkevin80 Dear Ken, I feel the site will be of benefit to those who are interested. As I said earlier, if people are interested in Abhidhamma and in the right way of development, they are; if they are not, then they are not. I have been active on Buddhist internet forums for a while and I've come to understand that people don't "come around" to the Right way of development unless there are accumulations for it. If there are accumulations they will. In general, however, modern Buddhists tend to read a lot of suttas. At least if they have line by line Commentary, they may gain a little bit more Right Understanding of what they read. The Commentators were very, very wise and many were masters of Dhamma. It is true that not many people will be interested. That is fine. As far as my development is concerned, I don't feel a need to "work" on it anymore. Instead, friend, I'd rather help others in some way. There are already people explaining about Abhidhamma for them to query and listen to should they feel the need to, but there is no one translating the Commentaries in such a way that I know of. Therefore, that is my job to do if this body and mind holds out. P.S. I'm glad you liked the music. ;) Thanks. With metta, Kevin The Lost Trailers: http://www.vevo.com/watch/the-lost-trailers/country-folks/USBVA0900012 Ken wrote: ________________________________ From: kenhowardau To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, April 21, 2010 7:05:16 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: Learning Pali/ translating Sutta Pitika Hi Kevin, ----- <. . .> KH: > > While you are learning Pali you could, instead, be considering and discussing Dhamma. > > K: > Friend I heard the Dhamma and understood it already. ------------ - That is not the way things happen in ultimate reality. There is no sudden right understanding. The Dhamma has to be heard and wisely considered again and again and again . . . ------------ --------- KH: > > We already have good sutta translations if we know where to look for them. Don't think of making a gift to the world. The world isn't very interested. > > K: > A lot of people use the internet these days. It is unsuitable that there are not accurate translations of the Blessed Ones words online with line by line Commentary in English. ------------ --------- - I hope my hastily written note didn't give the impression that we, at DSG, were not very interested. I was referring to people in general. Think, for example, of the number of Buddhists who look in on DSG and move on. They are not interested in understanding, they are interested in superficial religious trappings. ------------ --------- --------- -- K: > There is so much wonderful stuff in the Suttas and Commentaries. <. . .> ------------ --------- --------- -- Yes, of course there is. So the problem is not a shortage of material, the problem is a shortage of interest. ------------ -------- K: > The site will be large and attractive ------------ -------- Kevin, I have been waiting to make a joke about your appalling taste in music. Perhaps now is not the time, but I must say, if you think that song you linked us to was in any way attractive . . . :-) ------------ --------- ------ K: > and will be a presence on the internet eventually, I hope. <. . .> ------------ --------- ------ #107007 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 12:21 am Subject: Great Compassion = Maha-Karuna! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Feel Pity for all those Falling: It is a great pity with all those beings thinking: Pleasure is the only good; by that they fall! Terror is the only goal; by that they fall! Sensuality is innocent; by that they fall! Violence is allowable; by that they fall! Money makes happy; by that they fall! Power is progress; by that they fall! Falsehood is OK; by that they fall! Stealing makes rich; by that they fall! Conceit covers up; by that they fall! Science knows all; by that they fall! Killing can be good; by that they fall! Hunting is only fun; by that they fall! Adultery is matured; by that they fall! Paedophilia is harmless; by that they fall! Drugs is fantastic; by that they fall! Booze is medicine; by that they fall! Giving does not help; by that they fall! After death is nothing!; by that they fall! The Hells do not exist; by that they fall! Action has no effect; by that they fall! I am the better than...; by that they fall! Making merit cannot elevate; by that they fall! It is a great pity with all those beings: who is veiled by wrong view; by that they fall! who is fooled by own opinion; by that they fall! who is gripped by greed and lust; by that they fall! who is stirred by hate and anger; by that they fall! who is clinging to anything worldly; by that they fall! who is confused by not knowing; by that they fall! who prostitutes themselves; by that they fall! who cheat and deceives; by that they fall! who pretends what is not; by that they fall! who hides what is actual fact; by that they fall! who destroys beings or things; by that they fall! who pollute milieu and society; by that they fall! who deliberately do evil knowing it; by that they fall! who fails their duties and obligations; by that they fall! who misses the obvious opportunities; by that they fall! It is a great pity with all those blinded by ignorance, bound and dragged by craving, while pushed by aversion: By that they surely fall into states of pain, agony and despair! As if gripped by the arms by two strong men and hurled into a big fire... <...> Have a nice compassionate day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri <...> #107008 From: "Rob" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 12:55 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Anger. How to stop / with .Metta-Karuna / rrobinrb2000 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > .... > >robin writes: If we understand that such ignorance causes others to be bound, and therefore they must experience dukkha, and we feel empathy with that, as if their dukkha is also our dukkha, then I think we have experienced karuna. We feel their pain, we shed real tears for them. Maybe like a parent feels for a lost child. > ... > S: When "we feel their pain, we shed real tears for them", isn't this dosa (aversion) with unpleasant feeling? As soon as there's the slightest unpleasant feeling, we can be sure it's not karuna (compassion). > ... R:> >One thing, I have been told that cultivating karuna might arouse very intense emotions of sorrow. > .... > S: Impossible! Karuna can only arise with pleasant or neutral feeling. The beautiful (sobhana) cetasikas which only arise with wholesome roots can never arise with sorrow or unpleasant feeling. Robin asks: I was comfused by sobhana. Is another transliteration of subha {beaurty} plus -na? > ... R: > >I think Karuna is bittersweet sorrow; not bitter. That is my understanding, fwiw. > .... > S: Just sweet, very sweet. That is my understanding, fwiw:-) Sarah or anyone. I have been contemplating this. I recall someone telling me that aversion {dosa} and attraction; or sukha and dukkha, can never arise together. That was some time ago. This always bothered me, because I have experienced blissful sorrow many times, at the time of a loss of loved one. The heart is filled with metta; but is sad at the person;s passing. Also, while very sick, in great pain, and unable to walk; I have felt very intense joy. Please, no one tell me endorphin; I know the difference. It is like the transition of the seasons from Summer, to Autumn, to Winter. It is sad, but awesomely beautiful. My understanding is that there are only three vedana, sukha, dukha, and neutral [neither, nor}, and only one arises a time. I have also seen uppeka given as the third, rather than neutral. Would this 'one at a time' also apply to emotions like sorrow and joy? There is no doubt in my mind that there is a bittersweet emotion that is a mixture of sorrow and joy. It is really neither pleasant nor unpleasant. It is utterly beautiful and blissful. If the Buddha said this can not be; then he was mistaken. Just kidding. I trust the Buddha's words; just not sure we always fully understand. thank you in advance for your khanti robin #107009 From: "Rob" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello / Gentle on my Citta rrobinrb2000 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Robin, > > Thanks for sharing! > > --- On Sat, 10/4/10, Rob wrote: > >The lyrics are from "Gentle on My Mind" an oft covered song composed by the late John Hartford about 43 years ago. The best version, in my biased opinion, is John's New Grass style recording with Benny Martin, Sam Bush, Hargus `Pig' Robbins, and Buddy Emmons. The choppiness, the way John spits out the words; maybe like the auditory texture of gravel beneath wheels, gives the right sound quality to go with the visual imagery of the lyrics: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbZHIoaapmE robin Dwelling on the back roads by the rivers of our memories ... #107010 From: "retro77@..." Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:09 am Subject: Re: Sankhata dhammas retro77... Greetings Scott, > Paul: "Thank you - I appreciate the directness in your response." > Scott: "Any comments on the contents?" No, I don't think so. It would seem that the different understandings on "what is a dhamma" are so fundamentally opposed, that investigating a model which is underpinned by such different starting assumptions would be of no benefit. This is why I was thankful for the directness of your comments - you have saved me time which can now be devoted to the pursuit and further investigation of the suttas. In the past others have not recognised or acknowledged these fundamental differences and attempted to flood me with Abhidhamma and praise of its greatness instead, which is of not use in answering the question at hand. That said, however conditioned dhammas are conceived, we are all clearly in agreement that they are anicca, anatta and dukkha... I suspect that is the most important thing. Thank you for your comments, and thank you to others who have responded. I have read your comments with interest. Metta, Paul. :) #107011 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:17 am Subject: Re: Sankhata dhammas scottduncan2 Dear Paul, Regarding: P: "No, I don't think so. It would seem that the different understandings on 'what is a dhamma' are so fundamentally opposed, that investigating a model which is underpinned by such different starting assumptions would be of no benefit. This is why I was thankful for the directness of your comments - you have saved me time which can now be devoted to the pursuit and further investigation of the suttas. In the past others have not recognised or acknowledged these fundamental differences and attempted to flood me with Abhidhamma and praise of its greatness instead, which is of not use in answering the question at hand." Scott: Cool. P: "That said, however conditioned dhammas are conceived, we are all clearly in agreement that they are anicca, anatta and dukkha... I suspect that is the most important thing." Scott: Yep. Take it easy. Sincerely, Scott. #107012 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:37 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Anger. How to stop / with .Metta-Karuna / ptaus1 Hi Robin, Maybe you'll find some of these topics helpful in Useful Posts: http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/kJ_PSxoOuhi6GLO79yL3fIByw_PbmsGm8fGXTiMkrdkFY7OatP6\ BmoD-e6rSkCKRnasEzIesp0MwXq0Gc0XB/Useful_Posts_February_2010.htm "Kusala & Akusala1 ?" beginners" "Kusala & Akusala2 (wholesome and unwholesome mental states)" "Sobhana (Beautiful) and Asobhana Cittas (Non beautiful consciousness)" These might help understanding the difference between various wholesome and unwholesome mental states, regardless of whether they are accompanied by pleasant, unpleasant or neutral feeling at different times. "Cittas8 - one at a time only, one object at a time too" This might help regarding different cittas succeeding one another (and getting confused about it - e.g. when compassion is replaced by pity, then by sorrow, then by compassion again, etc, all in just a few moments). "Brahma Viharas2 - Near & Far enemies" This might explain a bit why sorrow, pity, etc, are in fact not compassion but the "enemies" of compassion (an added difficulty being that compassion is sometimes translated as pity). Anyway, I remember I had trouble understanding what Nina, Sarah and others here were saying until I read one of Nina's books to get the hang of the terminology and the way it's used here. I get the feeling that a lot of your questions also revolve around different usage of terms. If you haven't had the chance to read any of Nina's books, then I guess the logical start is Abhidhamma in Daily Life: http://www.scribd.com/doc/23527103/Abhidhamma-in-Daily-Life-revised-1-12-09 Best wishes pt > Robin: I have been contemplating this... #107013 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:47 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sankhata dhammas ptaus1 Dear Nina and KenO, Thanks for your replies: > KO: by characteristic of the nature of conditioned dhamma which are anatta, anicca and dukkha. The understanding of feeling feels is to help to understand that there is no self that feels. Likewise when one perceive the 32 body parts, one understand there is no owner in the body, the body is devoid of a self. > Nina: Pa~n~naa attends to the feeling that presents itself and knows > that feeling as anattaa. No person or self in the feeling. And there > is no thinking about it: this is feeling. pt: So do I understand correctly then that at the moment of insight, both the individual characteristic of a dhamma (feeling for example) as well as the general characteristic of that dhamma (anatta- for example) are known by pañña- at the same moment? Best wishes pt #107014 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sankhata dhammas ptaus1 Dear KenO, > KO: Another explanation, when one see the origination of the world, one discren correctly, one see nama and rupa. these are dhamma that exist, hence the non-existence to the world does not occur. When one see the cessation of the world, one understand that nama (except Nibbana) and rupa as dukkha, anicca and anatta, this samasara existence is completely abondoned and ceased, thus existence does not occur. This is a very interesting way to explain it in terms of individual and general characteristics as related to eternity/annihilation views. Best wishes pt #107015 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:19 am Subject: Little selves? truth_aerator Hello Retro, Scott, all, >Scott: Do you accept that a dhamma bears it's own characteristic? And how is that different from Dharmin? How does sabhava & dhamma, reconcile with sunnata? Abhidhamikas refute the Self by dividing it into different parts. Chair is made of parts. None of the parts of wood, paint, electrons, etc, are a "chair". Thus chair doesn't ultimately exist. Same with Self. But these particles called Dhammas, are being given the attributes of Self and indivisibility to them! So in this system it appears that the Self is being pushed back to microscopic levels. ... With metta, Alex #107016 From: "retro77@..." Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:28 am Subject: Re: Little selves? retro77... Greetings Alex, In investigating a similar question once, I came across the following in Y. Karunadasa's... The Dhamma Theory: Philosophical Cornerstone of the Abhidhamma http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/ebdha227.htm -------------- "Up to the present time," observes Nyanaponika Thera, "it has been a regular occurrence in the history of physics, metaphysics, and psychology that when a whole has been successfully dissolved by analysis, the resultant parts come again to be regarded as little Wholes." This is the kind of process that culminates in radical pluralism. As we shall soon see, about a hundred years after the formulation of the dhamma-theory, such a trend surfaced within certain schools of Buddhist thought and culminated in the view that the dhammas exist in all three periods of time. But the Pali Abhidhamma Pitaka did not succumb to this error of conceiving the dhammas as ultimate unities or discrete entities. In the Pali tradition it is only for the sake of definition and description that each dhamma is postulated as if it were a separate entity; but in reality it is by no means a solitary phenomenon having an existence of its own. This is precisely why the mental and material dhammas are often presented in inter-connected groups. In presenting them thus the danger inherent in narrowly analytical methods has been avoided -- the danger, namely, of elevating the factors resulting from analysis to the status of genuinely separate entities. Thus if analysis shows that composite things cannot be considered as ultimate unities, synthesis shows that the factors into which the apparently composite things are analysed (ghana-vinibbhoga) are not discrete entities. If this Abhidhammic view of existence, as seen from its doctrine of dhammas, cannot be interpreted as a radical pluralism, neither can it be interpreted as an out-and-out monism. For what are called dhammas -- the component factors of the universe, both within us and outside us -- are not fractions of an absolute unity but a multiplicity of co-ordinate factors. They are not reducible to, nor do they emerge from, a single reality, the fundamental postulate of monistic metaphysics. If they are to be interpreted as phenomena, this should be done with the proviso that they are phenomena with no corresponding noumena, no hidden underlying ground. For they are not manifestations of some mysterious metaphysical substratum, but processes taking place due to the interplay of a multitude of conditions. -------------- Metta, Paul. :) #107017 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 21, 2010 11:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anger. How to stop / with .Metta-Karuna / upasaka_howard Hi, Robin (and Sarah) - In a message dated 4/21/2010 8:57:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, nichibek@... writes: I have been contemplating this. I recall someone telling me that aversion {dosa} and attraction; or sukha and dukkha, can never arise together. That was some time ago. This always bothered me, because I have experienced blissful sorrow many times, at the time of a loss of loved one. The heart is filled with metta; but is sad at the person;s passing. Also, while very sick, in great pain, and unable to walk; I have felt very intense joy. Please, no one tell me endorphin; I know the difference. It is like the transition of the seasons from Summer, to Autumn, to Winter. It is sad, but awesomely beautiful. My understanding is that there are only three vedana, sukha, dukha, and neutral [neither, nor}, and only one arises a time. I have also seen uppeka given as the third, rather than neutral. Would this 'one at a time' also apply to emotions like sorrow and joy? There is no doubt in my mind that there is a bittersweet emotion that is a mixture of sorrow and joy. It is really neither pleasant nor unpleasant. It is utterly beautiful and blissful. =============================== Robin, a possibility to consider is that of a rapid alternation of emotions, so fast that the emotions seem simultaneous or mixed. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #107018 From: Kevin Farrell Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? farrellkevin80 Hi Paul, Paul wrote: Greetings Alex, In investigating a similar question once, I came across the following in Y. Karunadasa's. .. The Dhamma Theory: Philosophical Cornerstone of the Abhidhamma http://www.buddhane t.net/budsas/ ebud/ebdha227. htm ------------ -- "Up to the present time," observes Nyanaponika Thera, "it has been a regular occurrence in the history of physics, metaphysics, and psychology that when a whole has been successfully dissolved by analysis, the resultant parts come again to be regarded as little Wholes." This is the kind of process that culminates in radical pluralism. As we shall soon see, about a hundred years after the formulation of the dhamma-theory, such a trend surfaced within certain schools of Buddhist thought and culminated in the view that the dhammas exist in all three periods of time. But the Pali Abhidhamma Pitaka did not succumb to this error of conceiving the dhammas as ultimate unities or discrete entities. In the Pali tradition it is only for the sake of definition and description that each dhamma is postulated as if it were a separate entity; but in reality it is by no means a solitary phenomenon having an existence of its own. This is precisely why the mental and material dhammas are often presented in inter-connected groups. In presenting them thus the danger inherent in narrowly analytical methods has been avoided -- the danger, namely, of elevating the factors resulting from analysis to the status of genuinely separate entities. Thus if analysis shows that composite things cannot be considered as ultimate unities, synthesis shows that the factors into which the apparently composite things are analysed (ghana-vinibbhoga) are not discrete entities. If this Abhidhammic view of existence, as seen from its doctrine of dhammas, cannot be interpreted as a radical pluralism, neither can it be interpreted as an out-and-out monism. For what are called dhammas -- the component factors of the universe, both within us and outside us -- are not fractions of an absolute unity but a multiplicity of co-ordinate factors. They are not reducible to, nor do they emerge from, a single reality, the fundamental postulate of monistic metaphysics. If they are to be interpreted as phenomena, this should be done with the proviso that they are phenomena with no corresponding noumena, no hidden underlying ground. For they are not manifestations of some mysterious metaphysical substratum, but processes taking place due to the interplay of a multitude of conditions. ------------ -- Metta, Paul. :) Paul, The author does not understand that nama can only know one single object at a time. Wether dhammas arise in a group or not, when satipatthana occurs, it does not occur on all of the eight inseperable rupas that arise together in a kalapa for example, but on only one, such as hardness, or visible object, and so forth even though that object arises in a group of eight or more rupas. His "Dhamma Theory" misses the mark. Out of fear of thinking that ultimate realities imply some sort of thing with a self, he has to explain things away somehow, not realizing that we are referring to anatta dhamma-- it is not a self, it does not have a self, it is not controlled by a self, it is just a real reality that is experienced. He misses the mark. Realities are real and really here, but they are gone way too fast to ever be controlled. All the best, Kevin #107019 From: "retro77@..." Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:58 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Little selves? retro77... Greetings Kevin, You wrote: "The author does not understand that nama can only know one single object at a time." By status this, are you then turning "nama" into a "little self" of the type Alex depicted? How would you respond to such a suggestion? Metta, Paul. :) #107020 From: Kevin F Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? farrellkevin80 Hi Retro, Paul wrote: Greetings Kevin, You wrote: "The author does not understand that nama can only know one single object at a time." By status this, are you then turning "nama" into a "little self" of the type Alex depicted? How would you respond to such a suggestion? Metta, Paul. :) Hi Paul. The answer is no, definitely not. Nama is also uncontrollable and completely conditioned. It is not-self. I will try to give you an example. Lobha (attachment) arises very often. It arises many, many times throughout the day, even billions of times. When we look at something and see color, for example the color white, usually subtle lobha, attachment, arises and we may not even know it. It is subtle and it happens quite frequently. I am not talking about when we see some objec that we particularly like and we know we get attached to the color. I am talking about in a subtle way, even while we seem to be "thinking" about something else or experiencing something else, but some color comes into our field of vision. That attachment just arises at that time when we see the white color. It just arises by itself and falls away. Some times it arises many times in succession. We do not will it to arise, nor control it. It arises and falls away so fast before we even know it. Often meditators can't "settle their minds". That is because nama is arising of it's own accord, by conditions. It is self-view that arises and makes us think that nama and rupa are self. In reality it is not the way it is. Can you stop consciousness from arising right now? It is only delusion that takes it as a controllable self. Delusion is thick, my friend. Kevin #107021 From: "Lukas" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:17 am Subject: Re: Anger. How to stop / with .Metta-Karuna / szmicio Dear Robin, > I have been contemplating this. I recall someone telling me that aversion {dosa} and attraction; or sukha and dukkha, can never arise together. That was some time ago. This always bothered me, because I have experienced blissful sorrow many times, at the time of a loss of loved one. The heart is filled with metta; but is sad at the person;s passing. L: No metta with sorrow. Actually this is very hard to tell what metta is. And if there is even a slice sorrow or grieve there cannot be metta at that moment. >Also, while very sick, in great pain, and unable to walk; I have felt >very intense joy. L: Yes, no aversion so even great pain in the body it can be pleasant. Only such painful vipaka it cannot hurt you if you dont have dosa ath such moments. There can be even joy. >Please, no one tell me endorphin; I know the difference. It is like the transition of the seasons from Summer, to Autumn, to Winter. It is sad, but awesomely beautiful. L: And very natural and no one can change this. This is impossibe to change unpleasant feeling for pleasant. Even if we decide to take pain killers, this is conditioned moment it arose in you it;s gone now. And we will be thinink i decidet to take pain killers I can control realties. This thinking is also conditioned. If more we understand that each moments is out of control there is less misery. > My understanding is that there are only three vedana, sukha, dukha, and neutral [neither, nor}, and only one arises a time. I have also seen uppeka given as the third, rather than neutral. L: each vedana is nama it does not last. > Would this 'one at a time' also apply to emotions like sorrow and joy? L: Yes, it is. >There is no doubt in my mind that there is a bittersweet emotion that is a mixture of sorrow and joy. It is really neither pleasant nor unpleasant. It is utterly beautiful and blissful. If the Buddha said this can not be; then he was mistaken. Just kidding. I trust the Buddha's words; just not sure we always fully understand. > > thank you in advance for your khanti Best wishes Lukas #107022 From: "sukinderpal" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:31 am Subject: [dsg] Re: rules and rituals sukin pt sukinderpal Hi Ken, I would have asked to withdraw from this discussion had you not accused me of double standards…… ;-) ======== > >NewS: The question is, when there is the idea of going somewhere to learn how to practice, can this ever be without desire for results? You say 'to develop more understanding', then what about *now*? Why must one think in terms of the future? Are there not dhammas now as there are anywhere else? > > KO: You are telling you dont go to foundation? So what is now? I do not support meditation presently being practise especially retreats. In the ancient times, they do go a a seluded place. Sukin: I go to the foundation to "discuss". I don't say that there can't be Right Understanding "now". And the question is not whether those people in ancient times went to secluded places, but that they did this as a result of following methods / instructions or was it due to their own accumulated understanding. This is why I was pointing out earlier that reading about the behavior of the monks of those times and the danger of reducing what they did to methods which other people can follow. ======== > >NewS: Of course there is practice (samatha), but not because it is stated in the Visud. but because much kusala development would be required before there can be the development of the different Parami, including that of Panna. However if you insist on referring to the Visud., just as it is in the rest of the Tipitaka, the development of other kinds of kusala must be seen in light of Satipatthana. Besides in terms of Samatha itself, there is also the question of interpretation which is where we disagree. > > > >In this regard, I don't see the requirement for chanda, vitakka and saddha to be there with or without panna, proves that what has been written in the Visud. regarding samatha is about following 'methods'. When there is saddha etc. but no panna, this could be dana, sila or an instance of metta, mudita, karuna etc. or perhaps you would say Sanghanusati, Dhammanusati or Buddhanusati? In any case, which of these condition 'seeing the teachings as 'method' to be followed'? If it is some other object, what is it? > > KO: I am repeating myself. I already said, if there is no mindfulness, virture and clear comprehension, one should not undertake a meditation subject. Could you explain to me how does panna interest and act. you have yet explain to me. Sukin: But my question to put it differently, was, "what kind / level of understanding sees the descriptions in the Visuddhimagga as 'methods to follow'"? Are you saying that once the requirement for the particular amount of virtue, mindfulness and clear comprehension has been met, I'd come to see / understand the methods? ======== > >NewS: I don't know how it is interpreted by others, but when I refer to rites and ritual, I'm pointing to the akusala citta conditioned by wrong view. > > > KO: so is rites and ritual wrong by itself? Sukin: To me it is meaningless to call an activity 'rite and ritual' if no wrong view is involved. ======== > >NewS: I'd say that, because we forget that dhammas are anatta that we conceive of practice as being associated with 'methods'. So we are wrong from the very outset making any subsequent hearing of the Dhamma, more likely interpreted in a way which creates illusions of results and any apparent 'correction' just part of that illusion. > > > KO: what is wrong with a method, the dhammas or the method itself? What does anatta got to do with method? Sukin: All there is in reality are just conditioned dhammas and anatta is their characteristic. Methods imply that certain dhammas can be made to arise by thinking certain thoughts. This disregards the fact of conditionality, particularly that of the roots, and how any of them arise by natural decisive support condition rather than by intention. Besides, if any kusala arisen now was not by any intention, let alone following a method, why the sudden requirement for some method at a later stage? I'd like to hear your reasoning with regard to this. ======== > >NewS: Putting one foot in Samatha and the other in Vipassana, I hope you don't end up mixing the two. ;-) Isn't the 32 parts of body the object of samatha? How can this then lead to understanding anatta? Breaking out from compactness comes from right consideration of experiences through the different doorways one at a time, and not by way of a theoretical consideration, let alone concept of 32 parts…… > > KO: There is the development of 32 parts whether one like it or not. It is clear in the text it is use to eradicate greed. Are you saying now your understanding is paramatha level and not a theoretical level. Also there show how little dinosaurs understand samatha bhavana, the two bhavana must end in the delimiting of materiality and immateriality. This is always said in the texts. Sukin: Well from my perspective it is you who appears to be misunderstanding all this. The difference between samatha and vipassana is such that only the latter is the understanding leading to insight which the former can never do. The 32 parts for example, are concepts and concepts can never be the object of insight though they can very well be a condition for calm. True while contemplating any of the 32 parts, there are realities arising and falling away just as they do now when reading and typing. The realities are however nama and rupa, and only these can be the object of the development of wisdom capable of leading to insight. And yes, this is intellectual understanding but the kind which I believe is in line with the way things are. The concepts are concepts about that which really exists, not about that which does not. ========= > >NewS: You seem now to be going into the abstract thinking about how mindfulness, virtue and wisdom would direct the particular practice. You are saying that mindfulness conditions coming back to the recitation and virtue prevent it from going on to other sense objects. My question, what is the object of mindfulness, and when virtue arises, what is its object and would this be without panna? > > KO: There is no need to use sense object as a development. Some use dhamma, some use concepts, it depends on the person's inclination. Buddha never specify said use sense objects, there are other means. Sukin: That wasn't my point. I wasn't drawing the attention to the fact that sense objects must be known. I was asking about how virtue comes in during so-called meditation and plays its particular role and whether this is with panna or not. I was asking about the kind of mindfulness which directs the mind back to the meditation object if whether this is one kind of kusala, different from when the chosen subject is the object? ======== KO: Even in satipatthana there is samatha and vipassana and not just vipassana. To think it is just vipassana in satipatthana that is wrong and not according to the texts. Sukin: Every instance of kusala is samatha, so yes, satipatthana is samatha too. But are you now trying to bring this in as support for the need to develop samatha as a separate practice complementing satipatthana? Is this good reasoning? ;-) ========= <…> > >KO: Do you choose to listen to AS now? So what is choosing and what is the object of this listening? > > > >NewS: Is it right to make the comparison? > > KO: Why not? Then how do you choose. If you claim there is no choosing why you choose to listen to AS. And why cant other people choose a particular subject. If that is alright with you, why cant it is alright with others? Double standards? Sukin: :-) First, there is no such thing as 'choice' in reality. We can talk about choice conventionally, but this is because at those times our concern is not in describing or understanding reality, and of course it is even convenient to talk in such terms at times. For example, I would be telling you that I choose to listen to A. Sujin and not other teachers. You'd understand this as being a statement about the correctness of her teaching and not bother to question me about whether I really believed that I could actually choose to listen etc. In deed I do not go to listen involved with thoughts about choice even in the conventional sense (which btw, there has been no discussion since when Sarah and Jon were here :-(. ). But even if I did have such thoughts as choosing between this and that, it could only be an overall impression, unlike what must necessarily be involved in choosing between different meditation subjects, don't you think? A meditation subject has very direct relevance to the state of mind which considers it such that one either has right understanding or else wrong understanding about it. The requirement for precision is such that to even thinking to pick one out is reflection of wavering and therefore can't be right. Besides, the important thing is that while the former allows for understanding to arise at anytime in between, to think that similarly can happen with the latter while still holding on to the idea seems like a contradiction. ========= <….> > KO: that is your preference, Buddha never said development of enlightement is purely based on paramatha dhammas, it can be based on concepts and you also start from concepts even in understanding dhamma now. You can ask without expectation, why can't other people ask without expectation. Again isn't it double standard? Also did you choose to listen to her? Isn't that that act and concentrate to listen. Can you listen without concentration? Sukin: An understanding based on conventional examples would be kusala of the level of samatha, perhaps such is what is involved in Dhammanusati, but I'm not sure. However Pariyatti understanding I believe, which is precursor to Patipatti and Pativedha, this must be about paramattha dhammas. It is consideration *in the moment* about a reality, qualifying it as being that which directly conforms to panna of the level which is satipatthana and that of vipassana. So for anyone who hears about conventional examples and feel subsequently inspired, they'd need to have right understanding about paramattha dhammas before there can be any satipatthana. ========= > >Can the same be said about the activity of meditation? Does a meditator believe that whatever he learns is intellectual? Does he not have the aim and hence any subsequent idea, of having had direct understanding of some level? > > KO: That does mean the meditator does not know that the object in his mind is also not self. Not self is not restricted to dhammas, it could be apply to concepts just like the 32 parts or the cemetary meditation. Buddha never restrict not self on dhammas only, not I, not myself and not mine, are all could be concepts and dhammas :-). Sukin: You mean concepts have the characteristic of anatta? Yes, you can reflect conceptually about anatta, but 'not mine, not I and not myself' does not come from reasoning alone, but from a good deal of direct understanding. ========= > >NewS: I've given my response, but a bit more here. > > > >In considering the need for sila and sati etc. is it not imperative that we first understand what sila and sati are? And would not these require understanding at least of the level of Suttamaya panna or Bhavanamaya panna? And if this is understood to be the situation, would one still want to go on into talking about such kind of practice? > > > >In other words, I believe that thoughts about meditation arise precisely because one has missed the point. > > > KO: Nope, then you are dismissing what is written in the Visud. Prove by text and not by claims. Everyone can claim. Sukin: I'm not dismissing the Visud. but only interpreting what's written there in a way which is consistent with my understanding of anatta and conditionality and how the development of both samatha and vipassana must necessarily proceed. ======== > >NewS: I am saying that the dhamma which conditions thoughts about meditation is the papanca which is miccha ditthi. This of course is intellectual understanding only, but this is how it must be, isn't it, else how does one ever come to direct experience? > > >NewS: The akusala dhamma which is miccha ditthi conditions the idea and this when followed is wrong practice, which again involves predominantly the dhamma lobha, which is mistaken for sati. > > KO: That is really a total disregard to the what is taught by Buddhism, dont forget Buddha taught meditation also. Sukin: The Buddha taught the Four Noble Truths. The fourth is the Path led by Right Understanding. ======== > >>NewS: Not *just because* the person likes to count, there being of course many conditions. > > > KO: text pse. > > There is for example a Sutta in which monks have been described as reacting to akusala cittas by biting their tongue (?) and other such activities which I believe you'd agree are simply conditioned responses to the particular situation. In other words you'd understand all those activities in the light of individual accumulations, conditionality and anatta? Why not similarly with all that is written in the Visud. then? Just as you wouldn't believe that in biting your tongue it would be with kusala citta, shouldn't the same attitude be towards all those descriptions in the Visud.? > > > KO: We have to be clear, what I have written is supported by the text, your example is not. If you wish to give an example pse give one that is reasonable. Sukin: I'm not sure what you are saying. Are you saying that the particular example from the Suttas I gave should be interpreted in the same way as you interpret what is written in the Visud. namely as method to follow? ============ > >NewS: It has never been implied that the conventional activity is the wrong practice. Sitting is sitting, whether this is when listening to the Dhamma, watching TV or meditating. The one associated with watching TV is motivated by attachment. That with listening to the Dhamma can be the same, or kusala interest with / without understanding or with wrong view. That with meditating is with the idea of control / following a method, therefore necessarily with wrong view. ;-) > > KO: your conventional activity is listening is ok, why meditation is not ok. You mean when you listen to dhamma, you dont condition your mind to fix on the listening, isn't that also a control? Sukin: There can be right effort or wrong effort while listening. Trying hard to listen is likely wrong effort conditioned by tanha. Trying hard to catch realities with reference to particular time, place, posture and object of thought (such as the breath) must be with both tanha and wrong view. ========== KO: Isn't going to the foundation a conditoned act, a controlled act and a purposedly done act? If not, why do you go there? So what is control and what is anatta? Sukin: As you have also pointed out, there is nothing wrong with thinking and concepts. Getting ready, going to my car and driving towards the foundation, reaching there and going into the room for discussion, countless akusala must be involved. If there is any wrong view as well, that would be conditioned by something else and not the particular idea of going to discuss. Following the idea of a place with a particular setting, sitting a particular posture, concentrating on a particular object, this is saying that understanding can't arise at other times; indeed it is moving away from the present moment which is the only relevant moment in this regard. Are these two viewpoints similar to you? ========= > >NewS: No they weren't wrong, but one reason is that "they were not following a method". ;-) And btw, what according to you is the method involved in anyone's travelling to the foundation, sitting down and listening to the Dhamma? > > KO: You mean seating down, listening and concentrating on listening is not a method and then seating down concentrating breath is a method :-) Double standards again right :-) Sukin: Are you saying that I must have read about this in the Visud. or some other text and have followed the prescription? ;-) Metta, Sukinder #107023 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 6:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" wrote: > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > > Hi Robin, > > > For example, the khanika samadhi, momentary concentration, arises now with every single citta. Its object is exactly the same as the citta's and the other co-arising cetasikas. At a moment of seeing now, there is khanika samadhi arising. It's not a matter of developing it, directing mindfulness or noting anything. When there are attempts to direct anything, I believe it is wrong concentration that is being developed. > > > > Sarah, > > I may have missed your point. Are you saying that the ordinary, run of the mill, uninstructed person already has mindfulness and khanika samadhi? Dear Robin Khainka samadhi is always present, even when we are distratced. What is not always present is sati. you can read this letter I wrote some time back which might be relevant: http://www.dhammastudy.com/corr.html oops I just checked don't click on the link, it has a trojan virus, teh website seems to be infected. I will try to find anotehr site/ robert #107024 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 7:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Learning Pali/ translating Sutta Pitika nilovg Dear Kevin, Op 21-apr-2010, om 16:31 heeft Kevin Farrell het volgende geschreven: > Sadly, not every one has a penchant for Abhidhamma. The majority of > western Buddhits that I know, though, like to read suttas ------- N: Yes, because they think merely of long lists of classifications. The Abhidhamma is 'not in the book' as Kh Sujin says. As soon as we consider paramattha dhammas like seeing, and all defilements, we are already 'in Abhidhamma'. The suttas are full of Abhidhamma. Read the suttas about a person who sees and is then attached to visible object: Abhidhamma. It is all about the characteristic of the dhamma appearing now. There is seeing all the time, and before we realise it, attachment to visible object. If this is not understood one misses the point of the suttas all the time. You could make an Abhidhamma note for each sutta, showing that it points to right understanding of the reality that appears right now. People may read all suttas and commentaries in Pali and still misunderstand the real purpose of it all. We are far away from the Buddha's time and therefore we need someone like Kh Sujin who makes it all relevant to this moment. As to Pali, it can be useful. I liked Warder, because he lets people read suttas rather soon in the book. Nina. #107025 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 7:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sankhata dhammas nilovg Dear pt, Op 22-apr-2010, om 4:47 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > pt: So do I understand correctly then that at the moment of > insight, both the individual characteristic of a dhamma (feeling > for example) as well as the general characteristic of that dhamma > (anatt?aa for example) are known by pa~n~naa at the same moment? -------- N: Yes, because it is feeling that presents itself at that time, not seeing. Pa~n~naa has feeling as object, no confusion. It understands feeling as anattaa. In the course of insight first the specific characteristics, visesa lakkha.na), are understood, and later on the sama~n~na lakkha.na, the general characteristics (anattaa etc.). But these general characteristics are always seen as the anattaness of this or that specific reality. Nina. #107026 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 10:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? nilovg Dear Kevin, (and Ken H) Op 22-apr-2010, om 6:11 heeft Kevin F het volgende geschreven: > Often meditators can't "settle their minds". That is because nama > is arising of it's own accord, by conditions. It is self-view that > arises and makes us think that nama and rupa are self. In reality > it is not the way it is. Can you stop consciousness from arising > right now? It is only delusion that takes it as a controllable > self. Delusion is thick, my friend. -------- N: Ken H said: you have dsg. He said: Now here above you explained very well anattaness. I like to encourage you not to leave us alone because of your other work at translations. While you are explaining something it also helps you to consider realities. So, go on, it will help your translation work. ------- Nina. #107027 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 10:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) nilovg Dear Han, I appreciate your post, carefully and clearly explaining attanudi.t.thi. Nina. Op 20-apr-2010, om 4:33 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > I have agreed to your statement on two accounts. > (1) When there is an idea of the tangible object or visible object > (say, a bowl) being a thing, a substance or whole, it is attanu > di.t.thi or atta-di.t.thi. > (2) but it is not sakkaaya di.t.thi. #107028 From: han tun Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 12:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) hantun1 Dear Nina, Thank you very much. It is very encouraging for me. Respectfully, Han --- On Thu, 4/22/10, Nina van Gorkom wrote: From: Nina van Gorkom Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, April 22, 2010, 5:19 PM Dear Han, I appreciate your post, carefully and clearly explaining attanudi.t.thi. Nina. Op 20-apr-2010, om 4:33 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > I have agreed to your statement on two accounts. > (1) When there is an idea of the tangible object or visible object > (say, a bowl) being a thing, a substance or whole, it is attanu > di.t.thi or atta-di.t.thi. > (2) but it is not sakkaaya di.t.thi. #107029 From: han tun Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:16 pm Subject: Twenty modes of Dependent Origination hantun1 Dear Nina and Sarah, I will first quote some passages from The Essence of Buddha Abhidhamma, by Dr Mehm Tin Mon. Quote: [Some Notable Aspects of the Law. In the Law of Dependent Origination, twelve factors (a"nga), three periods (kaala), twenty modes (aakaara), three connections (sandhi), four abridgments (sa"nkhepa), three rounds (va.t.ta) and two roots (muula) should be taken into consideration.] End Quote. I will then take up No. 3 Twenty modes. Quote: [3 Twenty modes (aakaara) 1 Past Causes (Atiita Hetu) avijjaa, sa"nkhaara, ta.nhaa, upaadaana, kamma-bhava. 2 Present Effects (Va.t.tamana Phala) vi~n~naa.na, naama-ruupa, sa.laayatana, phassa, vedanaa. 3 Present Causes (Va.t.tamana Hetu) ta.nhaa, upaadaana, kamma-bhava, avijjaa, sa"nkhaara 4 Future Effects (Anaagata Phala) vi~n~naa.na, naama-ruupa, sa.laayatana, phassa, vedanaa. When we look at the past period, we see only avijjaa and sa"nkhaara to be taken as the past causes. But avijjaa; is kilesa-va.t.ta dhamma; so also are ta.nhaa and upaadaana. Since these va.t.ta-dhammas occur together in the same citta, ta.nhaa and upaadaana must also be included in the past causes. Again sa"nkhaara is a kamma-va.t.ta-dhamma, and so also is kammabhava. Thus when sa"nkhaara is taken into account, kamma-bhava is also implicitly accounted for. So we have five dhammas viz., avijjaa, sa"nkhaara, ta.nhaa, upaadaana and kamma-bhava as the past causes. Vi~n~naa.na, naama-ruupa, sa.laayatana, phassa and vedanaa in the present period are the present effects of the past causes. Again in the present period, ta.nhaa, upaadaana and kamma-bhava can act as the present causes for future rebirth. As reasoned above, when ta.nhaa and upaadaana are taken into account, avijjaa is also implicitly accounted for. Furthermore, sa"nkhaara must also be grouped together with kamma-bhava. So we get ta.nhaa, upaadaana; kamma-bhava, avijjaa and sa"nkhaara as the present causes which will condition the rebirth-process in the subsequent life. In the future period, only jaati and jaraa-mara.na are present. They represent becoming, decay and death, respectively. The question arises here as to which entities come into being, decay and die. The answer is: 'Vi~n~naa.na, naama-ruupa, sa.laayatana, phassa and vedanaa come into being, decay and die'. The arising, the existing and the dissolving phenomena of these entities are taken as jaati, jaraa and mara.na, respectively. So we get vi~n~naa.na, naama-ruupa, sa.laayatana, phassa and vedanaa as the future effects. Thus it is stated in Visuddhi Magga (Path of Purification) that: "Five causes were there in the past; Five fruits we find in present life; Five causes do we now produce; Five fruits we reap in future life." We should note that, although Pa.ticcasamuppaada states one cause for one effect, and the effect becomes the cause to give rise to another effect, actually many causes take part at the same time to give rise to many effects in real life.] End Quote. -------------------- Han: Now, my argument. In the above description, the five causes in the past life condition the five effects in the present life. The five effects in the present life condition the five causes in the present life. The five causes in the present life condition the five effects in the future life. It is a one-way direction. In a circular diagram produced by Mogok Sayadaw and other scholars, to make it very clear, there is an arrow from Past Causes to Present Effects; another arrow from Present Effects to Present Causes; another arrow from Present Causes to Future Effects, and so on. My argument is that it is not a one-way traffic as shown by the arrows. For example, the main arrow will go from Present Causes to Future Effects, but at the same time another arrow will make a backward loop from Present Causes to Present Effects. This is to show that whatever one does will have effect not just in the future life but also, to some extent, in this very life. If it were only one-way traffic, it would mean that one can do anything he likes, he will not have the effect of his actions in this life but only in the next life. It will then become very dangerous. Further more, if it were only one-way traffic (present causes having effects only in future life), how would one explain Di.t.thadhamma-vedaniya-kamma? I have asked this question to some of my friends but I did not get a satisfactory answer. Could you kindly tell me whether I am wrong to argue that way, and why? Respectfully, Han #107030 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:40 pm Subject: Re: Little selves? truth_aerator Hello Retro, Thank you for your post. I did read it before, though at this group the dhammas seem to be over-reified. Hopefully I am mistaken here. Also one of the things that I disagree as it comes to Abhidhamma is the term translated as "absolute realities." It really puts me off. It also puts off a monk who led the Mahasi retreat which I've attended. A more appropriate translation would be more like "fundamental experiential phenomena" or something like that. "Ultimate Reality" is too Hindu for me as it reminds me of "Brahman alone being real, and Samsara is unreal". It gives something stable (paramattha sacca) to cling to. There are suttas that talk how consciousness is a mirage "Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick ? this has been taught by the Kinsman of the Sun. However you observe them, appropriately examine them, they're empty, void to whoever sees them appropriately. " http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.095.than.html The above phrase by the Buddha, rather than Hindu commentators who authored post canonical Abh doesn't justify any ultimate substance in citta/cetasika/rupa, a carrier of the burden we call "dhammas". Again, the point of analyzing reality into parts is to refute the idea of the whole, a single agent. This whole, this single agent is now part of ultimate reality like citta/cetasika/rupa according to post canonical Abh. Ptsm (sutta pitaka) REFUTES the sabhava nature of things which is taken for granted in post canonical Abh. The fact that cittas arise and fall so rapidly also negates their self-sufficient nature. But it doesn't negate the possibility of eternalistic interpretation put onto them. Even though they rise and fall so rapidly, still at any conscious moment there is citta & cetasika. So as a category they are always present to the experience. No wonder some call them ultimate realities. It is not too far from talk about "the ground of all being". With metta, Alex #107031 From: Kevin F Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Learning Pali/ translating Sutta Pitika farrellkevin80 Hi Nina, You wrote: Dear Kevin, Op 21-apr-2010, om 16:31 heeft Kevin Farrell het volgende geschreven: > Sadly, not every one has a penchant for Abhidhamma. The majority of > western Buddhits that I know, though, like to read suttas ------- N: Yes, because they think merely of long lists of classifications. The Abhidhamma is 'not in the book' as Kh Sujin says. As soon as we consider paramattha dhammas like seeing, and all defilements, we are already 'in Abhidhamma'. The suttas are full of Abhidhamma. Read the suttas about a person who sees and is then attached to visible object: Abhidhamma. It is all about the characteristic of the dhamma appearing now. There is seeing all the time, and before we realise it, attachment to visible object. If this is not understood one misses the point of the suttas all the time. You could make an Abhidhamma note for each sutta, showing that it points to right understanding of the reality that appears right now. People may read all suttas and commentaries in Pali and still misunderstand the real purpose of it all. We are far away from the Buddha's time and therefore we need someone like Kh Sujin who makes it all relevant to this moment. As to Pali, it can be useful. I liked Warder, because he lets people read suttas rather soon in the book. Nina. Kevin: Nina thanks a lot for that message. My plan is to keep study Paal.i. When I am ready to translate, to translate first the Suttas and Commentaries dealing with dry insight (such as the Susima Sutta, Bahiya Sutta, etc. and their Commentaries and Tikas). After that, other suttas that deal with satipatthana, abhidhamma, and so on so forth, just like you mention. If there is some benefit, I will translate the rest of the Suttas too. One step at a time I will take. It is very rare to have a human body and to understand Dhamma and be able to share it with others. I take a lot of inspiration from your books. They have helped me understand the Dhamma. What wholesome results of kamma I had to come to Thailand! Kevin #107032 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 10:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? upasaka_howard Hi, Paul (and Alex) - In a message dated 4/21/2010 11:31:50 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, retro77@... writes: Greetings Alex, In investigating a similar question once, I came across the following in Y. Karunadasa's... The Dhamma Theory: Philosophical Cornerstone of the Abhidhamma http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/ebdha227.htm -------------- "Up to the present time," observes Nyanaponika Thera, "it has been a regular occurrence in the history of physics, metaphysics, and psychology that when a whole has been successfully dissolved by analysis, the resultant parts come again to be regarded as little Wholes." This is the kind of process that culminates in radical pluralism. As we shall soon see, about a hundred years after the formulation of the dhamma-theory, such a trend surfaced within certain schools of Buddhist thought and culminated in the view that the dhammas exist in all three periods of time. But the Pali Abhidhamma Pitaka did not succumb to this error of conceiving the dhammas as ultimate unities or discrete entities. In the Pali tradition it is only for the sake of definition and description that each dhamma is postulated as if it were a separate entity; but in reality it is by no means a solitary phenomenon having an existence of its own. This is precisely why the mental and material dhammas are often presented in inter-connected groups. In presenting them thus the danger inherent in narrowly analytical methods has been avoided -- the danger, namely, of elevating the factors resulting from analysis to the status of genuinely separate entities. Thus if analysis shows that composite things cannot be considered as ultimate unities, synthesis shows that the factors into which the apparently composite things are analysed (ghana-vinibbhoga) are not discrete entities. If this Abhidhammic view of existence, as seen from its doctrine of dhammas, cannot be interpreted as a radical pluralism, neither can it be interpreted as an out-and-out monism. For what are called dhammas -- the component factors of the universe, both within us and outside us -- are not fractions of an absolute unity but a multiplicity of co-ordinate factors. They are not reducible to, nor do they emerge from, a single reality, the fundamental postulate of monistic metaphysics. If they are to be interpreted as phenomena, this should be done with the proviso that they are phenomena with no corresponding noumena, no hidden underlying ground. For they are not manifestations of some mysterious metaphysical substratum, but processes taking place due to the interplay of a multitude of conditions. -------------- Metta, Paul. :) ========================================= Yes, I see Karunadasa's description to be a middle-way approach that defies essentialist reification (both monistic and pluralistic) and also defies an outright nihilism. It expresses a distinguishing-within-seamlessness that I think finds it's basis in a good number of suttas, a distinguishing in which convention plays a key role. I also believe, however, that a number of the good folks on DSG likely find this perspective to be irremediably flawed! ;-) 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) #107033 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Learning Pali/ translating Sutta Pitika nilovg Dear Kevin, Op 22-apr-2010, om 16:10 heeft Kevin F het volgende geschreven: > One step at a time I will take. ------- N: Yes, a very good idea. Nina. #107034 From: Kevin F Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? farrellkevin80 Dear Nina, Nina: Dear Kevin, (and Ken H) Op 22-apr-2010, om 6:11 heeft Kevin F het volgende geschreven: K:> Often meditators can't "settle their minds". That is because nama > is arising of it's own accord, by conditions. It is self-view that > arises and makes us think that nama and rupa are self. In reality > it is not the way it is. Can you stop consciousness from arising > right now? It is only delusion that takes it as a controllable > self. Delusion is thick, my friend. -------- N: Ken H said: you have dsg. He said: Now here above you explained very well anattaness. I like to encourage you not to leave us alone because of your other work at translations. While you are explaining something it also helps you to consider realities. So, go on, it will help your translation work. Kevin: Dear Nina, I not leave alone. Only reason to work on any dhamma is for understanding of anatta dhammas, which leads to the end of suffering. This I try to share wherever I go, conditions allowing. Kevin #107035 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 10:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Learning Pali/ translating Sutta Pitika upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Kevin) - In a message dated 4/22/2010 3:40:22 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear Kevin, Op 21-apr-2010, om 16:31 heeft Kevin Farrell het volgende geschreven: > Sadly, not every one has a penchant for Abhidhamma. The majority of > western Buddhits that I know, though, like to read suttas ------- N: Yes, because they think merely of long lists of classifications. The Abhidhamma is 'not in the book' as Kh Sujin says. ----------------------------------------------------- I disagree. It is Dhamma that is "not in the book". In the following, I believe there is no reason to use 'Abhidhamma' instead of 'Dhamma' except to specifically promote the Abhidhamma Pitaka. Everywhere that 'Abhidhamma' is used in the following, I believe that 'Dhamma' would more properly be used. IMO, it is not that Abhidhamma is found in the suttas, but that the Dhamma, directly taught in the suttas, can be found pointed to as well in the Abhidhamma. --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- As soon as we consider paramattha dhammas like seeing, and all defilements, we are already 'in Abhidhamma'. The suttas are full of Abhidhamma. Read the suttas about a person who sees and is then attached to visible object: Abhidhamma. It is all about the characteristic of the dhamma appearing now. There is seeing all the time, and before we realise it, attachment to visible object. If this is not understood one misses the point of the suttas all the time. ----------------------------------------------------- I believe that the point of the suttas is not individual-phenomena-specific characteristics, but the general characteristics of anicca, dukkha, and anatta. The taste of the Dhamma isn't the taste of "realities" but of emptiness, relinquishment, and freedom. It is exactly the "realities" that need to be seen through as "unreal." --------------------------------------------------------- You could make an Abhidhamma note for each sutta, showing that it points to right understanding of the reality that appears right now. People may read all suttas and commentaries in Pali and still misunderstand the real purpose of it all. We are far away from the Buddha's time and therefore we need someone like Kh Sujin who makes it all relevant to this moment. As to Pali, it can be useful. I liked Warder, because he lets people read suttas rather soon in the book. Nina. ================================== With metta, Howard /Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick - this has been taught by the Kinsman of the Sun. However you observe them, appropriately examine them, they're empty, void to whoever sees them appropriately./ (From the Phena Sutta) _______________________________ /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) ________________________________ /He who neither goes too far nor lags behind and knows about the world: "This is all unreal," - such a monk gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta ) #107036 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Twenty modes of Dependent Origination nilovg Dear Han, Op 22-apr-2010, om 15:16 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > I will first quote some passages from The Essence of Buddha > Abhidhamma, by Dr Mehm Tin Mon. ------ N: Always a very good idea. An excellent teacher. I never take it so rigidly as one way traffic. These are different aspects shown so well by the Visuddhimagga. Also the Buddha in the suttas starts from the beginning, or from the middle or from the end. It is all explained in Vis. Ch XVII. There is so much more to be said, there are so many aspects, but it would be too long. The twenty modes are like the spokes of the Wheel of becoming. I quote some parts of my Vis. study: < The sole purpose of all these divisions and subdivisions is to demonstrate that there is no maker of the Wheel, no experiencer, that there are only naama and ruupa, continuing in the cycle because of conditions. What is cause conditions fruit and what is fruit conditions cause, and this again conditions fruit. Thus, the Wheel of life goes round and round without any interruption. However, the situation is not hopeless. It is possible to be liberated from the cycle if one follows the right Path. The arahat is called a breaker of the spokes of the Wheel (Co. to the Vimaanavatthu, sa.msaara- cakkassa araana.m hatattaa). -------- In the preceding sections it was explained that there was a fivefold cause in the past that conditions a fivefold fruit at present, and that in the present life there is a fivefold cause that produces a fivefold fruit in the future. The links were classified as five that are kamma and five that are result. There is the round of kamma and the round of result. The following section introduces another round, the round of defilements. Ignorance, craving and clinging are now classified as the round of defilements. The ?triple round? are the rounds of kilesa (defilements), of kamma and of vipaaka. Defilements condition the performing of kamma which produces vipaaka in the form of rebirth and of sense-cognitions during life. On account of vipaaka defilements tend to arise and these motivate the committing of kamma. This happens time and again in our daily life: defilements arise because of what is seen, heard or experienced through the other senses and defilements can motivate akusala kamma through body, speech or mind. Thus the cycle goes on and on. As was explained before by the Tiika, ignorance, craving and clinging support kamma-accumulation (kammasambhaara). -------------- Text Vis. 298: 'With triple round it spins for ever' (par. 288): here formations and becoming are the 'round of kamma'. Ignorance, craving and clinging are the 'round of defilements'. Consciousness, mentality-materiality, the sixfold base, contact and feeling are the 'round of result'. So this Wheel of Becoming, having a triple round with these three rounds, should be understood to spin, revolving again and again, forever; for the conditions are not cut off as the round of defilements is not cut off.> ________ Nina. #107037 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Learning Pali/ translating Sutta Pitika nilovg Hi Howard, Op 22-apr-2010, om 16:40 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I disagree. It is Dhamma that is "not in the book". In the following, > I believe there is no reason to use 'Abhidhamma' instead of > 'Dhamma' except > to specifically promote the Abhidhamma Pitaka. ------- N: No problem at all. Abhidhamma is Dhamma. I do not think of the seven books, I think of reality, or realities, dhammas. We can and should take Abhidhamma in a wider sense. Abhi just means: in detail or in the highest sense. ---------- H: The taste of the Dhamma isn't the taste of "realities" but of emptiness, relinquishment, and freedom. It is exactly the "realities" that need to be seen through as "unreal." ------- N: As to the word "unreal", you mean empty of self, I know. But unreal could create confusion. They are real, have their own characteristics, but they do not stay, have no core, no owner. Seeing now is real, it can be experienced directly, it is not imagination. You said before that paramattha dhammas are conventional, but this is also a matter of words. As you know, there is conventional truth: person, table, and there is paramattha truth: seeing, defilements, which have their own characteristics. If the specific characteristics of realities are not clearly understood first of all, then they cannot be realised as impermanent, dukkha, anattaa. It has to be known exactly 'which' reality is impermanent, and when: just now. Only one reality at a time. -------- Nina. #107038 From: "Lukas" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:24 pm Subject: Re: Twenty modes of Dependent Origination szmicio Dear Han, Thanks for sharing this. You know excellent teachers. > Han: Now, my argument. > > In the above description, the five causes in the past life condition the five effects in the present life. The five effects in the present life condition the five causes in the present life. The five causes in the present life condition the five effects in the future life. It is a one-way direction. In a circular diagram produced by Mogok Sayadaw and other scholars, to make it very clear, there is an arrow from Past Causes to Present Effects; another arrow from Present Effects to Present Causes; another arrow from Present Causes to Future Effects, and so on. > > My argument is that it is not a one-way traffic as shown by the arrows. For example, the main arrow will go from Present Causes to Future Effects, but at the same time another arrow will make a backward loop from Present Causes to Present Effects. This is to show that whatever one does will have effect not just in the future life but also, to some extent, in this very life. If it were only one-way traffic, it would mean that one can do anything he likes, he will not have the effect of his actions in this life but only in the next life. It will then become very dangerous. Further more, if it were only one-way traffic (present causes having effects only in future life), how would one explain Di.t.thadhamma-vedaniya-kamma? > > I have asked this question to some of my friends but I did not get a satisfactory answer. > Could you kindly tell me whether I am wrong to argue that way, and why? L: I am not sure I understood you correctly, but i want to mention something here. I think that those past hetus, present fruits, present hetus and future fruits can be shown by some examples. Like a child who was born in orphanage and grew up there without parents then he went steal and go to prison. So those present fruits are there and they aslo influance our behaviour(present hetus), then it will bring fruits later on. This is all caused by avijja from past hetus. And what is important here, that we all like to think we are the owner of our kamma, that we have our own fate in our hands, and i was always wondering OK I am born in good family, I am a good guy, but what's with guys who was born in worse circumstances. They were shaped not only by they behaviour but also by circumstances they lived. My uncle said once: look at prisoners, they were bad, they had their free will and they choose like they choose(present hetus). And I told him, this is not true. This thinking can be with pride an dosa. A lot of different conditions influance people, like were they lived etc.. I think not so much control we think there is. I think we shall consider life like explained in patticasamuppada and dont think much o Self that is a controler, but have more reflections on non-Self, only different conditions , past hetus, present fruits, present hetus, future fruits. Like Nina had quoted nice reminder: nama and ruupa only now, but the end of misery is possible. I think we shall not involved too much Self, cause patticasamupada doesnt mention it and this is very deep teaching that all buddhists should consider in their lifes. I think then there is less misery Best wishes Lukas #107039 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:40 pm Subject: Susima sutta, dry insight? truth_aerator Hello Kevin, Rob2K, all, I wish I had a penny every time someone has claimed that Susima sutta teaches "dry insight". Please tell me where in the sutta does it says that those monks didn't do Jhana? They simply rejected the abhinnas and aruppa attainments (both are not part of N8P, but Jhanas are part of N8P). I checked Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi's comments and he says the same thing. With metta, Alex #107040 From: "Lukas" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 6:11 pm Subject: Re: Susima sutta, dry insight? szmicio Dear Alex, Here is a link for the Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.070.than.html First of all this Sutta is excellent to show that hearing Dhamma is the condition for right understanding and Nibbana. Some vibhangas Buddha made there and then people became enlightenment. There is also shown explanation in short and explanation in detailed way. Susima couldnt understand the meaning of Dhamma explained in short, and he asked for explaing Dhamma in detailed way then he get enligtenment. This is all so perfect. This is how Dhamma is manifested. Theras comments go with this all the time. They constitute Theravada tradition. > I wish I had a penny every time someone has claimed that Susima sutta teaches "dry insight". > > Please tell me where in the sutta does it says that those monks didn't do Jhana? They simply rejected the abhinnas and aruppa attainments (both are not part of N8P, but Jhanas are part of N8P). L: There was explained that Nibbana can be reach with Jhana or not, this is explained in Abhidhammathasanagaha. > I checked Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi's comments and he says the same thing. L: This is funny because bhikkhu Bodhi translated Abhidhammathasangaha ;> :> And right there is explanation. Dhamma could be realized with jhanas or not. Depends on conditions. Best wishes Lukas #107041 From: "Rob" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 6:12 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Anger. How to stop / with .Metta-Karuna / rrobinrb2000 Hi pt. 'Sorry' for the length of the reply. :) I almost decided not to click send. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi Robin, > Maybe you'll find some of these topics helpful in Useful Posts: > http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/kJ_PSxoOuhi6GLO79yL3fIByw_PbmsGm8fGXTiMkrdkFY7OatP6\ BmoD-e6rSkCKRnasEzIesp0MwXq0Gc0XB/Useful_Posts_February_2010.htm R: The hyperlink came up 'document not found,' I shall try to find it later. I want to read it. Over the years, I have read about a dozen pieces on the same topic of 'near and far enemies' of the wholesome mental states. I have some questions about far opposites of Uppeka. pt: > "Brahma Viharas2 - Near & Far enemies" > This might explain a bit why sorrow, pity, etc, are in fact not compassion but the "enemies" of compassion (an added difficulty being that compassion is sometimes translated as pity). R: I understand that actually. I have written on that topic; of the near and far opposites or 'enemies' of the 4 Brahma-Vihara / catasso appamannayo. Obviously; sadism, cruelty, and schadenfreude are shades of far enemies of karuna. Pity, as I see it, in modern terms, has an element of condescending contempt or scorn, an attitude that "I" am better than "you." It has the same connotation as 'pathetic.' What is lacking in pity, in that sense, is genuine empathy. So, yes, pity, as in common usage, would be a near opposite of karuna. I think. I could be wrong. BTW, there have been controlled studies of the effects of metta & karuna bhavana on the human brain. These have shown that the cultivations increase activity in the centers of the brain associated with empathy. When practitioners of metta bhasvana are shown images of suffering, the empathy centers of the brain 'light up.' Meanwhile, similar studies of serial killers, as well as other pathological individuals, show a msrked lack of empathy in response to suffering. There is clinical work being done, to apply forms of 'compassion meditation.' as treatments for 'empathy deficit.' This has many practical implications in daily life. We, humanity as a whole, have had problems with rebellious youth, bullying at school, domestic violence, road rage, workers 'going postal,' and so on. Buddhism seems to offer some real solutions, and there is a lot of genuine interest, even out here here in rural USA. Moving on, I have discussed the problems of translation with others as well. The Chinese word for metta, for example, can actually mean pity or mercy, in common everyday usage; while the Chinese word for karuna means lamentation or grief. One translator, who is an expert in Classical Chinese Literature, has used pity as a translation of ? {ci}, a translation of maitri, the sanskrit for metta. Of course, the meaning of words change over time. One of the original meanings of pity was a tender empathy for the pain / suffering of others, resulting in mercy, especially for prisoners and servants. This pity or mercy is rooted in a real humane respect and honest concern for the well being of others. Pity, in the the old sense of piety, could also mean empathetic joy for the victories / successes / happiness of others -- mudita. In the Buddha's words, paraphrased, 'as a mother loves her child, her only child.' Normal healthy parents have empathy for their own children.' The idea is to extend this to all 'children.' We are all someone's child. Anyway, over time, as noted above, pity has come to imply an element of contempt or scorn, as in 'how pitiful.' This is probably because the concept of pity, in the West, was developed by those who deemed themselves in a superior position. The rich pity the poor. The master pities the servant. The jailer pities the prisoner. The victor in war shows mercy to the defeated. Can that be reversed? Could, for example, a victim of crime have compassion for the perpetrator; the prisoner for the plight of the jailer; the ailing patient for the challenges faced by the doctor; the servant for the boss? The latter would, I think, come closer to karuna. Lamentation also has different nuances. Lamentation can imply a kind of self pity, a 'woe is me' attitude; in which one wallows in a "why me" grief. A lamentation can also be also a way of honestly dealing with, addressing. and overcoming sorrow. This was the original intent of lamentations. They worked like lullabies, to console and pacify. I used the analogy of good blues music; which is sort of mellow and bittersweet. By that I mean that it honestly addresses the reality of sorrow, but it defeats that sorrow by finding a way 'home,' to a kind of underlying 'beauty.' Perhaps it is the inner beauty of empathy itself? This contrasts with bad blues music; which wallows in self pity, resentment, enmity, disgust, and so on. There is the story of the Buddha's advice to female householder Kisagotami, who had lost a child. There are a many themes there. One of these is that while ugly {asubha}, by conventional standards, Kisagotami had an inner wealth; a kind of subtle, graceful beauty. Another is that is she was unable to glean mustard seeds from any household untouched by the loss of death. There is a 20th Century blues song with that theme, "Death Don't Have no Mercy." Death visits every house in this land. We can universalize our selfish sorrow; in this way we can begin to transcend our compounded / conditioned egoistic self? Another thing on words and meaning. Compassion consists of the prefix com- plus passion. Com- is a Latin cognate of the Indic sam-; which we see in many Pali Buddhist words {sanna, sankhara, samkhata, sambodhi, samma, samadhi}. It usually means with / together / same. Passion originally meant sorrow. So the original meaning was to suffer together, to share another person's grief or pain. Over time, the meaning of passion changed to mean emotion in general. Sympathy is a similar word. Syn- is derived from a Greek prefix that means the same thing as com- and sam-. Pathy is from 'pathos,' meaning emotion, especially emotional pain. Of course, no one wants to have another's stress or mental pathology. I think the idea is to truly understand, so one can 'reach out' and help. As a tangential aside, passion has evolved another meaning, far removed from original the meaning of sorrow or even emotion. It has come to mean the same thing, in some contexts, as ardor, elan, vigor, or enthusiasm; which are wholesome states. Many years ago, a Mahayana teacher was using 'passion' as a translation of viriya {a cognate of virility, btw}. Meanwhile, at that time, passion was also being used as the most common translation of kilesa. Words can confuse as well as inform or clarify. :) A 'possible' etymology of karuna: Ka could mean 'to put", "to do," or "to disseminate widely." Ru could mean a deep empathy for the suffering of all sentient beings. -Na is a cognate of -ing, but it is used to make gerunds; so -ness, -ion, or -ment, meaning the 'state of' can express this in English. The main caveat is that it is more of a process, an 'ing,' rather than a static state. pt > This might help regarding different cittas succeeding one another (and getting confused about it - e.g. when compassion is replaced by pity, then by sorrow, then by compassion again, etc, all in just a few moments). I still have trouble reconciling that with concepts that the Buddha talked about, like 'sustaining' recollections, or cultivating and 'maintaining' wholesome cetana(s). Sorry if that annoys anyone. Finally, I had some interesting experiences using the chant of metta, reciting the metta sutta, and some other 'devotional methods' in dealing with the depressing aspects of my sickness. I was a very independent person, and wanted no help, no pity, from anyone. I had to change my attitude to accept some help I both needed and had maybe even earned. The amazing thing, to me, was the obvious affect this had on people around me, including strangers. It was almost palpable. My wife kept asking me why all those people were being so darn nice to us? Some of those same people had been hostile to us in the past. Finally finally, I think this still all relates to conventional or relative truth? To the conditioned / compounded? The Brahma Vihara{s} imply a self and others? While things are far from perfect, I 'prefer' 'my' conditions as they are now, in contrast with 10 years ago. Of course, 'my' and 'preference' can still reflect wrong views. :) palms together robin #107042 From: "Rob" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 7:24 pm Subject: Re: Anger. How to stop / with .Metta-Karuna / rrobinrb2000 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear Robin, no one can change this. This is impossibe to change unpleasant feeling for pleasant. Even if we decide to take pain killers, this is conditioned moment it arose in you it;s gone now. And we will be thinink i decidet to take pain killers I can control realties. This thinking is also conditioned. > If more we understand that each moments is out of control there is less misery. > FWIW, I can not accept this at this moment. I think there is control. Otherwise, Samma Vayama as explained in the Sutta makes no sense. There can be no blocking, no abandoning, no cultivation, no sustaining. If there is commentary stating the Buddha did not really mean what he spoke in the Sutta; then I shall go with the Buddha's words. I do not think that control means that there must be some perpetual self doing the controlling. Nor does it mean that a citta endures. I can not really explain the ontology. with metta robin And what, bhikkhus, is Right Effort? Here (in this teaching), bhikkhus, a bhikkhu generates an intention, makes effort, rouses energy, applies his mind, and strives ardently to prevent the arising of evil, unwholesome states of mind that have not yet arisen. He generates an intention, makes effort, rouses energy, applies his mind, and strives ardently to abandon evil, unwholesome states of mind that have arisen. He generates an intention, makes effort, rouses energy, applies his mind, and strives ardently to attain wholesome states of mind that have not yet arisen. He generates an intention, makes effort, rouses energy, applies his mind, and strives ardently to maintain the wholesome states of mind that have arisen, to prevent their lapsing, to increase them, to cause them to grow, and to completely develop them. This, bhikkhus, is called Right Effort. #107043 From: Kevin F Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 7:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Susima sutta, dry insight? farrellkevin80 From the wording of your post I can see that you are not a genuine seeker of Dhamma, trying to understand where it is stated in the Sutta that 500 monks attained without jhana, but that you are only here to be antagonistic, because of your accumulated lobha and dosa. How sad, really. It makes it unable for me to share the quotes from the Commentaries with you which clearly state these things, because you are not sincere in your questioning. Take your antagonism away from here friend. Come back when you are sincere for information. Then we will share the dhamma with you. Go antagonize elsewhere, friend. We will not answer your posts until you are sincere, although I have in front of me the quotations from the Commentary and Sub-Co of the Sutta that make it perfectly clear as crystal, I cannot share them with you-- and I am one who is incapable of not sharing the Dhamma [with those who are sincere seekers] my friend, if you understand what that means, but you don't understand. You have fallen into error. Kevin ________________________________ From: truth_aerator To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups. Sent: Thu, April 22, 2010 12:40:45 PM Subject: [dsg] Susima sutta, dry insight? Hello Kevin, Rob2K, all, I wish I had a penny every time someone has claimed that Susima sutta teaches "dry insight". Please tell me where in the sutta does it says that those monks didn't do Jhana? They simply rejected the abhinnas and aruppa attainments (both are not part of N8P, but Jhanas are part of N8P). I checked Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi's comments and he says the same thing. With metta, Alex #107044 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 9:43 pm Subject: Re: Susima sutta, dry insight? truth_aerator Dear Lukas, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > Here is a link for the Sutta > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.070.than.html > > First of all this Sutta is excellent to show that hearing Dhamma is >the condition for right understanding and Nibbana. Right. It is very important to hear the right Dhamma from the master, The Buddha. It is almost impossible to become awakened without hearing/reading True Dhamma. There is no need to reinvent the wheel. >Some vibhangas Buddha made there and then people became >enlightenment. The suttas focus on the Buddha's Sermon. This is their emphasis. As such, they do not mention every single event in a monk's life (especially if he was not even a stream-enterer yet) prior to hearing the Buddha's discourse and reaching Stream or Higher. It is not impossible that this monk may have just finished a very intensive jhana and/or vipassana retreat and at the end of it, when the mind was pure, all it needed was a right guidance by the Best Teacher of All Time - The Buddha. So just like lets say "the wedding photos" do not show everything that has occured prior, same could be in the suttas where the monk's path broke through with Buddha's instruction. IMHO. This is why I prefer definitive statements of the Buddha like "it can't happen without X, Y, Z". You simply can't include everything and everything leading up to this event into every sutta. ================================================ Translator's note: This discourse is sometimes cited as proof that a meditator can attain Awakening (final gnosis) without having practiced the jhanas, but a close reading shows that it does not support this assertion at all. The new arahants mentioned here do not deny that they have attained any of the four "form" jhanas that make up the definition of right concentration. Instead, they simply deny that they have acquired any psychic powers or that they remain in physical contact with the higher levels of concentration, "the formless states beyond forms." In this, their definition of "discernment-release" is no different from that given in AN 9.44 (compare this with the definitions for "bodily witness" and "released in both ways" given in AN 9.43 and AN 9.45). Taken in the context of the Buddha's many other teachings on right concentration, there's every reason to believe that the new arahants mentioned in this discourse had reached at least the first jhana before attaining Awakening. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.070.than.html ====== With metta, Alex #107045 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 10:40 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Little selves? kenhowardau Hi Paul, Welcome from me to DSG. You asked Kevin: ". . . are you then turning "nama" into a "little self"?" The correct answer, of course, is no, there is no self anywhere. In a way, however, the correct answer could be yes. That is because everything that could possibly be mistaken for self can in fact be traced back to a nama or rupa. Namas and rupas (conditioned dhammas) are the Buddha's explanation of ultimate reality. They explain beyond doubt how the world is devoid of a self. Anything that could be called a self is in reality just a fleeting, worthless, conditioned mental or physical phenomenon. Generally speaking, modern-day Buddhists don't want to know there is no self. And so they desperately latch onto the idea that the Buddha may not have believed in namas and rupas. Don't listen to them, Paul. :-) Ken H #107046 From: han tun Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 12:56 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Twenty modes of Dependent Origination hantun1 Dear Lukas, Thank you very much for your kind comments. Lukas: I am not sure I understood you correctly, but i want to mention something here. I think that those past hetus, present fruits, present hetus and future fruits can be shown by some examples. Like a child who was born in orphanage and grew up there without parents then he went steal and go to prison. So those present fruits are there and they also influence our behaviour (present hetus), then it will bring fruits later on. This is all caused by avijja from past hetus. And what is important here, that we all like to think we are the owner of our kamma, that we have our own fate in our hands, and i was always wondering OK I am born in good family, I am a good guy, but what's with guys who was born in worse circumstances. They were shaped not only by they behaviour but also by circumstances they lived. My uncle said once: look at prisoners, they were bad, they had their free will and they choose like they choose (present hetus). And I told him, this is not true. This thinking can be with pride and dosa. A lot of different conditions influence people, like where they lived etc.. I think not so much control we think there is. I think we shall consider life like explained in patticasamuppada and dont think much of Self that is a controller, but have more reflections on non-Self, only different conditions, past hetus, present fruits, present hetus, future fruits. Like Nina had quoted nice reminder: nama and ruupa only now, but the end of misery is possible. I think we shall not involved too much Self, cause patticasamupada doesnt mention it and this is very deep teaching that all buddhists should consider in their lives. I think then there is less misery -------------------- Han: I agree with your above comments. If you are not sure you understood me correctly, in summary, my main argument, as I wrote to Nina, is that DO is not one-way traffic. Present causes in present life not only condition the Future Effects in future life, but also condition the Present Effects in present life. With appreciation and metta, Han #107047 From: han tun Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 1:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Twenty modes of Dependent Origination hantun1 Dear Nina, Nina: I never take it so rigidly as one way traffic. These are different aspects shown so well by the Visuddhimagga. Also the Buddha in the suttas starts from the beginning, or from the middle or from the end. It is all explained in Vis. Ch XVII. There is so much more to be said, there are so many aspects, but it would be too long. The twenty modes are like the spokes of the Wheel of becoming. I quote some parts of my Vis. study: < The sole purpose of all these divisions and subdivisions is to demonstrate that there is no maker of the Wheel, no experiencer, that there are only naama and ruupa, continuing in the cycle because of conditions. What is cause conditions fruit and what is fruit conditions cause, and this again conditions fruit. Thus, the Wheel of life goes round and round without any interruption. However, the situation is not hopeless. It is possible to be liberated from the cycle if one follows the right Path. The arahat is called a breaker of the spokes of the Wheel (Co. to the Vimaanavatthu, sa.msaara-cakkassa araana.m hatattaa). -------- In the preceding sections it was explained that there was a fivefold cause in the past that conditions a fivefold fruit at present, and that in the present life there is a fivefold cause that produces a fivefold fruit in the future. The links were classified as five that are kamma and five that are result. There is the round of kamma and the round of result. --------- The following section introduces another round, the round of defilements. Ignorance, craving and clinging are now classified as the round of defilements. The 'triple round' are the rounds of kilesa (defilements), of kamma and of vipaaka. Defilements condition the performing of kamma which produces vipaaka in the form of rebirth and of sense-cognitions during life. On account of vipaaka defilements tend to arise and these motivate the committing of kamma. This happens time and again in our daily life: defilements arise because of what is seen, heard or experienced through the other senses and defilements can motivate akusala kamma through body, speech or mind. Thus the cycle goes on and on. As was explained before by the Tiika, ignorance, craving and clinging support kamma-accumulation (kammasambhaara). ----------- Text Vis. 298: 'With triple round it spins for ever' (par. 288): here formations and becoming are the 'round of kamma'. Ignorance, craving and clinging are the 'round of defilements'. Consciousness, mentality-materiality, the sixfold base, contact and feeling are the 'round of result'. So this Wheel of Becoming, having a triple round with these three rounds, should be understood to spin, revolving again and again, forever; for the conditions are not cut off as the round of defilements is not cut off.> =============== Han: Thank you very much for your above very useful comments. My main argument is that DO is not one-way traffic. Present causes in present life not only condition the Future Effects in future life, but also condition the Present Effects in present life. The friends with whom I have so far discussed, are the devout followers of Mogok vipassanaa. They are very rigid. They are rigid *probably* because their teachers are rigid. This is not unusual. In our culture, particularly in my generation, to question the teachings of our teachers (even a lay person, let alone a Sayadaw) is simply unthinkable. Admittedly, I, also, am still under the influence of this rigid discipline. I will not dare to discuss this issue with a Sayadaw. So, with my Burmese friends, I will just keep my idea in my mind. Respectfully, Han --- On Thu, 4/22/10, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > From: Nina van Gorkom > N: Always a very good idea. An excellent teacher. > I never take it so rigidly as one way traffic. #107048 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 1:46 am Subject: Re: Little selves? ptaus1 Hi Alex, Kevin, Retro, Howard, > Do you accept that a dhamma bears it's own characteristic? > Alex: And how is that different from Dharmin? > How does sabhava & dhamma, reconcile with sunnata? pt: I thought KenO really explained it well with this: > KO: Another explanation, when one see the origination of the world, one discren correctly, one see nama and rupa. these are dhamma that exist, hence the non-existence to the world does not occur. When one see the cessation of the world, one understand that nama (except Nibbana) and rupa as dukkha, anicca and anatta, this samasara existence is completely abondoned and ceased, thus existence does not occur. pt: Is there anything you disagree there? To me it seems to explain quite nicely that in the moment of insight, there's the middle way exactly because: 1. panna is aware of a dhamma (nama or rupa) arising - thus, aware of its individual characeteristic, and hence, there's no falling into the annihilation view that nothing exists. 2. panna is aware of a dhamma ceasing - thus, aware of the general characteristic of a conditioned dhamma, and hence there's no falling into the eternalist view that things exist. So, to me, this means that at the moment of insight, there's no falling into wrong view thanks to keeping to the middle way and seeing the arising and falling, so there cannot be conceiving self in things, reifying, etc. I mean, it simply seems like a description of how things are seen to happen during insight. If we try to argue and keep philosophying about this though, then we're bound to fall into some sort of view and naturally we'll start reifying and conceiving a self or a no-self in all sorts of things, including in our ideas of what a dhamma might be, without actually experiencing insight. Best wishes pt #107049 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 1:50 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sankhata dhammas ptaus1 Dear Nina, Thanks very much for your reply. Best wishes pt > N: Yes, because it is feeling that presents itself at that time, not > seeing. Pa~n~naa has feeling as object, no confusion. It understands > feeling as anattaa. > In the course of insight first the specific characteristics, visesa > lakkha.na), are understood, and later on the sama~n~na lakkha.na, the > general characteristics (anattaa etc.). But these general > characteristics are always seen as the anattaness of this or that > specific reality. #107050 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 1:57 am Subject: Re: Little selves? truth_aerator Hi Pt, KenO, Retro, All, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi Alex, Kevin, Retro, Howard, > > > Do you accept that a dhamma bears it's own characteristic? > > > Alex: And how is that different from Dharmin? > > How does sabhava & dhamma, reconcile with sunnata? > > > pt: I thought KenO really explained it well with this: > > > KO: Another explanation, when one see the origination of the world, one discren correctly, one see nama and rupa. these are dhamma that exist, hence the non-existence to the world does not occur. When one see the cessation of the world, one understand that nama (except Nibbana) and rupa as dukkha, anicca and anatta, this samasara existence is completely abondoned and ceased, thus existence does not occur. > > > pt: Is there anything you disagree there? To me it seems to explain >quite nicely that in the moment of insight, there's the middle way >exactly because: It is a good explanation. I agree with it. > So, to me, this means that at the moment of insight, there's no falling into wrong view thanks to keeping to the middle way and seeing the arising and falling, so there cannot be conceiving self in things, reifying, etc. I mean, it simply seems like a description of how things are seen to happen during insight. If we try to argue and keep philosophying about this though, then we're bound to fall into some sort of view and naturally we'll start reifying and conceiving a self or a no-self in all sorts of things, including in our ideas of what a dhamma might be, without actually experiencing insight. > > Best wishes > pt What I think is really inappropriate is to use "absolute realities". The name is just too loaded with ontological and philosophical implications. The philosophizing is in calling anything to be an "absolute reality". I am not sure why some people don't want to call them something less solid & Atman-like, like "fundamental experiential phenomena" or "basic units of experience". And ultimately it is mind that knows, distinguishes and knows characteristics. So in a sense the characteristics require mind to know them and it is impossible to know anything outside of one's mind. It seems that to posit ontology beyond what is known (a mental cognition) is philosophizing (which may be wrong or right, but philosophizing nonetheless). IMHO. With metta, Alex #107051 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 2:32 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Anger. How to stop / with .Metta-Karuna / ptaus1 Hi robin, > R: 'Sorry' for the length of the reply. :) I almost decided not to click send. pt: No worries, I find that writing to others helps me sort out my own understanding of the subject, so if it's the same for you, then write as long as you like. > R: The hyperlink came up 'document not found,' I shall try to find it later. pt: Sorry about that, you're right, the link is dead, not sure what happened. Here's the link again: http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/EPHQSzhq1TaWqi_AF6EDRz3T95a-mlsDceUC5ORj_l186fpTbmw\ GZUqhb88erjQyD4w6jzWbghyHo946fISp/Useful_Posts_February_2010.htm If it still doesn't work, then you can get to the Useful Posts file like this: 1. Click on "Files" in the menu on the left (where Messages, Link, Photos, etc, are) 2. Once you are on the "Files" page, scroll down until you find a file called "Useful Posts February 2010.htm" 3. Click on that file - once you're there you can scroll down to the topic that interest you. I find Useful Posts file really great, because many things that I want to discuss were already discussed here before, so I can quickly go through the best posts about it form the past that Sarah collected there. > R: A 'possible' etymology of karuna... pt: I too find it very important to understand what exactly is meant by a certain term. In particular I often find that all my troubles are really due to confusing how a certain term is used in conventional sense as compared to how it's used in abhidhamma (not even getting into the problems of different buddhist branches interpreting the same term differently). I mean, one of the reasons I got into abhidhamma is to try and get some clarity on what exactly is meant by a certain term like compassion, mindfulness, etc. Importantly, I find that abhidhamma probably goes to the greatest detail in describing terms very precisely, but importantly, doing it from the experiential perspective, which is crucial if one wants to understand what exactly is being experienced. I mean, in most cases, what I really experience and what I think I'm experiencing are two entirely different things, and the problem is that I'm usually stuck on things that I think I'm experiencing, instead of understanding what's actually going on (i.e. through insight). That's where abhidhamma is supposed to help. Anyway, that's why I'd say understanding what exactly is meant by a certain term in abhidhamma is very important - my favorite book at the moment is Nina's book on cetasikas: http://www.scribd.com/doc/3918075/Cetasikas It has a chapter for every individual mental factor - mindfulness, feeling, etc, so it's easy to see how my conventional understanding of what is feeling for example is flawed when considering it from abhidhamma perspective (i.e. insight). You'll find a chapter there on metta, karuna and other very interesting stuff if you're interested. Best wishes pt #107052 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 2:42 am Subject: Re: Little selves? ptaus1 Hi Alex, Thanks for your reply. > A: What I think is really inappropriate is to use "absolute realities". The name is just too loaded with ontological and philosophical implications. The philosophizing is in calling anything to be an "absolute reality". pt: Yes, I fell into that trap before of trying to figure this stuff out philosophically, but I just couldn't make any sense of it that way. I mean, philosophying can only swing from one extreme view to the other simply because it needs views to operate in the first place, so it can never touch the middle way I guess. Not until insight. Best wishes pt #107053 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 4:29 am Subject: Re: Susima sutta, dry insight? szmicio Dear Kevin F, > We will not answer your posts until you are sincere, although I have in front of me the quotations from the Commentary and Sub-Co of the Sutta that make it perfectly clear as crystal, I cannot share them with you L: Kevin, please share the comments ;> This is wonderful you have comments to this Sutta. I like from the Sutta: <"Thus, Susima, any form whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: every form is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.' "Any feeling whatsoever... "Any perception whatsoever... "Any fabrications whatsoever... "Any consciousness whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: every consciousness is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.' "Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with consciousness. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'"> Best Wishes Lukas #107054 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 9:12 pm Subject: Divine Dwelling... bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Divine Dwelling is infinite and produces Gods! Contemplation of infinitely friendly Loving-Kindness (Metta) Having seen that like oneself all beings whatsoever searches only happiness Patiently then cultivate friendly loving-kindness for all beings like this: May I always be happy. May I always be free from suffering. May all my friends always be happy and always be free from suffering. May all neutral beings always be happy and always be free from suffering. May all my enemies always be happy and always be free from suffering too! Within this town, this country, this continent, this planet, all the galaxies, May all sentient beings, all persons, all creatures, and all breathing things, Be happy, be free, joyous, content and peaceful in their various destinies. Whatever living beings there may be, men, women, Noble, or ordinary, Animals, Devas, or unhappy ones, who lives in one of the ten directions, whether weak or strong, long or large, short or small, far or near seen or unseen, in existence or seeking to become this or that, With none excepted: May creatures all be of a blissful heart! May I be free from enmity! May I be free from distress! May I be free from misery! May I live happily! Whatever beings there are: May they be free from enmity! Whatever beings there are: May they be free from distress! Whatever beings there are: May they be free from misery! Whatever beings there are: May they live happily! May all beings ? all breathing things ? all creatures ? all persons ? all entities ? women ? men ? the Noble Ones ? those not noble ones ? gods ? humans ? beings in the realms of deprivation in the east ? west ? north ? south ? above ? as below ? and all around be free from enmity, be free from distress, be free from misery, and live fully happily! The Four Divine Abidings (Brahmavih?ra ): I: Loving-kindness (Metta): Whatever beings there are: May they be happy! Whatever beings there are: May they be free from enmity! Whatever beings there are: May they be free from distress! Whatever beings there are: May they be free from misery! Whatever beings there are: May they live happily! II: Compassionate Pity (Karuna): Whatever beings there are: May they be free from all pain & all suffering! III: Mutual Joy with other's success (Mudita): Whatever beings there are: May they not be separated from their gains! IV: Equanimity (Upekkha): Whatever beings there are: they are the owners of their kamma, inherit their kamma, born of their kamma, related to their kamma, abide supported by their kamma; whatever kamma they do, whether good or evil, the effect of that will be the theirs only... Contemplation on Equanimity (Upekkha): Just as a mighty rock doesn't shake with the wind, So the wise are not disturbed, neither by praise, nor by blame. Neither clinging to the state of happiness, nor in pain when depressed. Composed and ballanced I remain! This is my perfect equipoise... Yeah! <...> Source: BPS Wheel no 54 (Edited Excerpt): The Mirror of the Dhamma. A Manual of Buddhist Devotional Texts. By Narada Thera and Bhikkhu Kassapa. Revised By Bhikkhu Khantipalo: http://www.bps.lk/wh054-u.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri <...> #107055 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Susima sutta, dry insight? ptaus1 Hi Kevin, Alex, Kevin, I found it necessary to speak up when I felt people treated you harshly on another forum, now I feel you are being needlessly harsh towards Alex. Sorry, I guess I don't understand the need to resort to allegations about another's person just to support one's POV (something you yourself protested to on another forum). I mean, keeping the discussion on the Dhamma issue at hand even when disagreeing seems much more beneficial. Maybe the two of you are simply using the term "jhana" differently? Maybe one means samatha practice, and another means calm and concentration at the moment of insight? Or something else? And what's "dry insight"? Does it refer to practice? Or to the moment of attainment? Or what? There are many interpretations possible, and I'm not sure what either one of you has in mind when you use them. Maybe the argument is simply due to using the same terms differently. And even if it turns out in the end you two still disagree, I would think that's okay as well. Best wishes pt > K: From the wording of your post I can see that you are not a genuine seeker of Dhamma, trying to understand where it is stated in the Sutta that 500 monks attained without jhana, but that you are only here to be antagonistic, because of your accumulated lobha and dosa. How sad, really. It makes it unable for me to share the quotes from the Commentaries with you which clearly state these things, because you are not sincere in your questioning. > Take your antagonism away from here friend. Come back when you are sincere for information. Then we will share the dhamma with you. Go antagonize elsewhere, friend. We will not answer your posts until you are sincere, although I have in front of me the quotations from the Commentary and Sub-Co of the Sutta that make it perfectly clear as crystal, I cannot share them with you-- and I am one who is incapable of not sharing the Dhamma [with those who are sincere seekers] my friend, if you understand what that means, but you don't understand. You have fallen into error. > A: I wish I had a penny every time someone has claimed that Susima sutta teaches "dry insight". > > Please tell me where in the sutta does it says that those monks didn't do Jhana? They simply rejected the abhinnas and aruppa attainments (both are not part of N8P, but Jhanas are part of N8P). > > I checked Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi's comments and he says the same thing. > > With metta, > > Alex #107056 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:40 am Subject: Re: Anger. How to stop / with .Metta-Karuna / szmicio Dear Robin, But mind applies to right effort on its own. And in this case this is reading and hearing Dhamma. Example from the Sutta you gave is a reminder that after hearing mind can apply to viriya, generates effort for kusala. We like to think we have roght speach, we speak in a right way. But we can consider in life all kinds of speach is conditioned, then this help right speach to grow more and more. When you try to have more right speach, when you strive from saying bad things, this doesnt mean right speach now. Speach is conditioned, there is no you who speaks, There are conditione vacisankharas, cittas and cetasikas that speak. And I think knowing this is a suprime condition to more right speach. Best wishes Lukas > FWIW, I can not accept this at this moment. I think there is control. Otherwise, Samma Vayama as explained in the Sutta makes no sense. There can be no blocking, no abandoning, no cultivation, no sustaining. If there is commentary stating the Buddha did not really mean what he spoke in the Sutta; then I shall go with the Buddha's words. > > I do not think that control means that there must be some perpetual self doing the controlling. Nor does it mean that a citta endures. I can not really explain the ontology. > > with metta > > robin > > And what, bhikkhus, is Right Effort? Here (in this teaching), bhikkhus, a bhikkhu generates an intention, makes effort, rouses energy, applies his mind, and strives ardently to prevent the arising of evil, unwholesome states of mind that have not yet arisen. He generates an intention, makes effort, rouses energy, applies his mind, and strives ardently to abandon evil, unwholesome states of mind that have arisen. He generates an intention, makes effort, rouses energy, applies his mind, and strives ardently to attain wholesome states of mind that have not yet arisen. He generates an intention, makes effort, rouses energy, applies his mind, and strives ardently to maintain the wholesome states of mind that have arisen, to prevent their lapsing, to increase them, to cause them to grow, and to completely develop them. This, bhikkhus, is called Right Effort. > #107057 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Susima sutta, dry insight? szmicio Dear pt, this is all OK. Those moments of anger are conditioned, we cannot choose. We can have more metta knowing this. Metta doesnt judge, doesnt pondering over this person or that person. metta forgets everything. Best wishes Lukas > Kevin, I found it necessary to speak up when I felt people treated you harshly on another forum, now I feel you are being needlessly harsh towards Alex. Sorry, I guess I don't understand the need to resort to allegations about another's person just to support one's POV (something you yourself protested to on another forum). I mean, keeping the discussion on the Dhamma issue at hand even when disagreeing seems much more beneficial. Maybe the two of you are simply using the term "jhana" differently? Maybe one means samatha practice, and another means calm and concentration at the moment of insight? Or something else? And what's "dry insight"? Does it refer to practice? Or to the moment of attainment? Or what? There are many interpretations possible, and I'm not sure what either one of you has in mind when you use them. Maybe the argument is simply due to using the same terms differently. And even if it turns out in the end you two still disagree, I would think that's okay as well. > > Best wishes > pt > > > > K: From the wording of your post I can see that you are not a genuine seeker of Dhamma, trying to understand where it is stated in the Sutta that 500 monks attained without jhana, but that you are only here to be antagonistic, because of your accumulated lobha and dosa. How sad, really. It makes it unable for me to share the quotes from the Commentaries with you which clearly state these things, because you are not sincere in your questioning. > > Take your antagonism away from here friend. Come back when you are sincere for information. Then we will share the dhamma with you. Go antagonize elsewhere, friend. We will not answer your posts until you are sincere, although I have in front of me the quotations from the Commentary and Sub-Co of the Sutta that make it perfectly clear as crystal, I cannot share them with you-- and I am one who is incapable of not sharing the Dhamma [with those who are sincere seekers] my friend, if you understand what that means, but you don't understand. You have fallen into error. > > > > A: I wish I had a penny every time someone has claimed that Susima sutta teaches "dry insight". > > > > Please tell me where in the sutta does it says that those monks didn't do Jhana? They simply rejected the abhinnas and aruppa attainments (both are not part of N8P, but Jhanas are part of N8P). > > > > I checked Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi's comments and he says the same thing. > > > > With metta, > > > > Alex > #107058 From: "retro77@..." Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 8:23 am Subject: Re: Little selves? retro77... Greetings pt, Alex: What I think is really inappropriate is to use "absolute realities". The name is just too loaded with ontological and philosophical implications. The philosophizing is in calling anything to be an "absolute reality". pt: Yes, I fell into that trap before of trying to figure this stuff out philosophically, but I just couldn't make any sense of it that way. I mean, philosophying can only swing from one extreme view to the other simply because it needs views to operate in the first place, so it can never touch the middle way I guess. Not until insight. Paul: So how do you personally avoid the trap of interpreting paramatta dhamma as little atomistic selves? Or, as Alex said earlier... "But these particles called Dhammas, are being given the attributes of Self and indivisibility to them! So in this system it appears that the Self is being pushed back to microscopic levels. ..." What's your approach for avoiding that tendency to claim things exist (which incidentally led Nagarjuna to rip the Sarvastivadin Abhidharma to shreds)? Ignoring the unstated philosophical assumptions behind one's take on "paramatta dhamma" does not make them go away. How to resolve one's understanding of "paramatta dhamma" with the Buddha's injunction to "look at the world and see its emptiness" (Sn 1119)? Metta, Paul. :) #107059 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 9:31 am Subject: Re: Little selves? ptaus1 Hi retro, > Paul: So how do you personally avoid the trap of interpreting paramatta dhamma as little atomistic selves? Maybe you missed it, I tried to explain in: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/107048 Perhaps let me know if you don't agree with something there or if I'm unclear somewhere and then we can discuss it from there. Btw, if you haven't already discovered on your own, yahoo interface here isn't quite as user-friendly as other forums - I find the best way to view the messages here is by clicking on little blue "Expand" option - in that way you get 30 full messages per page that you can then just scroll through, kind of like a single thread looks on DW. More info on getting around the yahoo interface here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/103290 Please ask if yo need any further help re technical issues. Also, if you're interested - check out Useful Posts file - it's an archive that contains a lot of older posts from previous discussions here - relevant to many topics that were discussed recently on DW. The way to get to Useful posts is: 1. Click on "Files" in the menu on the left (where Messages, Link, Photos, etc, are). 2. Once you are on the "Files" page, scroll down until you find a file called "Useful Posts February 2010.htm" - it's currently tenth from above. 3. Click on that file - once you're there you can scroll down to the topic that interest you. There's not much point bookmarking it because the name of the file changes every few months when it's updated, do the address changes accordingly. Best wishes pt #107060 From: "retro77@..." Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 9:44 am Subject: Re: Little selves? retro77... Greetings pt, OK, so you wrote this... --------- 1. panna is aware of a dhamma (nama or rupa) arising - thus, aware of its individual characeteristic, and hence, there's no falling into the annihilation view that nothing exists. 2. panna is aware of a dhamma ceasing - thus, aware of the general characteristic of a conditioned dhamma, and hence there's no falling into the eternalist view that things exist. --------- You explained satisfactorily how you've avoided seeing dhammas as little selves, but have you reified panna into a little self in the process? You could very easily replace the word panna with pt, couldn't you? How do you avoid that? Either way, you've seemingly got a subject/object duality taking place... is that a concern for you, or is that acceptable? Metta, Paul :) #107061 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 10:25 am Subject: Re: Little selves? ptaus1 Hi retro, > Paul: You explained satisfactorily how you've avoided seeing dhammas as little selves, but have you reified panna into a little self in the process? You could very easily replace the word panna with pt, couldn't you? How do you avoid that? pt: If I get what you mean, I think the answer would be to consider the way mental factors (as dhammas) are considered in abhidhamma - the main objective being to point to anatta characteristic of all conditioned dhammas. With that purpose in mind, it's said - the function of feeling is to feel, the function of perception is to perceive, etc (so, cetana wills, panna understands, sati is mindful, etc). So, each mental factor is said to perform a function (which is in fact its individual characteristic), and they all perform their functions together at the same time when they arise depending on the citta and its object, conditioning one another, and then falling away together with the citta, thus complying with tilakkhana characteristics. In such way there is no room for self, because any function that an idea of self can appropriate to justify its existence is in fact already preformed by a certain conditioned dhamma (and there's only so many dhammas arising at one time). Basically, imo it's exactly the same thing like when in the suttas the 5 aggregates are used - just that in abhidhamma a bit more detail is added regarding the aggregate of volitional formations. As for panna, its function is to understand, so it's the main factor involved in understanding the arising and ceasing, characteristics, conditionality, etc, though of course it's helped at that time by sati, perception, concentration and other mental factors, which all arise, performing their functions just like panna does, and then falling away completely. That's how I understand it. Please ask if something is unclear. > Either way, you've seemingly got a subject/object duality taking place... is that a concern for you, or is that acceptable? Perhaps you can clarify what you mean by subject/object duality? Thanks. Best wishes pt #107062 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 10:42 am Subject: Re: Little selves? ptaus1 Hi retro, I realize I might be using too much abhidhamma lingo you're not particularly keen about. To put it more simply: I guess you'd agree that the 5 aggregates are not said to exist nor not-exist in the suttas, but that they are conditioned. Imo, panna can be considered exactly in the same way because it is classed under the the volitional formations aggregate. Same with sati, concentration, etc. So, in the suttas it might be said "a monk understands...", while in abhidhamma it might be said "panna understands", but neither implies a self, but points towards insight occurring - understanding anatta at the time for example. Best wishes pt #107063 From: "retro77@..." Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 10:42 am Subject: Re: Little selves? retro77... Greetings pt, Thank you for the response. You wrote... -------- So, each mental factor is said to perform a function (which is in fact its individual characteristic), and they all perform their functions together at the same time when they arise depending on the citta and its object, conditioning one another, and then falling away together with the citta, thus complying with tilakkhana characteristics. -------- So the object is observed to pass away, but is the passing away of cittas observed too, in order to see their not-self characteristic (such that perception of self cannot hide within)? As for explaining subject/object duality, I'll swipe this from Wikipedia... The subject-object problem, a longstanding philosophical issue, is concerned with the analysis of human experience, and of what within experience is "subjective" and what is "objective." It arises from the premise that the world consists of objects (entities) which are perceived or otherwise presumed to exist as entites, by subjects (observers). This results in multiple questions regarding how subjects relate to objects, one of which is called the "knowing subject." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subject-object_problem Metta, Paul. :) #107064 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 10:55 am Subject: Re: Little selves? scottduncan2 Dear Paul and pt, Regarding: P: "So, each mental factor is said to perform a functionAs for explaining subject/object duality, I'll swipe this from Wikipedia..." Scott: Citta cognizes. Pa~n~naa understands. These functions have an object. This object has characteristics which are cognized and understood. Sincerely, Scott. #107065 From: "retro77@..." Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:01 am Subject: Re: Little selves? retro77... Greetings Scott, > Scott: Citta cognizes. Pa~n~naa understands. These functions have an object. This object has characteristics which are cognized and understood. That's what I'm trying to work out. We never/rarely take "objects" to be self... it's these "functions" like citta, pa~n~naa and such where perceptions of self hide. In an Abhidhamma-geared practice, how do you observe the anatta characteristic of citta, pa~n~naa and so on? Metta, Paul. :) #107066 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:06 am Subject: Re: Little selves? ptaus1 Hi retro, > Paul: So the object is observed to pass away, but is the passing away of cittas observed too, in order to see their not-self characteristic (such that perception of self cannot hide within)? pt: There are people here who would be able to explain this much better, I'll try from how much I understand of abhidhamma explanation re what you're asking: 1. Citta (and cetasikas which accompany it) can have six kinds of an object: citta, cetasika, gross rupa, subtle rupa, nibanna and concept. 2. There can be only one object at a time - e.g. let's say a present feeling (cetasika). 3. If the present citta takes up the feeling as an object - and if sati, panna, etc, also accompany that citta at the time, then there might be understanding of anatta characteristic of that dhamma (feeling cetasika in our example). 4. Perception of self in abhidhamma is classed as ditthi cetasika - translated as "wrong view". Wrong view is said to arise only with akusala cittas. 5. If akusala citta arises, then that means that there cannot be any panna or sati cetasikas at that time, because these accompany only with kusala cittas. 6. Of course, akusala and kusala cittas can alternate very quickly - at one moment there really can be sati and panna arising to understand a certain present dhamma as anatta, but at the very next moment, akusala citta can arise without panna, e.g. with wrong view that for example corresponds to the sentiment "wow, I'm so wise right now". Of course, this is easy to miss thanks to ignorance (yet another cetasika which accompanies akusala cittas). So, in that way "perception of self can hide within" as you suggest thanks to ignorance, though this would refer to akusala cittas arising, meaning there would be no panna and sati at the time. > Paul: As for explaining subject/object duality, I'll swipe this from Wikipedia... pt: Hm, I'm not sure I get the relation of "subject/object duality" with what we're discussing. Do you maybe mean because citta is said to have an object - a dhamma during insight? Best wishes pt #107067 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:14 am Subject: Re: Little selves? scottduncan2 Dear Paul, Regarding: P: "That's what I'm trying to work out. We never/rarely take 'objects' to be self... it's these 'functions' like citta, pa~n~naa and such where perceptions of self hide." Scott: What do you mean by 'object?' I mean a dhamma. P: "In an Abhidhamma-geared practice, how do you observe the anatta characteristic of citta, pa~n~naa and so on?" Scott: There is no 'Abhidhamma-geared' practise. I don't observe anything. As a Site Administrator on your own Forum you've been party to enough clarifying discussions regarding the so-called 'Sujinist' platform to have formed a good enough idea about what it is that you don't agree with. What is your actual position on this whole matter? Wouldn't it be simpler to start there? Sincerely, Scott. #107068 From: "retro77@..." Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:28 am Subject: Re: Little selves? retro77... Greetings Scott, Scott: There is no 'Abhidhamma-geared' practise. I don't observe anything. Paul: Well, what is done with this information? Surely it's meant to be applied in some way, otherwise what practical use is it? What is an Abhidhammika and what do they do with all these classification schemes? Scott: You've been party to enough clarifying discussions regarding the so-called 'Sujinist' platform to have formed a good enough idea about what it is that you don't agree with. Paul: You assume I have a 'platform'. I'm just trying to understand and there's certain things that still aren't clear to me, even if I can't always articulate what they are. There's a lot to Abhidhamma - I can't eat an elephant and won't try. First and foremost I guess, if I have a 'platform', it's wanting to know how Abhidhamma can best complement the Sutta Pitaka, and the practice of the Noble Eightfold Path. Isn't that what we're all doing, and will keep doing until we (at least) attain stream-entry? Metta, Paul. :) #107069 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:33 am Subject: Re: Little selves? scottduncan2 Dear Paul, Paul: "Well, what is done with this information? Surely it's meant to be applied in some way, otherwise what practical use is it? What is an Abhidhammika and what do they do with all these classification schemes?" Scott: I have no idea. The above is simply a critique. If you see no use in it, fine. Paul: "...First and foremost I guess, if I have a 'platform', it's wanting to know how Abhidhamma can best complement the Sutta Pitaka, and the practice of the Noble Eightfold Path..." Scott: Do you think that Abhidhamma complements the Sutta Pitaka? If not, fine. I don't mind if you don't agree. No need to. Sincerely, Scott. #107070 From: "retro77@..." Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:48 am Subject: Re: Little selves? retro77... Greetings Scott (and pt) --------- Scott: Do you think that Abhidhamma complements the Sutta Pitaka? If not, fine. I don't mind if you don't agree. No need to. --------- I don't know - hence the questions. On one hand, what I read in that Dhamma Theory book referenced earlier made me think it did. However, in relation to one part of the text which made it appear compatible, Kevin advises me that the author has got it all horribly wrong. What pt has been saying today has seemed satisfactory as far as I can tell, although we tend to always come up a few communication barriers in terms of our different vocabularies and starting points of reference. Metta, Paul :) #107071 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 12:12 pm Subject: Re: Little selves? ptaus1 Hi retro and Scott, > Scott: Citta cognizes. Pa~n~naa understands. These functions have an object. This object has characteristics which are cognized and understood. pt: :) That says it better in a few words than what I had explained in half a page. Paul: That's what I'm trying to work out. We never/rarely take "objects" to be self... it's these "functions" like citta, pa~n~naa and such where perceptions of self hide. pt: I think the problem is usually that the object of citta is a concept, which we then take for self (i.e. there's ditthi and ignorance accompanying that citta), regardless of whether it's a concept about a person or about a dhamma, etc. I think we are rarely actually aware of dhammas like citta, panna, when they arise - if we were, that would be insight then already (i.e. kusala cittas with panna), I think. That's why I believe it's said that one of the first steps is to understand the difference between a concept and a dhamma - first to intellectually understand the difference and then on that basis to understand it practically (what I think means to essentially recognise dhammas in real life based on the description of individual characteristics) and then this can lead to seeing anatta, since that's the inherent characteristic of dhammas. If one doesn't see anatta at the moment, I think that's most probably because (aside from panna not arising) at the time the object of citta is a concept - and a concept is not a dhamma - it doesn't have the characterstics of anatta, anicca and dukkha. > Paul: In an Abhidhamma-geared practice, how do you observe the anatta characteristic of citta, pa~n~naa and so on? pt: I think many here will reply that there's no such thing as "abhidhamma-geared practice". I think abhidhamma is just a description of how everything is experienced through insight. So, abhidhamma (and suttas for that matter, since I believe it's all the same thing, just expressed differently) as descriptions are meant to show us first what's the difference between a concept and a dhamma (by explaining what are the individual characteristics of a dhamma for example). Based on that, we'd then be able to actually recognise dhammas in real life so to speak, thanks to their individual characteristics - and then eventually see anatta of dhammas (like citta, panna, feeling, perception, etc), since anatta is an inherent characteristic of dhammas. That's my understnading at the moment. Hopefully others will give their understanding as well. Best wishes pt #107072 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 12:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Susima sutta, dry insight? sarahprocter... Dear Friends, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: >...I mean, keeping the discussion on the Dhamma issue at hand even when disagreeing seems much more beneficial.... .... S: Yes, let's all keep it friendly and gentle. After all, it's not a competition or race to nibbana:-) Lots of good detail on the Susima Sutta and its commentaries (while we wait for Kevin's further translations!!) in "Useful Posts" under: "Susima...." and Kevin, here's my wish-list - (keeping in mind that some of us are not spring chicks!!): 1. A new translation (with Pali terms added) of the Patisambhiddamagga with commentary and Tika. [That's several volumes and a life's work in itself), but as you're keen - 2. A translation of the commentary to the Sutta Nipata, one of the oldest works and recited from the 1st Council, I believe. Don't be misled into thinking that as the Sutta Nipata is a small volume, the commentary is too:-) 3. And for all that energy, a translation of the commentary to the Vinaya would be very useful to many. We have the intro to the commentary only. Full of good material. 4. Then, I think I'd look to the Yamaka... 5. Commentaries to the Dhatuvibhanga, Yamaka and why not to the Patthana, while you're at it? (Remember again, that some of us would like to see these in our lifetimes:-)) 6. We could move on to the Tika to the Vism and then all those sutta commentaries and Tikas not yet translated... sounds like you'll be busy:-)) Meanwhile, as Nina and Ken H have said, keep discussing dhamma with us all so that we all learn more about the value of understanding Dhamma for the sake of Dhamma, rather than for ourselves or others as being of the greatest kusala.... One citta at a time... Metta Sarah ====== #107073 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 12:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? sarahprocter... Dear Paul, Just a quick and belated welcome to DSG. I'm very glad to see that you've made yourself "at home" and found many old friends here as well. (Thx too to pt and others who've helped show you the ropes.) --- On Fri, 23/4/10, retro77@... wrote: >What pt has been saying today has seemed satisfactory as far as I can tell, although we tend to always come up a few communication barriers in terms of our different vocabularies and starting points of reference. ... S: Well, it's all these "communication barriers" and "points of reference" with regard to the Dhamma that we're here to discuss! May I ask you where you live and would you care to share a few words about your background and interest in the Dhamma for those of us who haven't "met" you until now? (If you or any other newcomers or oldcomers would care to add a "real" pic in the photo album, it's always appreciated. Perhaps you'll even encourage pt:-)) I'll look forward to discussing some topics with you in due course, but meanwhile, thanks again for adjusting to the DSG format, Guidelines and so on so smoothly. Metta Sarah p.s Thx also for signing off with your "real" name here and encouraging others to use it:-). ... #107074 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 12:57 pm Subject: Re: Little selves? scottduncan2 Dear Paul, Okay, Mr. I-Won't-Commit-To-An-Opinion, ;-), what is your opinion of: Me: "Citta cognizes. Pa~n~naa understands. These functions have an object. This object has characteristics which are cognized and understood."? Scott: Any questions? Sincerely, Scott. #107076 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 1:51 pm Subject: Re: Susima sutta, dry insight? szmicio Dear Sarah, > One citta at a time... L: This is so hard to remember this. I just get back from a party with my friends. We had very enjoyable time and i realise i forgot Dhamma. this constantly happens since I am not reading Dhamma recently. Best wishes Lukas #107077 From: Kevin F Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 2:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Susima sutta, dry insight? farrellkevin80 Dear pt, all, Perhaps I was too hasty. Maybe I have you wrong Alex. If so, I apologize. It just seems sometimes that you ask a question and are not interested in the reply because you will only shoot it down with your "sutta only interpretation". This seemed like an example of that. Anyway, for you Lukas, pt, and Alex here are the quotes I was talking about. I don't have the translation of the whole Commentary, only what is posted on Abhidhamma.org. Saratthappakasini (Atthakatha) : QUOTE "Why is this said? For the purpose of showing the arising of knowledge thus even without concentration. This is meant: "Susima, the path and fruit are not the issue of concentration (samadhinissanda), nor the advantage brought about by concentration (samadhi-anisamsa), nor the outcome of concentration (samadhinipphatti). They are the issue of insight (vipassana), the advantage brought about by insight, the outcome of insight. Therefore, whether you understand or not, first comes knowledge of the stability of the Dhamma, afterwards knowledge of Nibbana. Spk-pt (tika): 'Even without concentration' (vina pi samadhim): even without previously established (concentration) that has acquired the characteristic of serenity (samatha-lakkhanappattam); this is said referring to one who takes the vehicle of insight (vipassanayanika)..." All the best, Kevin Pt wrote: Hi Kevin, Alex, Kevin, I found it necessary to speak up when I felt people treated you harshly on another forum, now I feel you are being needlessly harsh towards Alex. Sorry, I guess I don't understand the need to resort to allegations about another's person just to support one's POV (something you yourself protested to on another forum). I mean, keeping the discussion on the Dhamma issue at hand even when disagreeing seems much more beneficial. Maybe the two of you are simply using the term "jhana" differently? Maybe one means samatha practice, and another means calm and concentration at the moment of insight? Or something else? And what's "dry insight"? Does it refer to practice? Or to the moment of attainment? Or what? There are many interpretations possible, and I'm not sure what either one of you has in mind when you use them. Maybe the argument is simply due to using the same terms differently. And even if it turns out in the end you two still disagree, I would think that's okay as well. Best wishes pt ---- Kevin _ #107078 From: Kevin F Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 2:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Susima sutta, dry insight? farrellkevin80 Hi Sarah, T and Kevin, here's my wish-list - (keeping in mind that some of us are not spring chicks!!): 1. A new translation (with Pali terms added) of the Patisambhiddamagga with commentary and Tika. [That's several volumes and a life's work in itself), but as you're keen - 2. A translation of the commentary to the Sutta Nipata, one of the oldest works and recited from the 1st Council, I believe. Don't be misled into thinking that as the Sutta Nipata is a small volume, the commentary is too:-) 3. And for all that energy, a translation of the commentary to the Vinaya would be very useful to many. We have the intro to the commentary only. Full of good material. 4. Then, I think I'd look to the Yamaka... 5. Commentaries to the Dhatuvibhanga, Yamaka and why not to the Patthana, while you're at it? (Remember again, that some of us would like to see these in our lifetimes:-) ) 6. We could move on to the Tika to the Vism and then all those sutta commentaries and Tikas not yet translated.. . sounds like you'll be busy:-)) Meanwhile, as Nina and Ken H have said, keep discussing dhamma with us all so that we all learn more about the value of understanding Dhamma for the sake of Dhamma, rather than for ourselves or others as being of the greatest kusala.... One citta at a time... Metta Sarah ====== Kevin: The plan is first to translate Susima Sutta and Commentary (and Tika), then Bahiya Sutta, etc., and all Suttas dealing with dry insight. Then all suttas that I can find dealing with satipatthana, and with sense-bases and elements and so on. When I am done with that I wish to work on some other texts. Maybe at that time I will be able to do Patisambhiddamagga. After that I will go back and see which Nikaya I have translated the most suttas out of, and then finish translating that whole Nikaya with its Commentaries and so on. Next something else, then another Nikaya, and so on. As you said, one citta at a time. Kevin #107079 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 2:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Susima sutta, dry insight? scottduncan2 Dear pt, Regarding: pt: "...on another forum...something you yourself protested to on another forum..." Scott: Although I asked Paul to come clean on his opinions, certain as I was that he'd had plenty of opportunity on 'another forum' to come up with them, I think it best that one recall that here, on this forum, it is this forum that one is interacting on. Other forums are irrelevant. I, for one, don't appreciate the 'bleed-over.' Who needs all the pointless politics? Hmm? Sincerely, Scott. #107080 From: "Rob" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 3:10 pm Subject: Re: Susima sutta, dry insight? / Translations rrobinrb2000 To all --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > from the Sutta: > Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' > > Best Wishes > Lukas > I always wonder what words / terms are being translated. Dispassion: Possibly viraga? No, not viagra. :) The prefix vi + raga. Vi is a curious prefix, cognate of dis- or de-. It means 'apart.' Sometimes it indicates a separation or dividing up, like in vinaya {discipline}. Often, it is an intensive, as in vipassa {insight, as opposed to passa or more ordinary sight}. In viraga, vi- is clearly a reversal / removal, as in vimala. Raga is a hard word to translate. I have seen it translated as passion, attachment, desire, or greed. It might a broad, inclusive term for an emotional attachment? The verbal root literally means "to color ot dye." It is used figuratively to mean "impassioned, affectionate, enamored, passionately fond of or attached to or hankering after." [source Monier-Williams] Viraga is then a removal of attachment. Passion is a problematic translation of raga, because the nuance / idiom has changed from to endure pain, to sorrow, to emotion in general, to attachment, to enthusiasm. As such, the meaning too vague. Dispassion means 'cool,' objective, or detached, free of emotion, So that might work. Disinterest and detachment are synonyms. The two most common meanings are 'fairness / impartiality' and apathy / aloofness. The former is better, but neither is perfect. Non-attachment might be best? with non-attachment to fixed views, robin #107081 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 3:13 pm Subject: How does one practice insight? was: susima truth_aerator Dear Lukas, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear Kevin F, > > > We will not answer your posts until you are sincere, although I >have in front of me the quotations from the Commentary and Sub-Co of >the Sutta that make it perfectly clear as crystal, I cannot share >them with you > > L: Kevin, please share the comments ;> > This is wonderful you have comments to this Sutta. > > I like from the Sutta: > > <"Thus, Susima, any form whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: every form is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.' [Alex: same with other aggregates] > > "Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows >disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with >perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with >consciousness. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through >dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the >knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the >holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for >this world.'"> > > Best Wishes > Lukas How exactly does one accomplish "to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as..." What needs to occur in order to see as it actually is with right wisdom? Does one study repetedly certain principles until one day insight arises? Does it involve thinking certain things during daily activities? Does one label the activities as they occur (ala Mahasi) ? Does one consider all these things with a super powered mind after Jhana? I believe in tilakkhana, however I am yet to reach the stage where: >"Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows >disenchanted with [alex: 5 aggregates]. Disenchanted, he becomes >dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full >release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns >that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There >is nothing further for this world.'"> With metta, Alex #107082 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 3:46 pm Subject: Re: How does one practice insight? was: susima szmicio Dear Alex, > > <"Thus, Susima, any form whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: every form is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.' [Alex: same with other aggregates] > > > > "Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows >disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with >perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with >consciousness. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through >dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the >knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the >holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for >this world.'"> > > > > Best Wishes > > Lukas > > > How exactly does one accomplish "to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as..." L: No one can. This is out of control. But Dhamma had been explained now, what do you want more? I've heard once: leave it all to Dhamma, let it work. > What needs to occur in order to see as it actually is with right wisdom? > > Does one study repetedly certain principles until one day insight arises? > > Does it involve thinking certain things during daily activities? > > Does one label the activities as they occur (ala Mahasi) ? > > Does one consider all these things with a super powered mind after Jhana? L: All is lobha. clinging, trying to have something. But you can see now there is thinking and this appears now. I appreciated very much Sarah/Nina's reminders on present moment. The right understanding can be only now as Acharn Sujin constantly reapeat. I forget this constantly. > I believe in tilakkhana, however I am yet to reach the stage where: > > >"Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows >disenchanted with [alex: 5 aggregates]. Disenchanted, he becomes >dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full >release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns >that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There >is nothing further for this world.'"> L: Seeing eye as eye, seeing visible object as visible object, seeing phassa as phassa, seeing seeing-consciousness as seeing consciousness Seeing thus well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with eye..... Best wishes Lukas #107083 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] How does one practice insight? was: susima upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Lukas & Kevin) - In a message dated 4/23/2010 11:18:55 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Dear Lukas, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear Kevin F, > > > We will not answer your posts until you are sincere, although I >have in front of me the quotations from the Commentary and Sub-Co of >the Sutta that make it perfectly clear as crystal, I cannot share >them with you > > L: Kevin, please share the comments ;> > This is wonderful you have comments to this Sutta. > > I like from the Sutta: > > <"Thus, Susima, any form whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: every form is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.' [Alex: same with other aggregates] > > "Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows >disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with >perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with >consciousness. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through >dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the >knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the >holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for >this world.'"> > > Best Wishes > Lukas How exactly does one accomplish "to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as..." What needs to occur in order to see as it actually is with right wisdom? ---------------------------------------------------------------- I think one needs to do pretty much all that the Buddha urged, from 1) study and contemplation of the Dhamma, especially with those who (seem to) understand it well, to 2) mindful attention applied to what arises - as possible, to 3) engaging in the four right endeavors, to 4) calming the mind, heightening clear attention, and suspending the hindrances, and to 5) building upon such expanded mentality with investigation of phenomena. What one emphasizes in all this will vary from person to person in dependence on strengths, tendencies, and needs. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Does one study repeatedly certain principles until one day insight arises? ------------------------------------------------------------- Sure, but that's not enough. ------------------------------------------------------------- Does it involve thinking certain things during daily activities? ------------------------------------------------------------- Proper contemplation will help, though during daily activities I'd sooner recommend attending to what is actually occuring at the time. Thinking will arise on its own. ------------------------------------------------------------- Does one label the activities as they occur (ala Mahasi) ? -------------------------------------------------------------- That may well happen, but I think that intentionally doing that just encourages thinking that takes one away from what is present. A background of study and contemplation will serve as support for the arising of wisdom. ------------------------------------------------------------- Does one consider all these things with a super powered mind after Jhana? -------------------------------------------------------------- That would be lovely. :-) Dhamma practice may well lead to this, but we can't just turn on a switch for this. --------------------------------------------------------------- I believe in tilakkhana, however I am yet to reach the stage where: >"Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows >disenchanted with [alex: 5 aggregates]. Disenchanted, he becomes >dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full >release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns >that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There >is nothing further for this world.'"> ------------------------------------------------------------- Surely some disenchantment has occurred. Bodhi isn't built in a day. ;-) ------------------------------------------------------------- With metta, Alex ================================= With metta, Howard /"When this is, that is. From the arising of this comes the arising of that."/ (From the Bodhi Sutta, Udana 1.1) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ /"Nothing comes from nothing. Nothing ever could."/ (From "The Sound of Music") #107084 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 4:00 pm Subject: Re: Susima sutta, dry insight? / Translations szmicio Dear robin, Kevin F Here is pali: Tasmaatiha, susima, ya.m ki~nci ruupa.m atiitaanaagatapaccuppanna.m ajjhatta.m vaa bahiddhaa vaa o.laarika.m vaa sukhuma.m vaa hiina.m vaa pa.niita.m vaa ya.m duure santike vaa, sabba.m ruupa.m neta.m mama nesohamasmi na meso attaati; evameta.m yathaabhuuta.m sammappa~n~naaya da.t.thabba.m. Yaa kaaci vedanaa atiitaanaagatapaccuppannaa ajjhatta.m vaa bahiddhaa vaa o.laarikaa vaa sukhumaa vaa hiinaa vaa pa.niitaa vaa yaa duure santike vaa, sabbaa vedanaa neta.m mama nesohamasmi na meso attaati; evameta.m yathaabhuuta.m sammappa~n~naaya da.t.thabba.m. Yaa kaaci sa~n~naa pe ye keci sa"nkhaaraa atiitaanaagatapaccuppannaa ajjhatta.m vaa bahiddhaa vaa o.laarikaa vaa sukhumaa vaa hiinaa vaa pa.niitaa vaa ye duure santike vaa, sabbe sa"nkhaaraa neta.m mama nesohamasmi na meso attaati; evameta.m yathaabhuuta.m sammappa~n~naaya da.t.thabba.m. Ya.m ki~nci vi~n~naa.na.m atiitaanaagatapaccuppanna.m ajjhatta.m vaa bahiddhaa vaa o.laarika.m vaa sukhuma.m vaa hiina.m vaa pa.niita.m vaa ya.m duure santike vaa, sabba.m vi~n~naa.na.m neta.m mama nesohamasmi na meso attaati; evameta.m yathaabhuuta.m sammappa~n~naaya da.t.thabba.m. Eva.m passa.m, susima, sutavaa ariyasaavako ruupasmimpi nibbindati, vedanaayapi nibbindati, sa~n~naayapi nibbindati, sa"nkhaaresupi nibbindati, vi~n~naa.nasmimpi nibbindati. Nibbinda.m virajjati, viraagaa vimuccati, vimuttasmi.m vimuttamiti ~naa.na.m hoti.Khii.naa jaati, vusita.m brahmacariya.m, kata.m kara.niiya.m, naapara.m itthattaayaa pajaanaati. --------------------- I think this is good to list all those important words. Kevin F, are you going to translate this Sutta from pali? Maybe you can leave some pali words, this would be helpful, or maybe leave orginal pali words in brackets, next to english words. This will be so helpful to consider. I can help you if you want. You can give explanation on the bottom to the samohavinodhani and Vibhanga. This would be excellent translation. Best wishes Lukas #107085 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 4:32 pm Subject: Re: How does one practice insight? was: susima szmicio Dear Alex, I notice that there is only thinking and it is anicca. It's gone. Such activity only, that appeared and fall away. Of any importance. I've noticed that thoses moments of "me" "applying to present" is also thinking. But usually I am forgetful of kusala and Dhamma. It helps me very much to listen to Khun Sujin's discourses. Then mind can apply to what is important naturaly. Or not. Doesnt matter. Sometimes I spend listening for 30 minutes and I notice that I was absent or agitated. This is conditioned. This does not belong to anyone, it just appears and fall away. http://dhammastudygroup.org/audio/2007-01a-kk/2007-01-09-a.mp3 http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ > How exactly does one accomplish "to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as..." > > What needs to occur in order to see as it actually is with right wisdom? > > Does one study repetedly certain principles until one day insight arises? > > Does it involve thinking certain things during daily activities? > > Does one label the activities as they occur (ala Mahasi) ? > > Does one consider all these things with a super powered mind after Jhana? > > I believe in tilakkhana, however I am yet to reach the stage where: > > >"Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows >disenchanted with [alex: 5 aggregates]. Disenchanted, he becomes >dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full >release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns >that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There >is nothing further for this world.'"> > > > > > With metta, > > Alex > #107086 From: Kevin F Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 4:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How does one practice insight? was: susima farrellkevin80 Alex, you wrote: ________________________________ How exactly does one accomplish "to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as..." What needs to occur in order to see as it actually is with right wisdom? Does one study repetedly certain principles until one day insight arises? Does it involve thinking certain things during daily activities? Does one label the activities as they occur (ala Mahasi) ? Does one consider all these things with a super powered mind after Jhana? ======== Kevin: Hi Alex. Is there a self that makes wisdom come about? All the best, Kevin #107087 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 4:43 pm Subject: Intention for wisdom, maggaphala, nibbana = chanda not lobha truth_aerator Dear Lukas, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > A: What needs to occur in order to see as it actually is with right >wisdom? > > > > Does one study repeatedly certain principles until one day >insight >arises? > > > > Does it involve thinking certain things during daily activities? > > > > Does one label the activities as they occur (ala Mahasi) ? > > > > Does one consider all these things with a super powered mind >after Jhana? > > L: All is lobha. clinging, trying to have something. > But you can see now there is thinking and this appears now. I >appreciated very much Sarah/Nina's reminders on present moment. Not all lobha is created equal. Lobha to know more (so that one would remove all sakkayaditthi, raga and so on) are not lobha, its kusala chanda! Chanda is part of 37 factors of awakening. "Lobha is greed, i.e., craving for sensual pleasures. But wanting to attain Nibbana, wanting to get Dhamma, wanting to be learned, wanting wealth for giving in charity to the poor, are not lobha. They are called chanda (desire) which will be dealt with later." http://www.thisismyanmar.com/nibbana/abdmjnka.htm#cetasikas (under lobha) ABHIDHAMMA IN DAILY LIFE by ASHIN JANAKABHIVAMSA =============================================================== With metta, Alex #107088 From: Kevin F Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 4:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Susima sutta, dry insight? / Translations farrellkevin80 Hi Lukas. You wrote: Kevin F, are you going to translate this Sutta from pali? Maybe you can leave some pali words, this would be helpful, or maybe leave orginal pali words in brackets, next to english words. This will be so helpful to consider. I can help you if you want. You can give explanation on the bottom to the samohavinodhani and Vibhanga. This would be excellent translation. Best wishes Lukas ==== Hi Lukas. Eventually, yes. I am still working on my Pali and have much work to do. I am doing a course recorded by Bhikkhu Bodhi now on his website from Bodhi Monastery. It will be a while before I translate any Suttas. I just decided to tell everyone my intention for the future. That is all. For whatever I translate I will place the translated Commentary line by line with the text, and have all the Pali available on a separate page. The Sub Commentary will be available translated on a separate page as well. So everything will be there-- the translated text with its commentary line by line, and all the pali for the text as well as for the Commentary and tika (when applicable) on a separate page, as well as the translated Tikas. Thus, if you view anything I translate you will be able to see all the English for the main text and the commentary, and also all of the Pali and the translated sub-commenaries, but those will be available to you on a separate page. Kevin ========== #107089 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 4:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How does one practice insight? was: susima truth_aerator Hello Kevin, Lukas, all, > Kevin: > Hi Alex. Is there a self that makes wisdom come about? No. It is an impersonal process that develops due to causes and conditions. Nobody can fully control it, "I want wisdom now!" and poof it magically happens. However none of this should mean that there is no use in studying, restraining the senses and properly meditating. Choice to "do nothing" is as much conditioned choice as is choice to "do something about it". Reading and considering is as much "action" as "meditation" is. And it appears to me that lets say instructions found in the commentaries on "clear comprehension" as it comes to Satipatthana sutta and its section on walking are also a set of instructions. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wayof.html#deport The question that I* am interested in is how to make the learning more productive (in bringing maggaphala). Of course this is not under anyone's direct control which is why conditions are required. However I am not a big fan of certain statements that sound like "pubbekatavada" . The Buddha did often talk about diligence and how one should strive as if one's head is on fire. *For clear communication purposes one has to use personal pronouns, and the Buddha did use them. However I don't theorize "Self" in them. IMHO. With metta, Alex #107090 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:37 pm Subject: Re: Intention for wisdom, maggaphala, nibbana = chanda not lobha szmicio Dear Alex, > > L: All is lobha. clinging, trying to have something. > > But you can see now there is thinking and this appears now. I >appreciated very much Sarah/Nina's reminders on present moment. > > Not all lobha is created equal. > > Lobha to know more (so that one would remove all sakkayaditthi, raga and so on) are not lobha, its kusala chanda! Chanda is part of 37 factors of awakening. L: yes, kusala chanda. > "Lobha is greed, i.e., craving for sensual pleasures. But wanting to attain Nibbana, wanting to get Dhamma, wanting to be learned, wanting wealth for giving in charity to the poor, are not lobha. They are called chanda (desire) which will be dealt with later." L: But there can be kusala chanda that wants to get Dhamma, wants Nibbana. Or there can be very easily lobha. I think that kusala chanda doesnt arise too often without right understanding. I think there is just lobha. Best wishes Lukas #107091 From: Kevin F Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How does one practice insight? was: susima farrellkevin80 Daer Alex, Silabbattaparamasa. Self-view conditions more of the same. Just abandon it. Practice the Perfection of Truthfulness. "There is not an individual that can cause wisdom to come about. There are just these elements. So it is. There is fear that if the wisdom is not gained there will be suffering in the future. But I am being cheated there... who is the person that suffers in the future? Isn't it just impersonal elements? There is also the thought, I can do it! I can perform! Isn't that mana? Isn't mana, lobha not alobha. Can lobha condition alobha and amoha? No it cannot. So I should not trust this conceit that arise. It is wrong view that only conditions more wrong view to arise again later on, even stronger. Therefore, it is understood that "I" cannot cause wisdom to arise. It will arise will causes and conditions allow in time. But does that mean that I shouldn't read and study? If panna wants to investigate and read and study or even discuss, let it be. It arises because of conditions. I will know that. What if it is lobha that wishes to study? This lobha is impersonal, not a self, not mine. It cannot condition wisdom. Nevertheless, I study based on conditions. I understand it is based on conditions". Maybe this will help you. ________________________________ From: truth_aerator To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, April 23, 2010 12:57:38 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] How does one practice insight? was: susima Hello Kevin, Lukas, all, > Kevin: > Hi Alex. Is there a self that makes wisdom come about? No. It is an impersonal process that develops due to causes and conditions. Nobody can fully control it, "I want wisdom now!" and poof it magically happens. However none of this should mean that there is no use in studying, restraining the senses and properly meditating. Choice to "do nothing" is as much conditioned choice as is choice to "do something about it". Reading and considering is as much "action" as "meditation" is. And it appears to me that lets say instructions found in the commentaries on "clear comprehension" as it comes to Satipatthana sutta and its section on walking are also a set of instructions. http://www.accessto insight.org/ lib/authors/ soma/wayof. html#deport The question that I* am interested in is how to make the learning more productive (in bringing maggaphala). Of course this is not under anyone's direct control which is why conditions are required. However I am not a big fan of certain statements that sound like "pubbekatavada" . The Buddha did often talk about diligence and how one should strive as if one's head is on fire. *For clear communication purposes one has to use personal pronouns, and the Buddha did use them. However I don't theorize "Self" in them. IMHO. With metta, Alex #107092 From: "connie" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:49 pm Subject: Hello nichiconn Dear robK, Robin, Friends, robK: Khainka samadhi is always present, even when we are distratced. What is not always present is sati. you can read this letter I wrote some time back which might be relevant: http://www.dhammastudy.com/corr.html oops I just checked don't click on the link, it has a trojan virus, teh website seems to be infected. I will try to find anotehr site/ c: The webmaster of that site informs me that the problem has been resolved. Apologies for the trouble and thanks for the heads up. peace, connie #107093 From: Ken O Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? ashkenn2k Dear Paul subject and object duality At the moment of experiencing by citta on an object, there is no duality. Citta cannot arise without an object. Duality are commonly used for the eternal or annahilistic point of view. When one observed feelings as an observer, that is duality, why? Because there is an observer which is a miccha ditthi, which is eternal point of view. In actual fact, it is just citta that experience feeling (feeling as an object of the citta). When an object is observed to percieve as pass away, it is not you that oberve the pass away, it is panna that percieve the pass away as it is the function of panna to understand this. If one think one observed, then that is miccha ditthi and not panna, The objective of Abhidhamma is to understand dhamma as dhamma. for eg feeling feels, panna understands. Its main goal is that there is really no self at all, it is because of miccha ditthi we think there is a self, Even miccha ditthi is also anatta. Another way, to understand dhamma is understand what miccha ditthi is not, because self dont feels, dont interest, dont anger. It is feeling that feels, chanda that interest and dosa that angers, where is there a self then? cheers Ken O > >From: "retro77@..." >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Friday, 23 April 2010 18:42:38 >Subject: [dsg] Re: Little selves? > > >Greetings pt, > >Thank you for the response. You wrote... > >-------- >So, each mental factor is said to perform a function (which is in fact its individual characteristic) , and they all perform their functions together at the same time when they arise depending on the citta and its object, conditioning one another, and then falling away together with the citta, thus complying with tilakkhana characteristics. >-------- > >So the object is observed to pass away, but is the passing away of cittas observed too, in order to see their not-self characteristic (such that perception of self cannot hide within)? > >As for explaining subject/object duality, I'll swipe this from Wikipedia... > >The subject-object problem, a longstanding philosophical issue, is concerned with the analysis of human experience, and of what within experience is "subjective" and what is "objective." >It arises from the premise that the world consists of objects (entities) which are perceived or otherwise presumed to exist as entites, by subjects (observers). This results in multiple questions regarding how subjects relate to objects, one of which is called the "knowing subject." > >http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Subject-object_ problem > >Metta, >Paul. :) > > > #107094 From: Ken O Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? ashkenn2k Dear pt > >That's why I believe it's said that one of the first steps is to understand the difference between a concept and a dhamma - first to intellectually understand the difference and then on that basis to understand it practically (what I think means to essentially recognise dhammas in real life based on the description of individual characteristics) and then this can lead to seeing anatta, since that's the inherent characteristic of dhammas. If one doesn't see anatta at the moment, I think that's most probably because (aside from panna not arising) at the time the object of citta is a concept - and a concept is not a dhamma - it doesn't have the characterstics of anatta, anicca and dukkha. > KO: a concept is not a paramatha dhamma but that show does not mean it does not show the attributes of anatta, anicca and dukkha. It may not have this inherent characteristic but it could demonstrate or show the attributes of these. Yes like a fading flower could show anicca. One cannot escape from concepts because the mind keeps thinking, but one use concepts as a means to develop panna. In satipatthana sutta, it is not entirely base on nama and rupa. it is could be based on conceptual items just like those in the 38 or 40 (I keep confusing this number) meditation subjects. Some use understanding of foul meditation subjects to eradicate greed or to reach jhanas or access concentration as a basis for developing materiality and immateriality. Other factors are impt which are mindfulness and clear comprehension for such a practise. To say satipatthana is only nama and rupas this is only at the materiality and immateriality stage. Other than that, what we understand even feelings as feelng is also a concept as there is no direct exprience of it at the materiality and immateriality stage. This concept is a classified as a concept that something exist. Then what makes us arrive at that stage, it is actually panna that develops the undersanding of anatta, anicca and dukkha of whatever objects that come to the mind as the mind always need an object So the practise is not to reject any concept, but to develop the understanding of it. And I have yet meet any text that reject concept as a practise or to say the practise is just only nama and rupa (unless vipassana nana). cheers Ken O So it depends on the development one used > >> Paul: In an Abhidhamma-geared practice, how do you observe the anatta characteristic of citta, pa~n~naa and so on? > >pt: I think many here will reply that there's no such thing as "abhidhamma- geared practice". I think abhidhamma is just a description of how everything is experienced through insight. So, abhidhamma (and suttas for that matter, since I believe it's all the same thing, just expressed differently) as descriptions are meant to show us first what's the difference between a concept and a dhamma (by explaining what are the individual characteristics of a dhamma for example). Based on that, we'd then be able to actually recognise dhammas in real life so to speak, thanks to their individual characteristics - and then eventually see anatta of dhammas (like citta, panna, feeling, perception, etc), since anatta is an inherent characteristic of dhammas. That's my understnading at the moment. Hopefully others will give their understanding as well. > >Best wishes >pt > > > #107095 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:23 pm Subject: Re: Intention for wisdom, maggaphala, nibbana = chanda not lobha szmicio Dear Alex, > L: But there can be kusala chanda that wants to get Dhamma, wants Nibbana. Or there can be very easily lobha. I think that kusala chanda doesnt arise too often without right understanding. > I think there is just lobha. L: As you see in Suttas, right understanding is Suprime. And this was expressed in many Suttas. Best wishes Lukas #107096 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:14 pm Subject: Re: How does one practice insight? was: susima szmicio Dear Kevin, > Silabbattaparamasa. Self-view conditions more of the same. Just abandon it. Practice the Perfection of Truthfulness. "There is not an individual that can cause wisdom to come about. There are just these elements. So it is. There is fear that if the wisdom is not gained there will be suffering in the future. But I am being cheated there... who is the person that suffers in the future? Isn't it just impersonal elements? L: Yes, Han had quoted this recently. only future fruits, no person. past hetus, present fruits, present hetus, future fruits. No Self. >There is also the thought, I can do it! I can perform! Isn't that mana? Isn't mana, lobha not alobha. L: Exactly, there can be very subtle mana in moments of "I can do, I can perform" > Can lobha condition alobha and amoha? No it cannot. L: I think it can. akusala can be a condition to kusala. > So I should not trust this conceit that arise. It is wrong view that only conditions more wrong view to arise again later on, even stronger. L: Yes and Bhante Dhammadharo said this: more wrong view now, then more in the future, >Therefore, it is understood that "I" cannot cause wisdom to arise. L: And i think this kind of thinking is a right view and this can condition gradually more right understanding >It will arise will causes and conditions allow in time. But does that mean that I shouldn't read and study? If panna wants to investigate and read and study or even discuss, let it be. L: And this gone, so who can choose :> this is gone now. > It arises because of conditions. I will know that. What if it is lobha that wishes to study? This lobha is impersonal, not a self, not mine. It cannot condition wisdom. Nevertheless, I study based on conditions. I understand it is based on conditions". L: And this kind of consideration will bring its fruits later on. Development of right understanding is very very slow and graduall. Best wishes Lukas #107097 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:20 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Susima sutta, dry insight? / Translations szmicio Dear Kevin, That's good. I remember when I was spending my time with Vibhangapaali translated by PTS and I had so much problems with that translation. I had to look at paali version. So I took a bit of english text and then take a bit of paali text. This was helpful. Best wishes Lukas > Hi Lukas. Eventually, yes. I am still working on my Pali and have much work to do. I am doing a course recorded by Bhikkhu Bodhi now on his website from Bodhi Monastery. It will be a while before I translate any Suttas. I just decided to tell everyone my intention for the future. That is all. > For whatever I translate I will place the translated Commentary line by line with the text, and have all the Pali available on a separate page. The Sub Commentary will be available translated on a separate page as well. So everything will be there-- the translated text with its commentary line by line, and all the pali for the text as well as for the Commentary and tika (when applicable) on a separate page, as well as the translated Tikas. > > Thus, if you view anything I translate you will be able to see all the English for the main text and the commentary, and also all of the Pali and the translated sub-commenaries, but those will be available to you on a separate page. #107098 From: A T Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:34 pm Subject: how to avoid falling into pubbekatahetuvada? truth_aerator Dear Kevin, Lukas, all, >dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kevin F wrote: > > Daer Alex, > > > Silabbattaparamasa. Self-view conditions more of the same. Just >abandon it. Practice the Perfection of Truthfulness. "There is not >an individual that can cause wisdom to come about. There are just >these elements. So it is. There is fear that if the wisdom is not >gained there will be suffering in the future. But I am being >cheated there... who is the person that suffers in the future? >Isn't it just impersonal elements? There is also the thought, I can >do it! I can perform! Isn't that mana? Isn't mana, lobha not >alobha. Can lobha condition alobha and amoha? No it cannot. So I >should not trust this conceit that arise. It is wrong view that >only conditions more wrong view to arise again later on, even >stronger. Therefore, it is understood that "I" cannot cause wisdom >to arise. It will arise will causes and conditions allow in time. >But does that mean that I shouldn't read and study? If panna wants >to investigate and read and study or even >discuss, let it be. It arises because of conditions. I will know >that. What if it is lobha that wishes to study? This lobha is >impersonal, not a self, not mine. It cannot condition wisdom. >Nevertheless, I study based on conditions. I understand it is based >on conditions". > > Maybe this will help you. Thank you very much for your post, I will have to re-read it more and more. There is a very fine line between anatta teaching and "pubbekatahetuvada" that I need to consider and distinguish more. As to conceit (mana), or even the feeling "I am", only an Arahant removes all conceit and feeling "I am" thus it is less relevant for me at this stage. As I understand it, lobha (or more accurately kusala chanda) CAN indirectly condition alobha. One sees the benefit of alobha, wants it very much, practices, and then eventually abandons lobha. If there is no chanda, there is no action of developing wisdom. No action of developing wisdom, no results (such as maggaphala). Chanda is one of the iddhipadas and it is not an akusala action. With metta, Alex #107101 From: Kevin F Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] how to avoid falling into pubbekatahetuvada? farrellkevin80 Dear Alex, You wrote: Thank you very much for your post, I will have to re-read it more and more. There is a very fine line between anatta teaching and "pubbekatahetuvada" that I need to consider and distinguish more. ==== You may have seen just how subtle this path is. Kamma vipakka arises constantly. It is a major part of our experience. But there are other conditions that condition experience. Accumulations in the citta condition our experience in a big way. Akusala may indirectly condition kusala. In fact, I think it conditions papanca which can be a condition for kusala (maybe Nina can interject and correct if wrong). You see the right path. It is a subtle path. Kevin #107102 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:57 pm Subject: Susima sutta. nilovg Dear Kevin, Alex, Lukas and all, Thank you for the Pali LUkas. I repost an old post of mine: We read in the Wheel 351-353, The Jhanas in Theravada Buddhist Meditation, by Ven. Henepola Gunaratana, p. 70: end quote. If we go back to the Sutta, we see that the Buddha taught Susima the three characteristics of realities, beginning with, , and after that the Dependent Origination. In the Commentary it was said that the monks were nijjhaanakaa sukkhavipassakaa: here we see the meaning of contemplation in the sense of contemplation of the three characteristics in vipassana, as was previously brought forward by Robert and also by me: two meanings of nijjhaana (also the term upanijjhaana is used in other texts) or jhaana. We read in the Commentary, that the Buddha said to Susima that the Path, magga and the Fruition, phala, are not the result of concentration, samadhi, but that they are the result of vipassana. After the Buddha?s teaching Susima became an arahat. The Buddha did not teach him to attain jhana first. It is also said, in the beginning of the Sutta that there were many monks with the Buddha. Thus, many monks were sukkhavipassaka. I do not deny that in many Suttas the Buddha praised jhana, but to whom did he speak? To people who had accumulations for it. I quoted the Susima Sutta to show that it is not absolutely necessary for everybody to first develop a high degree of concentration and then vipassana. The question, atikamma ruupe aaruppaa te kayena phusitva ... transcending rupajjhana and remaining in arupajjhana, (kaya is here mental body, citta and cetasika) one could interprete it in different ways: have you attained arupajhana after having attained rupajjhana: have you both jhanas, no is the answer. What does it mean? We have neither, or, we have rupajhana but not arupajhana, and the latter possibility Ven. Thanissaro finds plausible. Then we should read the whole sutta and commentary, and draw our conclusion. Incidentally, according to Ven. Hennepola, there are five groups of pa~n~naavimutta, and one of these is dry insight, four have attained rupajhana. -------- Nina. #107103 From: Ken O Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 7:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: rules and rituals sukin pt ashkenn2k Dear Sukin > >Sukin: I go to the foundation to "discuss". I don't say that there can't be Right Understanding "now". > >And the question is not whether those people in ancient times went to secluded places, but that they did this as a result of following methods / instructions or was it due to their own accumulated understanding. This is why I was pointing out earlier that reading about the behavior of the monks of those times and the danger of reducing what they did to methods which other people can follow. KO: So is there a method or not in ancient times. You have yet answer this questions. Also are you saying breathing 1 to 10 is not a method, then you tell me what it is. Will one with accumulated understanding will straighaway will know oh i have to do this 1 to 10 without being taught or this is taught by another ancient masters. >Sukin: But my question to put it differently, was, "what kind / level of understanding sees the descriptions in the Visuddhimagga as 'methods to follow'"? Are you saying that once the requirement for the particular amount of virtue, mindfulness and clear comprehension has been met, I'd come to see / understand the methods? > KO: What kind of level, that is a good question which Visud does describe a bit but did not define in absolute level like a mathematician. But definitely this person has yet reach vipassana nana. >> KO: so is rites and ritual wrong by itself? > >Sukin: To me it is meaningless to call an activity 'rite and ritual' if no wrong view is involved. KO: Are Vinaya rules?. There are descriptions of disciples going round the shrine three times to pay respects, so are these call rituals or rite. >======== >> >NewS: I'd say that, because we forget that dhammas are anatta that we conceive of practice as being associated with 'methods'. So we are wrong from the very outset making any subsequent hearing of the Dhamma, more likely interpreted in a way which creates illusions of results and any apparent 'correction' just part of that illusion. >> > >> KO: what is wrong with a method, the dhammas or the method itself? What does anatta got to do with method? > >Sukin: All there is in reality are just conditioned dhammas and anatta is their characteristic. Methods imply that certain dhammas can be made to arise by thinking certain thoughts. This disregards the fact of conditionality, particularly that of the roots, and how any of them arise by natural decisive support condition rather than by intention. KO: What do you mean by certain thoughts. You mean you read a book is not due to intention arise or panna can intent. >Besides, if any kusala arisen now was not by any intention, let alone following a method, why the sudden requirement for some method at a later stage? I'd like to hear your reasoning with regard to this. KO: Because method is to prevent unprofitable thoughts from arising. Please read the commentary to discursive thoughts Vitakka-Santhana Sutta which could be found in access to insight website. >> >> KO: There is the development of 32 parts whether one like it or not. It is clear in the text it is use to eradicate greed. Are you saying now your understanding is paramatha level and not a theoretical level. Also there show how little dinosaurs understand samatha bhavana, the two bhavana must end in the delimiting of materiality and immateriality. This is always said in the texts. > >Sukin: Well from my perspective it is you who appears to be misunderstanding all this. The difference between samatha and vipassana is such that only the latter is the understanding leading to insight which the former can never do. The 32 parts for example, are concepts and concepts can never be the object of insight though they can very well be a condition for calm. >True while contemplating any of the 32 parts, there are realities arising and falling away just as they do now when reading and typing. The realities are however nama and rupa, and only these can be the object of the development of wisdom capable of leading to insight. And yes, this is intellectual understanding but the kind which I believe is in line with the way things are. The concepts are concepts about that which really exists, not about that which does not. KO: You mean Buddha never teach samatha bhavana at all. What Visud written is all a lie. Who say concepts cannot lead to insight, pse read the commentaries of satipatthana, it is concept of breathing that reach jhanas which become basis of insight and not breathing as nama and rupa. > >Sukin: That wasn't my point. I wasn't drawing the attention to the fact that sense objects must be known. I was asking about how virtue comes in during so-called meditation and plays its particular role and whether this is with panna or not. I was asking about the kind of mindfulness which directs the mind back to the meditation object if whether this is one kind of kusala, different from when the chosen subject is the object? > KO: Virture prevent akusala citta from arising. Mindfulness dont direct the mind, it is just protect the mind from aksuala states, it is vitakka that directs the mind and ekagatta that fix on that object > >Sukin: Every instance of kusala is samatha, so yes, satipatthana is samatha too. But are you now trying to bring this in as support for the need to develop samatha as a separate practice complementing satipatthana? Is this good reasoning? ;-) > KO: There shows every little understanding of samatha, without sati there is no samatha bhavana, if every instance of kusala is samantha than Mother Teresa would have been a jhana master. >========= ><…> >> >KO: Do you choose to listen to AS now? So what is choosing and what is the object of this listening? >> > >> >NewS: Is it right to make the comparison? >> >> KO: Why not? Then how do you choose. If you claim there is no choosing why you choose to listen to AS. And why cant other people choose a particular subject. If that is alright with you, why cant it is alright with others? Double standards? > >Sukin: :-) >First, there is no such thing as 'choice' in reality. We can talk about choice conventionally, but this is because at those times our concern is not in describing or understanding reality, and of course it is even convenient to talk in such terms at times. For example, I would be telling you that I choose to listen to A. Sujin and not other teachers. You'd understand this as being a statement about the correctness of her teaching and not bother to question me about whether I really believed that I could actually choose to listen etc. In deed I do not go to listen involved with thoughts about choice even in the conventional sense (which btw, there has been no discussion since when Sarah and Jon were here :-(. ). But even if I did have such thoughts as choosing between this and that, it could only be an overall impression, unlike what must necessarily be involved in choosing between different meditation subjects, don't you think? KO: if the paramtha dhamma dont exist, what condition the interest, the effort, the will to listen, panna alone? Why Sarah, Jon, Ken H cannot answer this question because simply, if there is no choice, why did you select a teacher? panna alone? > >A meditation subject has very direct relevance to the state of mind which considers it such that one either has right understanding or else wrong understanding about it. The requirement for precision is such that to even thinking to pick one out is reflection of wavering and therefore can't be right. Besides, the important thing is that while the former allows for understanding to arise at anytime in between, to think that similarly can happen with the latter while still holding on to the idea seems like a contradiction. > KO: who say those who practise meditation they dont practise understanding of dhamma in their daily lives, you should read clear comprehension in the commentary of satipatthana. >========= ><….> >> KO: that is your preference, Buddha never said development of enlightement is purely based on paramatha dhammas, it can be based on concepts and you also start from concepts even in understanding dhamma now. You can ask without expectation, why can't other people ask without expectation. Again isn't it double standard? Also did you choose to listen to her? Isn't that that act and concentrate to listen. Can you listen without concentration? > >Sukin: An understanding based on conventional examples would be kusala of the level of samatha, perhaps such is what is involved in Dhammanusati, but I'm not sure. However Pariyatti understanding I believe, which is precursor to Patipatti and Pativedha, this must be about paramattha dhammas. It is consideration *in the moment* about a reality, qualifying it as being that which directly conforms to panna of the level which is satipatthana and that of vipassana. So for anyone who hears about conventional examples and feel subsequently inspired, they'd need to have right understanding about paramattha dhammas before there can be any satipatthana. > KO: definitely there must pariyatti, everyone starts from there and it is conventional, without it could you do patipatti and pativedha. So say satipatthana is restricted to paramatha dhamma that is only applicable on vipassana nana and not before. >========= >> >Can the same be said about the activity of meditation? Does a meditator believe that whatever he learns is intellectual? Does he not have the aim and hence any subsequent idea, of having had direct understanding of some level? >> >> KO: That does mean the meditator does not know that the object in his mind is also not self. Not self is not restricted to dhammas, it could be apply to concepts just like the 32 parts or the cemetary meditation. Buddha never restrict not self on dhammas only, not I, not myself and not mine, are all could be concepts and dhammas :-). > >Sukin: You mean concepts have the characteristic of anatta? >Yes, you can reflect conceptually about anatta, but 'not mine, not I and not myself' does not come from reasoning alone, but from a good deal of direct understanding. KO: definitely it is from panna but the object is concept, panan can arise with any objects due to mental door process. It is not restricted to just nama and rupa. >========= >> >NewS: I've given my response, but a bit more here. >> > >> >In considering the need for sila and sati etc. is it not imperative that we first understand what sila and sati are? And would not these require understanding at least of the level of Suttamaya panna or Bhavanamaya panna? And if this is understood to be the situation, would one still want to go on into talking about such kind of practice? >> > >> >In other words, I believe that thoughts about meditation arise precisely because one has missed the point. >> > >> KO: Nope, then you are dismissing what is written in the Visud. Prove by text and not by claims. Everyone can claim. > >Sukin: I'm not dismissing the Visud. but only interpreting what's written there in a way which is consistent with my understanding of anatta and conditionality and how the development of both samatha and vipassana must necessarily proceed. > KO: So is there a meditation or not >======== >> >NewS: I am saying that the dhamma which conditions thoughts about meditation is the papanca which is miccha ditthi. This of course is intellectual understanding only, but this is how it must be, isn't it, else how does one ever come to direct experience? >> >> >NewS: The akusala dhamma which is miccha ditthi conditions the idea and this when followed is wrong practice, which again involves predominantly the dhamma lobha, which is mistaken for sati. >> >> KO: That is really a total disregard to the what is taught by Buddhism, dont forget Buddha taught meditation also. > >Sukin: The Buddha taught the Four Noble Truths. The fourth is the Path led by Right Understanding. > KO: Definitely Buddha taught about 4NT, did Buddha said there is no meditation. >> >> There is for example a Sutta in which monks have been described as reacting to akusala cittas by biting their tongue (?) and other such activities which I believe you'd agree are simply conditioned responses to the particular situation. In other words you'd understand all those activities in the light of individual accumulations, conditionality and anatta? Why not similarly with all that is written in the Visud. then? Just as you wouldn't believe that in biting your tongue it would be with kusala citta, shouldn't the same attitude be towards all those descriptions in the Visud.? >> > >> KO: We have to be clear, what I have written is supported by the text, your example is not. If you wish to give an example pse give one that is reasonable. > >Sukin: I'm not sure what you are saying. Are you saying that the particular example from the Suttas I gave should be interpreted in the same way as you interpret what is written in the Visud. namely as method to follow? \ KO: It is not bitting their tongue, it is clenching their teeth, placing their tongue and pressing on the patate. that is for placing a strong kusala thought to replace the aksuala thoughts under the commentary of the Vitakka-Santhana Sutta >============ >> >NewS: It has never been implied that the conventional activity is the wrong practice. Sitting is sitting, whether this is when listening to the Dhamma, watching TV or meditating. The one associated with watching TV is motivated by attachment. That with listening to the Dhamma can be the same, or kusala interest with / without understanding or with wrong view. That with meditating is with the idea of control / following a method, therefore necessarily with wrong view. ;-) >> >> KO: your conventional activity is listening is ok, why meditation is not ok. You mean when you listen to dhamma, you dont condition your mind to fix on the listening, isn't that also a control? > >Sukin: There can be right effort or wrong effort while listening. Trying hard to listen is likely wrong effort conditioned by tanha. Trying hard to catch realities with reference to particular time, place, posture and object of thought (such as the breath) must be with both tanha and wrong view. > KO: So you can dont try hard to listen, why cant these people who practise also did not try hard to meditate, So say they are trying to catch realities, did Buddha said meditition is catching realities, if it is will Buddha teach them? > >Sukin: As you have also pointed out, there is nothing wrong with thinking and concepts. Getting ready, going to my car and driving towards the foundation, reaching there and going into the room for discussion, countless akusala must be involved. If there is any wrong view as well, that would be conditioned by something else and not the particular idea of going to discuss. > >Following the idea of a place with a particular setting, sitting a particular posture, concentrating on a particular object, this is saying that understanding can't arise at other times; indeed it is moving away from the present moment which is the only relevant moment in this regard. > >Are these two viewpoints similar to you? > KO: definitely they are similar, can you escape from thinking and concepts. can one prevent citta from thinking and concepts. So you said going to discuss there is nothing wrong, and they are many instances of ancient discples who go to secluded place to meditate, are they wrong? >========= >> >NewS: No they weren't wrong, but one reason is that "they were not following a method". ;-) And btw, what according to you is the method involved in anyone's travelling to the foundation, sitting down and listening to the Dhamma? >> >> KO: You mean seating down, listening and concentrating on listening is not a method and then seating down concentrating breath is a method :-) Double standards again right :-) > >Sukin: Are you saying that I must have read about this in the Visud. or some other text and have followed the prescription? ;-) > KO: Nope, eveyone got their own incliination so why meditation is wrong whiile yours is right. Kind regards Ken O #107104 From: "colette" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How does one practice insight? was: susima ksheri3 Hi Alex, Good position! I appreciate your application of the word, pubbekatavada, since now I can see that the Buddhists have actually had to deal with this totalitarian position which gives rise to ELITISM and the Caste System where "divinity" is alleged bestowed upon the ruling classes simply because they are more worthy than others and therefore must cause suffering in every other person due to their past failures that have placed them in the slave position and the meglamaniac in the "elitist" position. Wisdom is very dependent upon CAUSES and CONDITIONS. For those lucky enough to be born with a "silver spoon" in their mouths they will likely never understand just how ignorant they truely are. In fact, I would wager that they'd never even give any credit to the Buddha's actual history of consciously choosing to not touch his son and to leave his luxurious life for an ascetic life where he eventually learned it's folly as well. Those people will never understand that the condition of their wealth is not an automatic "Get Out Of Jail FREE" card for everything negative in their lives; they will never be conscious that their condition is the CAUSE of their negative belief structure. And how can anybody tell a group, a gang, a fraternity/sorority, a entire CASTE, of meglamaniacs that they are delusioning, hallucinating, when their grasp of reality only extends to the edge of THE CASTE which imprisons them? When they go outside their sphere of influence, their CASTE, their former consciousness seases to be applicable and relevant, in fact it's useless, to a greater extent. I think it's folly to consider that WISDOM can somehow be packaged and sold to society as if it were something that they can actually purchase from the tyrany, the slavery, of IGNORANCE. Yet I believe that the actual discussion that WISDOM is actually a valuable thing to possess and strive to perfect, is a valuable discussion, I hate to admit it, but it's a PERSONAL THING. I like your statement Alex. Thank you! toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello Kevin, Lukas, all, > > > Kevin: > > Hi Alex. Is there a self that makes wisdom come about? > > No. It is an impersonal process that develops due to causes and conditions. Nobody can fully control it, "I want wisdom now!" and poof it magically happens. > > However none of this should mean that there is no use in studying, restraining the senses and properly meditating. Choice to "do nothing" is as much conditioned choice as is choice to "do something about it". Reading and considering is as much "action" as "meditation" is. And it appears to me that lets say instructions found in the commentaries on "clear comprehension" as it comes to Satipatthana sutta and its section on walking are also a set of instructions. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wayof.html#deport > > The question that I* am interested in is how to make the learning more productive (in bringing maggaphala). Of course this is not under anyone's direct control which is why conditions are required. However I am not a big fan of certain statements that sound like "pubbekatavada" . The Buddha did often talk about diligence and how one should strive as if one's head is on fire. > > > > > > *For clear communication purposes one has to use personal pronouns, and the Buddha did use them. However I don't theorize "Self" in them. > > > > > > IMHO. > > With metta, > > Alex > #107105 From: "Sadhu Chew" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 12:52 am Subject: Re: Hello chewsadhu Dear robK, Are you sure the one-pointedness mental factor that associated with distracted mind is also called Khanika Samadhi? With respect, Chew --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > Dear robK, Robin, Friends, > > robK: Khainka samadhi is always present, even when we are distratced. What is not always present is sati. > you can read this letter I wrote some time back which might be relevant: > http://www.dhammastudy.com/corr.html > > oops I just checked don't click on the link, it has a trojan virus, teh website seems to be infected. I will try to find anotehr site/ > > c: The webmaster of that site informs me that the problem has been resolved. Apologies for the trouble and thanks for the heads up. > > peace, > connie #107106 From: "retro77@..." Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 12:40 am Subject: Re: Little selves? retro77... Greetings Scott, Scott: what is your opinion of:... "Citta cognizes. Pa~n~naa understands. These functions have an object. This object has characteristics which are cognized and understood."? Any questions? Paul: Yes, I do actually. Is citta cognizing? I don't mean that in a temporal manner, but structurally is citta = cognizing? Does Pa~n~naa = understanding? Are they one and the same thing? As for the "This object..." bit, my present understanding remains that an object only becomes an object through the active process of sankhara (formation), and that is process is conditioned by ignorance. By way of example, here's a couple of pictures... http://www.drcahuston.com/fun_files/image002.jpg http://www.drcahuston.com/fun_files/image003.jpg In these pictures, what you see depends on how you form the raw input into an "object". Possible "objects" formed from these raw materials include a skill, a vanity, an eskimo, or a native American. To me, the "object" in question is not the JPG on the computer screen, but the form that is formed/cognized. In Bahiya Sutta (Ud 1.10) the Buddha encourages Bahiya to see without forming objects/things/dhammas... --- "Then, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Bahiya, there is no you in terms of that. When there is no you in terms of that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress." --- Further to the above, I do not believe external or objective "objects" (as might be conceived of in modern science) are what the Buddha is talking about when he speaks of dhammas and their signficance. The world (loka) of dhammas taught by the Buddha, which we need to bring to an end, is different to the world of things as conceived by science or worldlings. ---- Extract from SN 12:44 (Loka Sutta) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.044.than.html Dwelling at Savatthi. There the Blessed One addressed the monks: "I will teach you the origination of the world & the ending of the world. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak." "As you say, lord," the monks responded to the Blessed One. The Blessed One said: "And what is the origination of the world? Dependent on the eye & forms there arises eye-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. This is the origination of the world. ---- Metta, Paul. :) #107107 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 2:15 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Little selves? ptaus1 Hi KenO and Kevin, Thanks for you comments and quotes. Best wishes pt > So the practise is not to reject any concept, but to develop the understanding of it. And I have yet meet any text that reject concept as a practise or to say the practise is just only nama and rupa (unless vipassana nana). #107108 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 2:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Susima sutta, dry insight? ptaus1 Hi Scott, > Scott: Although I asked Paul to come clean on his opinions, certain as I was that he'd had plenty of opportunity on 'another forum' to come up with them, I think it best that one recall that here, on this forum, it is this forum that one is interacting on. > > Other forums are irrelevant. > > I, for one, don't appreciate the 'bleed-over.' Who needs all the pointless politics? Hmm? No worries, I think we just differ on this matter. I mean, I see threads and members spilling over from one forum to another year after year, yourself included, so I think it's great when people try to be cordial no matter where they are and sincerely ask each other questions, as Paul did here so far imo, instead of communicating for the sake of argument and belonging to a camp. Best wishes pt #107109 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 2:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Susima sutta, dry insight? scottduncan2 Dear pt, Regarding: pt: "No worries, I think we just differ on this matter." Scott: Yeah, we do pt (what is your name, by the way?). pt: "I mean, I see threads and members spilling over from one forum to another year after year, yourself included, so I think it's great when people try to be cordial no matter where they are and sincerely ask each other questions, as Paul did here so far imo, instead of communicating for the sake of argument and belonging to a camp." Scott: I don't appreciate your ability to recall other forums and the members they may have had, nor to continue threads from on to another. I'd thank you to leave me out of it. I think the boundaries between forums ought to be maintained. Separate forums are separate and should stay that way. (And I've seen a few people coming onto this forum just to cause trouble.) We'll leave it at that. Sincerely, Scott. #107110 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 2:51 am Subject: Re: Little selves? scottduncan2 Dear Paul, Regarding: Paul: "Yes, I do actually. Is citta cognizing? I don't mean that in a temporal manner, but structurally is citta = cognizing? Does Pa~n~naa = understanding? Are they one and the same thing? As for the 'This object...' bit, my present understanding remains that an object only becomes an object through the active process of sankhara (formation), and that is process is conditioned by ignorance." Scott: Citta is cognizing. Pa~n~naa is understanding. Take seeing consciousness, for example. It's only object is visible object - colour. P: "By way of example, here's a couple of pictures..." Scott: These don't apply, really. This is just ordinary perception, not Dhamma. In considering Abhidhamma you'll have to drop the pop-psychology, I'm afraid. Visible object is not 'face' or 'car' or whatever. It is just colour. One moment of seeing consciouseness arises conditioned by visible object and then falls away. The 'face' or 'car' is created by thinking and other mental factors. Thanks for the suttas, I'll look at those for later. Sincerely, Scott. #107111 From: "retro77@..." Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 3:03 am Subject: Re: Little selves? retro77... Greetings Scott, --- Scott: Citta is cognizing. Pa~n~naa is understanding. Take seeing consciousness, for example. It's only object is visible object - colour....... Visible object is not 'face' or 'car' or whatever. It is just colour. One moment of seeing consciouseness arises conditioned by visible object and then falls away. --- Paul: Thank you for the explanation. Taking that back to the notion of sankhata dhamma (formed dhammas, or conditioned dhammas) for a moment... what is the condition of the "colour"? Would it be things like light etc.? Are all these conditions external to you or I, or is some aspect of the five aggregates involved as a condition? (e.g. normal vision, as opposed to colour blindness). If it is all external to the five aggregates (as I get the impression from your last posting, please correct me if I'm wrong), what is the significance of this notion of conditioning of such objective/external dhammas in the context of nirdoha (cessation)? Surely it doesn't mean cessation of an external objects blueness? It would be good if you had a look at those suttas, even if just to see that my conception is based on the suttas, rather than pop-psychology of which I've got negligable interest. Metta, Paul. :) #107112 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 3:21 am Subject: Re: Little selves? scottduncan2 Dear Paul, Regarding: Paul: Thank you for the explanation. Taking that back to the notion of sankhata dhamma (formed dhammas, or conditioned dhammas) for a moment... what is the condition of the 'colour'? Would it be things like light etc.? Are all these conditions external to you or I, or is some aspect of the five aggregates involved as a condition? (e.g. normal vision, as opposed to colour blindness)..." Scott: Colour is ruupa - a paramattha dhamma. Sincerely, Scott. #107113 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:48 pm Subject: Guarding the Senses! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Only by Guarding the 6 Sense Doors is one in Control! The Blessed Buddha once explained mental control like this: Friends, having seen a form with the eye, one remains neither attracted towards any nice form, nor repelled by any disgusting form... Having heard a sound with the ear, one remains neither captivated by any fine sound, nor repulsed by any horrible sound... Having smelled a smell with the nose, one remains neither allured by any pleasant smell, nor rejected by any repulsive smell... Having tasted a taste with the tongue, one remains neither fascinated by any delightful taste, nor reversed by any revolting taste... Having touched a touch with the body, one remains neither tempted by any delicate touch, nor disgusted by any unpleasant touch... Having thought an idea with the mind, one remains neither enticed by any agreeable thought, nor disappointed by any disagreeable thought... One resides having established constant awareness of the body & within an infinite mind. Thereby one comes to know directly that release of mind and that release by understanding, wherein all harmful detrimental states irreversibly cease without remaining traces left behind... It is in this very way, that one lives in full mental control with the 6 sense doors guarded... Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! http://What-Buddha-Said.net Guarding the Senses! #107114 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 3:52 am Subject: Re: Little selves? scottduncan2 Dear Paul, Regarding: Bahiya Sutta (Ud 1.10): "...When, Bahiya, for you in the seen is merely what is seen... in the cognized is merely what is cognized, then, Bahiya, you will not be 'with that.' When, Bahiya, you are not 'with that,' then, Bahiya, you will not be 'in that.' When, Bahiya, you are not 'in that,' then, Bahiya, you will be neither here nor beyond nor in between the two. Just this is the end of suffering..." (John Ireland, tr.). Here's the Paa.li: ...Tasmaatiha te, baahiya, eva.m sikkhitabba.m ?" 'di.t.the di.t.thamatta.m bhavissati, sute sutamatta.m bhavissati, mute mutamatta.m bhavissati, vi~n~naate vi~n~aa-atamatta.m bhavissatii'ti. Eva~nhi te, baahiya, sikkhitabba.m. Yato kho te, baahiya, di.t.the di.t.thamatta.m bhavissati, sute sutamatta.m bhavissati, mute mutamatta.m bhavissati, vi~n~naate vi~n~naatamatta.m bhavissati, tato tva.m, baahiya, na tena; yato tva.m, baahiya, na tena tato tva.m, baahiya, na tattha; yato tva.m, baahiya, na tattha, tato tva.m, baahiya, nevidha na hura.m na ubhayamantarena. Esevanto dukkhassaa 'ti... Scott: For later... Sincerely, Scott. #107115 From: Joel Krauser Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 3:23 am Subject: Just saying hello madnessofang... Hi, everyone! My name is Joel. Just joined dsg and Grouply.com both tonite. Really great site! :) Anyhoo, come from a Zen background, but have been hghly inspired by the books Dharma Punx and Against the Stream. also, have begun studying the suttas. Just beginning, have a lot to learn and absorb. thanks! -Joel Krauser-+ #107116 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 3:55 am Subject: Re: Just saying hello scottduncan2 Dear Joel, Regarding: J: "Hi, everyone! My name is Joel. Just joined dsg and Grouply.com both tonite. Really great site! :) Anyhoo, come from a Zen background, but have been hghly inspired by the books Dharma Punx and Against the Stream. also, have begun studying the suttas. Just beginning, have a lot to learn and absorb." Scott: Hi, Joel. Welcome. Sincerely, Scott. #107117 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 4:01 am Subject: Re: Little selves? scottduncan2 Dear Paul, Regarding: P: "...Further to the above, I do not believe external or objective 'objects' (as might be conceived of in modern science) are what the Buddha is talking about when he speaks of dhammas and their signficance. The world (loka) of dhammas taught by the Buddha, which we need to bring to an end, is different to the world of things as conceived by science or worldlings..." Scott: Yeah but don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Visible object is ruupa. The Buddha taught about ruupa. Sincerely, Scott. #107118 From: Kevin F Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 4:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Just saying hello farrellkevin80 Welcome Joel. I think you will enjoy the conversations here. We are lucky to have some really knowledgable people around such as Nina, Sarah, Scott, etc. etc. There is always a lot to learn. Kevin ________________________________ Hi, everyone! My name is Joel. Just joined dsg and Grouply.com both tonite. Really great site! :) Anyhoo, come from a Zen background, but have been hghly inspired by the books Dharma Punx and Against the Stream. also, have begun studying the suttas. Just beginning, have a lot to learn and absorb. thanks! -Joel Krauser-+ === #107119 From: "retro77@..." Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 4:09 am Subject: Re: Little selves? retro77... Greetings Scott, > Scott: Colour is ruupa - a paramattha dhamma. Does that mean it exists inherently, in and of itself, with no qualification or caveats required? Metta, Paul. :) #107120 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 5:47 am Subject: Re: Little selves? scottduncan2 Dear Paul, Regarding: P: "Does that mean it exists inherently, in and of itself, with no qualification or caveats required?" Scott: Yes. Sincerely, Scott. #107121 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 6:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Susima sutta, dry insight? ptaus1 Hi Scott, > Scott: I don't appreciate your ability to recall other forums and the members they may have had, nor to continue threads from on to another. I'd thank you to leave me out of it. I think the boundaries between forums ought to be maintained. Separate forums are separate and should stay that way. (And I've seen a few people coming onto this forum just to cause trouble.) We'll leave it at that. No worries, I'll try to comply with your requests as applicable. In the same token, I'd like to ask you to reconsider employing confrontational approach to Dhamma discussions, especially with newcomers, since that's one of the major factors imo that often leads to the trouble you mention. Best wishes pt #107122 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 6:14 am Subject: Re: Little selves? ptaus1 Hi Scott and Paul, > P: "Does that mean it exists inherently, in and of itself, with no qualification or caveats required?" > > Scott: Yes. Could you please explain on what basis you say that? I remember reading in Nina's book on rupas that external rupa is conditioned by temperature. Thus, I thought the answer to Paul's question would be that "exist/doesn't exist" has to do with views and therefore the question doesn't apply to dhammas (rupa included) because dhammas are conditioned. Thanks. Best wishes pt #107123 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:09 am Subject: Re: Character encoding ptaus1 Hi all, Part 7 - about macros and changing old Pali characters into new ones. This is particularly useful if you have a document with a lot of Pali in an old non-unicode font or in Velthius, and you want to transform the whole text into a new font (and the other way around of course). Usually, because of the difference in encoding, once you change that document into a new font, the normal letters all change appropriately, but the Pali diacritics don't. So then, instead of having to manually change every single Pali character with a diacritic into a new Unicode character to make the whole document Unicode-compliant, you can just run a macro which does it all automatically for those troublesome characters. 1. A "macro" is just an automated feature that Microsoft Word (and other text-editors) offer, and in our case it relates to the Find-Replace function that Word offers. So here is a brief summary of it first: - let's say you want to replace one letter (like å) or word in your text with another one (like a-) - instead of going letter by letter through the whole text manually, you can use the Find-Replace function in Word, which will do that automatically in the whole text every time the letter (or word) you want replaced is found. - In Word, select the entire text you want to change, then click on "Edit" in the top menu, then from the drop-down menu click on "Replace...". - You'll get a new window where you can enter the the letter you want replaced (å) in the "Find what" box, with the new letter you want (a-) in the "Replace with" box. Then click on "Replace All" button, and this function will be executed. This will work for any font and language, though if you want Unicode (and your Microsoft Word supports Unicode, i.e. it's not really old), then transform the whole text into a Unicode font like Arial Unicode MS for example (i.e. select the whole text and then select the font you want it to be in), and then do the Find-Replace. 2. Creating a macro If you want to automate a process, you then create a "macro" - i.e. instead of repeating the same thing manually over and over, you record what you do once (thus crating a macro), and the next time you need to do the same thing, you just run a macro, which does it all automatically. So, in our case, you can automate the Find-replace procedure by recording it, and then you can use that feature anytime you need on any text you need. To record a macro: - click on "Tools" in the top Word menu, then in the drop-down menu put your mouse over "Macro", then from the next drop-down menu click on "Create New Macro". -you will then get a new window where you can name your macro, and then click "OK" button. The recording of your actions will then begin, and you will also get a small menu bar which contains pause, record and stop buttons for the macro recording. -then simply do the actions you want recorded - so you can just do the Find-replace procedure that was explained in the point 1, and once you are done, press the stop button (little square) in the macro recording menu bar. 3. Playing a macro When you have a document in which you want to replace å with a-, then you can run the macro you created to do it for you: - select the text you want to change, then click on "Tools" in the top Word menu, then in the drop-down menu put your mouse over "Macro", then from the next drop-down menu click on "Macros". - you will then get a new window where you can select the macro you want to play, and once you select it, click on the "Run" button. - At that point the macro will execute and you'll get a pop-up window telling you how many replacements were made and if you want to continue (if you have more than one type of replacements). 4. Replacing multiple letters, words, etc, with a single macro. If you have several different letters you want to replace, you can repeat the same Find-Replace procedure for every letter while recording a macro. In that case, when you run that macro, it will go through the text once for each letter, replace it and come up with a pop-up window asking you if you want to continue, so you click "Yes" every time until it stops asking, meaning it's done with all the letters. 5. Obviously, recording a macro for many letters, like what's usually needed for pali diacritics, might take a long time, so it's faster to do a few quick copy-paste actions in the macro editor. There are a few ways to do it. You can create a macro for one letter as explained in point 2, and then call it as explained in point 3, but don't click on "Run", but click instead on "Edit" button. This will take you to the macro editor window. Alternatively, if you know what to do, you can go straight to the editor without first recording a macro. Next time about the macro editor and creating custom macros. Best wishes pt #107124 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 11:13 am Subject: India Ch 5, no 5 szmicio Dear friends, I found this somewhere on the web, I think it's Nina post. Best wishes Lukas ========================== India Ch 5, no 5 #107125 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 12:21 pm Subject: Re: Little selves? scottduncan2 Dear 'pt,' Regarding: pt: "Could you please explain on what basis you say that? I remember reading in Nina's book on rupas that external rupa is conditioned by temperature. Thus, I thought the answer to Paul's question would be that 'exist/doesn't exist' has to do with views and therefore the question doesn't apply to dhammas (rupa included) because dhammas are conditioned. Thanks." Scott: So your answer would have been: "'exist/doesn't exist' has to do with views and therefore the question doesn't apply to dhammas (rupa included) because dhammas are conditioned." Scott: Mine was 'yes.' Sincerely, Scott. #107126 From: Ken O Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 12:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? ashkenn2k Dear pt and Paul When Buddha taught about conditionality is to eradicate wrong views so one will develop understanding of anatta, anicca and dukkha.? When one say does rupa exist, Yes.? But it exist, conditions by temperature, by the four great elements, without these conditions it would not arise.? Even though it is condition, it has distinct characteristics that could be known and experience.?? If it is not distinct, how to one separate seeing from hearing, everything would be a mess. One of the objective of the DO is to eradicate wrong views of eternalism and annhilism.?? When we say rupa exist by conditions, this is to eliminate annhilistic point of view that nothing exist, when we say rupa condition to exist is to dispell the notion that things could exist on its own which leads to eternalistic point of view.? If dhamma does not exist, we cannot experience seeing, hearing etc.? So it exist but these dhamma that exist does not belong to anyone or God or self.? Cheers Ken O #107127 From: Ken O Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 1:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Susima sutta, dry insight? ashkenn2k Dear Lukas >this is all OK. >Those moments of anger are conditioned, we cannot choose. > >We can have more metta knowing this. Metta doesnt judge, doesnt pondering over this person or that person. metta forgets everything. KO: you are contradicting yourself, you said you cannot choose then you said we can have more metta? Isnt that choosing. To understand conditions is not attributing everything to conditions because in actual fact they are by nature conditions so there is no to need to attribute to them. We should understand conditions when they arise, the causes, the characteristics and not because it is all conditions which actual fact they are. when you decide to learn dhamma, you already chose, not by you but by conditions, the dhamma, the chanda. When you direct your thoughts towards the good, it is panna that known what is good but directed by cetana and vitakka as panna dont direct. Also to bring on down to conditions, we might as well now be merry since it is conditions to arise? So why bother to learn dhamma then? Understand this then one will know everything is conditioned but conditions can make a difference by striving, by directing by understanding dhamma. It is not you that learn, it is dhamma that wish (chanda) to learn condition by panna. it will act accordingly and put effort like reading and listening to dhamma. Cheers Ken O > >> Kevin, I found it necessary to speak up when I felt people treated you harshly on another forum, now I feel you are being needlessly harsh towards Alex. Sorry, I guess I don't understand the need to resort to allegations about another's person just to support one's POV (something you yourself protested to on another forum). I mean, keeping the discussion on the Dhamma issue at hand even when disagreeing seems much more beneficial. Maybe the two of you are simply using the term "jhana" differently? Maybe one means samatha practice, and another means calm and concentration at the moment of insight? Or something else? And what's "dry insight"? Does it refer to practice? Or to the moment of attainment? Or what? There are many interpretations possible, and I'm not sure what either one of you has in mind when you use them. Maybe the argument is simply due to using the same terms differently. And even if it turns out in the end you two still disagree, I would think that's okay as well. >> >> Best wishes >> pt >> >> >> > K: From the wording of your post I can see that you are not a genuine seeker of Dhamma, trying to understand where it is stated in the Sutta that 500 monks attained without jhana, but that you are only here to be antagonistic, because of your accumulated lobha and dosa. How sad, really. It makes it unable for me to share the quotes from the Commentaries with you which clearly state these things, because you are not sincere in your questioning. >> > Take your antagonism away from here friend. Come back when you are sincere for information. Then we will share the dhamma with you. Go antagonize elsewhere, friend. We will not answer your posts until you are sincere, although I have in front of me the quotations from the Commentary and Sub-Co of the Sutta that make it perfectly clear as crystal, I cannot share them with you-- and I am one who is incapable of not sharing the Dhamma [with those who are sincere seekers] my friend, if you understand what that means, but you don't understand. You have fallen into error. >> >> >> > A: I wish I had a penny every time someone has claimed that Susima sutta teaches "dry insight". >> > >> > Please tell me where in the sutta does it says that those monks didn't do Jhana? They simply rejected the abhinnas and aruppa attainments (both are not part of N8P, but Jhanas are part of N8P). >> > >> > I checked Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi's comments and he says the same thing. >> > >> > With metta, >> > >> > Alex >> > > > #107128 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 9:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and pt & Paul) - In a message dated 4/24/2010 9:04:57 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ashkenn2k@... writes: Dear pt and Paul When Buddha taught about conditionality is to eradicate wrong views so one will develop understanding of anatta, anicca and dukkha. When one say does rupa exist, Yes. But it exist, conditions by temperature, by the four great elements, without these conditions it would not arise. Even though it is condition, it has distinct characteristics that could be known and experience. If it is not distinct, how to one separate seeing from hearing, everything would be a mess. ---------------------------------------------------------- Yes, it is distinguishable but not separate/independent. --------------------------------------------------------- One of the objective of the DO is to eradicate wrong views of eternalism and annhilism. When we say rupa exist by conditions, this is to eliminate annhilistic point of view that nothing exist, when we say rupa condition to exist is to dispell the notion that things could exist on its own which leads to eternalistic point of view. If dhamma does not exist, we cannot experience seeing, hearing etc. So it exist but these dhamma that exist does not belong to anyone or God or self. ----------------------------------------------------------- Perfect, IMO. (The ontological middle way.) -------------------------------------------------------- Cheers Ken O ============================== With metta, Howard /"Just now, friend Sariputta, I understood your statement as, 'It's not the case, Kotthita my friend, that name-&-form is self-made, that it is other-made, that it is both self-made & other-made, or that - without self-making or other-making - it arises spontaneously. However, from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form' But then I understood your statement as, 'It's not the case, Kotthita my friend, that consciousness is self-made, that it is other-made, that it is both self-made & other-made, or that - without self-making or other-making - it arises spontaneously.' However, from name-&-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness.' Now how is the meaning of these statements to be understood?" "Very well then, Kotthita my friend, I will give you an analogy; for there are cases where it is through the use of an analogy that intelligent people can understand the meaning of what is being said. It is as if two sheaves of reeds were to stand leaning against one another. In the same way, from name-&-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness, from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form." / (From the Nalakalapiyo Sutta) #107129 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 1:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Just saying hello sarahprocter... Hi Joel, (pt*) --- On Sat, 24/4/10, Joel Krauser wrote: >My name is Joel. Just joined dsg and Grouply.com both tonite. Really great site! :) Anyhoo, come from a Zen background, but have been hghly inspired by the books Dharma Punx and Against the Stream. also, have begun studying the suttas. Just beginning, have a lot to learn and absorb. thanks! ... S: Welcome here and thanks for introducing yourself and letting us know you've joined us. Where do you live, by the way? We're all beginning, we all have a lot to learn, so welcome to the Club! If you find the list a little overwhelming in the beginning, with too many Pali terms and so on, I suggest you just start your own thread or just follow and join in those that don't seem too complicated for a while. In the files, there's also a simple Pali glossary that might be helpful for some of us to print out and have handy. In "Useful Posts" in the files, there's also a section under "New to the list...." which may be helpful for some.* Which suttas are you reading? You can always quote a little for discussion if you like.... Look forward to discussions with you in due course. Metta Sarah *pt - We've been slow to realise the problem with the UP link is because the name keeps changing....da! We'll try to do something about this at the next update. ========= #107130 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 1:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Just saying hello nilovg Dear Joel, Op 24-apr-2010, om 5:23 heeft Joel Krauser het volgende geschreven: > Just beginning, have a lot to learn and absorb. ------ Welcome here. Same, same for us all. A lot to learn and absorb. It is greatly appreciated when you start asking questions, that is the way that helps everybody. Nina. #107131 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 2:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Phra Dhammadharo on weak sati. nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 23-apr-2010, om 20:14 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > And this kind of consideration will bring its fruits later on. > Development of right understanding is very very slow and gradual. -------- N: Quite right. I listened to a Thai recording and heard Phra Dhammadharo's voice. He spoke about weak sati. I thought about your report, telling us that you went out with friends and realised that there was forgetfulness. Bhante Dhammadharo: When one begins one has to accept that sati is weak, and it is not right to be annoyed about that. But even being annoyed is conditioned. Weak sati is a reality that is not self, it is conditioned. No need to wonder about it why it is weak, it has gone already. Questioner: There are several realities appearing at the same time, such as cold and hardness, but I cannot separate them. Dh: Do not try to separate them. They have fallen away, do not try to know specifically cold or hardness. We do not know what appears next. It is cold in this room, but the characteristic of cold is not a place. We still have an idea of something that is cold. That is thinking, it is not knowing the characteristic of cold. Usually sati does not arise because we do not understand that it is anattaa. It is of no use to force its arising. A beginner who develops satipa.t.thaana is not free from wrong view. One does not want to know what has arisen already, one wants to know what has not arisen. One should not select objects of awareness. Satipa.t.thaana is directed towards detachment, but nobody likes detachment. Lobha likes objects, it does not detach. -------- Nina. #107132 From: Kevin F Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 4:02 pm Subject: The role of samatha for insight farrellkevin80 I had a thought about samatha. Many people think that deep concentration, serenity, makes it easier to "see" dhammas for what they are. However, that doesn't seem right. I don't think it is that the mind is more focused and able to finally then penetrate the characterstics of dhammas when concentrated. I think it makes it easier for the mind to compare the difference between when one is in a deep state of serenity, with the mind unified, with when one has "exited" the deep state and the mind is going wild again off sense-objects and impressions (when the mind is unified, everything is still happening because of conditions, but there is a certain stability not present otherwise and the instability may become apparent after on exits). It is at that time that there can be conditions for seeing just how anatta the citta, cetasikas, and rupa that arise are, and an opportunity for dispassion if panna sees their characteristics. This isn't some argument in favor of samatha, just my thoughts on its place for the samatha meditator. Of course, it is kusala to a high degree as well, even aside from the fact that it can be used as an aid for insight. Any thoughts on this? Thanks, Kevin #107133 From: "Rob" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 5:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How does one practice insight? was: susima rrobinrb2000 To all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > The Buddha did often talk about diligence and how one should strive as if one's head is on fire. Vayama and Virya both imply a directed effort. Sankappa implies a free will to form a resolution or intention. The idea there is no control or directing is hard to wrap my mind around. Some talked about cittas arising and falling rapidly with no carry over. I wondered about this because there is a continuity. IIRC, the verbal root cit even means to accumulate. Nina writes in her book that bhavanga-citta is the continuity, so there is a carry over? However, I got the impression that the bhavanga-citta is the same as the initial rebirth citta. If so, how is it, through samma vayama, one cultivates wholesome cetanas? How is there ever citta bhavana? Maybe with right effort and enthusiasm I can resolve this in my mind? vayama: I am told that a form of this same word in modern is use means exercise or gymnastics. I see it translated as effort, exertion, diligence ... viriya: This is said to be a cognate of virilty; that it originally literally referred to heroic macho characteristics. I see it translated as energy, zeal, enthusiasm, courageous effort ... robin #107134 From: "Rob" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 5:58 pm Subject: Re: Little selves? rrobinrb2000 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Dear Paul, > > Regarding: > > P: "Does that mean it exists inherently, in and of itself, with no qualification or caveats required?" > > Scott: Yes. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > Paul & Scott physics tells us that color is a wavelength of light energy. robin #107135 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 6:04 pm Subject: Re: The role of samatha for insight truth_aerator Dear Kevin, All, This question is very interesting to me. >K:I had a thought about samatha. Many people think that deep >concentration, serenity, makes it easier to "see" dhammas for what >they are. In brief: A) If hindrances can't be temporary suppressed, then how can they be permanently eradicated? Before you can run, you need to be able to walk. It seems strange for me to claim that a person never has attained Jhanas and cannot attain it, and yet become an Arahat (who has permanently let go of same hindrances that obstruct entry to Jhana). B) By temporary removing the hindrances, insight can do its job un-hindered. AN5.51 and other suttas clearly state that hindrances obstruct wisdom. Immediately After Jhana, the hindrances may still be supressed, one is super alert and mindful and from that clear state considering the Dhamma may be much more effective then when one is restless and thinking about various sensual thoughts. >K:I think it makes it easier for the mind to compare the difference >between when one is in a deep state of serenity, with the mind >unified, with when one has "exited" the deep state and the mind is >going wild again off sense-objects and impressions Right. Jhanas give a direct experience that can and should be used within the context of 4NT. You get into the Jhana by following 3rd NT, and the bliss that follows is a very important thing to consider. The skills needed to temporary let go of hindrances, may carry over into a skill that permanently eradicates them. Some more: 1) When one does deep samatha, one focus all one's attention at a small area in nama. The more one magnifies something (quality) the less other things (quantity) are present. Picture it as putting a sample under a microscope. You see less area, but in greater detail. That is done to see clearer a certain aspect of nama, something that cannot be seen when the mind is distracted among 6 senses. For example: A sand beach from a distance may look like one huge piece of earth. However when you come close, you will see that it is made of sand particles. Look closer and with greater magnification (using a magnifying glass, or even a microscope) and you see that particles ultimately do not even touch. Look under greater magnification and sand particles are seen as energy balls that are almost empty of matter... Emptiness filled with energy! Then you apply that knowledge (of the mind and mental processes) to other experiences in past and future. Example: A bottle filled with salt or sugar that is diffused in it. With one taste and knowledge of certain laws you can know how all water in that bottle tastes like. When you taste a bit of ocean, you can be reasonably certain that all ocean tastes like that (assuming that nothing else is added to it). So in this way samatha is very important for direct experience that may not be directly seen otherwise. I mean all, even non-Buddhists can see impermanence (ebb and flow of water. Flowers growing, waning and dying. sounds appearing and disappearing). Yet these facts don't make one Enlightened. Maybe the things perceived in daily life, or in 6 senses taken together are too coarse. Putting 100% attention to one sense door (such as the mind) may reveal much more previously unseen detail than putting 16.7% (100/6) attention to the mind. 2nd) Samatha pacifies hindrances (such as lust or hatred), and the deeper/longer the Samatha the more hindrances are temporary pacified. Thus without hindrances, vipassana can proceed much better. Don't worry, vipassana or insight can examine previous instances of hindrances. So one isn't missing the contemplation on hindrances. Considering the amount of hindrances we have today, this is an important point to consider. Even if some ascetics may have reached maggaphala with very limited past absorption concentration, their ascetic practices suppressed the hindrances almost as well as jhanic or post jhanic state of a meditator. 3) By comparing and contrasting the bliss of Jhana one can experientially witness the less-then-perfection of experiencing ordinary aggregates. Thus, more insight into dukkha (1st NT). By the absence of a certain thing (and then it's reappearance into awareness) a discerning person can learn quite a bit about it. A turtle that always lived in water cannot really know much what it means to be wet and dry. Only if it were able to go to the dry land, and then back into the water, then it would gain much more understanding of what water is. Learn through contrast. Something that is always present may become more deadened to awareness. Ex: when you are in an airplane, the constant sound will eventually be less noticeable. But when it suddenly starts or stops, than it is noticeable. Things in contrast are perceived much better. It is much easier to see dukkha of aggregates comparing to the bliss of Jhana. If a person cannot temporary let go of defilements and enter Jhana, then what makes you think that you can get rid of them permanently for awakening to occur?! IMHO, With metta, Alex #107137 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 6:45 pm Subject: Carry over of accumulations., truth_aerator Dear Nina, all, >"Rob" wrote: > Some talked about cittas arising and falling rapidly with no carry >over. I wondered about this because there is a continuity. IIRC, the >verbal root cit even means to accumulate. Nina writes in her book >that bhavanga-citta is the continuity, so there is a carry over? >However, I got the impression that the bhavanga-citta is the same as >the initial rebirth citta. If so, how is it, through samma vayama, >one cultivates wholesome cetanas? How is there ever citta bhavana? Interesting question. If I understand correctly what I've read in CMA, bhavanga serves as preserving a continuity between cittas. In compendium of miscelleneous (guide to #9) it is said that rebirth-linking, life-continuum (bhavanga), and death consciousness are the same??? Then how can there be any change from, lets say, double to triple rooted rebirth consciousness? How can anything accumulate into bhavanga within one lifetime? How can anything accumulate into bhavanga within multiple lifetimes? Does stream of Bhavanga changes when a good worldling becomes an Arahant in that life? With metta, Alex #107138 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 12:08 am Subject: Re: The role of samatha for insight kenhowardau Hi Kevin, ------------ K: > I had a thought about samatha. Many people think that deep concentration, serenity, makes it easier to "see" dhammas for what they are. However, that doesn't seem right. ------------ No, it doesn't seem right. Every citta has a samadhi cetasika, which enables it to remain focused on its object. --------------- K: > I don't think it is that the mind is more focused and able to finally then penetrate the characterstics of dhammas when concentrated. I think it makes it easier for the mind to compare the difference between when one is in a deep state of serenity, with the mind unified, ---------------- According to my understanding, the mind is always unified (in the sense of having only one object). The impression of a unified mind that lasts for a period of seconds is just a concept. ----------------------- K: > with when one has "exited" the deep state and the mind is going wild again off sense-objects and impressions (when the mind is unified, ----------------------- Going wild is also a concept. In reality, every citta is "one pointed." ------------------------------- K: > everything is still happening because of conditions, but there is a certain stability not present otherwise and the instability may become apparent after on exits). -------------------------------- According to my understanding, the practice of "exiting" applies only to jhana. Jhana citta has an abnormally strong samadhi cetasika, which ensures that the following citta will also be a jhana citta. Therefore, in jhana, the string of javana cittas (normally numbering seven) can be extended. Sometimes it can be extended for aeons (as in the non-material sphere). ------------------- K: > It is at that time that there can be conditions for seeing just how anatta the citta, cetasikas, and rupa that arise are, and an opportunity for dispassion if panna sees their characteristics. This isn't some argument in favor of samatha, just my thoughts on its place for the samatha meditator. Of course, it is kusala to a high degree as well, even aside from the fact that it can be used as an aid for insight. Any thoughts on this? ------------------- The thought that occurs to me is the unlikelihood of formal samatha meditation. For ordinary folk like us, kusala cittas are very rare in comparison to akusala cittas. And yet some people think that, by sitting still and relaxing, they can suddenly have a whole lot of kusala cittas. To me, it seems like a whole lot of wishful thinking. :-) Ken H #107139 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 12:15 am Subject: Re: The role of samatha for insight truth_aerator Hello KenH, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" > No, it doesn't seem right. Every citta has a samadhi cetasika, >which enables it to remain focused on its object. So what is the difference between micchasamadhi and samma-samadhi? If we are all and always possess samadhi, then why did Buddha taught about reaching and training in samadhi? If lets say a person (like Devadatta) committed heinous crimes, does it follow that every citta of his has samadhi? What about cittas in hell realm? Does it possess samadhi? > According to my understanding, the mind is always unified (in the >sense of having only one object). The impression of a unified mind >that lasts for a period of seconds is just a concept. >Going wild is also a concept. In reality, every citta is "one >pointed." Then how can the mind ever be restless and possess uddhacca cetasika? Restlessness and one-pointedness/unified mind are mutually exclusive. With metta, Alex #107140 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 12:42 am Subject: Re: Little selves? kenhowardau Hi pt, --------- pt: > I remember reading in Nina's book on rupas that external rupa is conditioned by temperature. Thus, I thought the answer to Paul's question would be that 'exist/doesn't exist' has to do with views and therefore the question doesn't apply to dhammas (rupa included) because dhammas are conditioned. ---------- I think you will find it is thoughts such as "I exist" and "I do not exist" that have to do with wrong views. (As in the Brahmajala Sutta.) On the other hand, "dhammas exist" has to do with right view. Here's a quote from SN22:94 Flowers: "And what is it, bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as existing, of which I too say that it exists? Form that is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. Feeling ... Perception... Volitional formations...Consciousness that is is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists." Ken H #107141 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Apr 24, 2010 11:10 pm Subject: Sound Reason... bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Calm is Sound Realistic Reason...! Buddha praised this simple contemplation for everyday progress: Five things have been well taught by the Blessed One who knows and sees, the Purified One, Perfectly Self-Enlightened by himself, that is, the five subjects for daily recollection by women and men, monks and householders. What are the five? 1: I am of a nature to decay, I have not yet got beyond decay. 2: I am of a nature to get a disease, I have not yet got beyond disease. 3: I am of a nature to die, I have not yet got beyond this certain death. 4: All that is mine, dear and delightful, will change, crumble and then vanish. 5: I am the owner of my kamma, born of my kamma, created & conditioned by my kamma, inheritor of my kamma, related and joined to my kamma, my life now is supported by my prior kamma. Whatever kamma I will perform, whether good or evil, of that shall I only experience the resulting effects! Anguttara Nikaya V, 57 <...> Source: BPS Wheel no 54 (Edited Excerpt): The Mirror of the Dhamma. A Manual of Buddhist Devotional Texts. By Narada Thera and Bhikkhu Kassapa. Revised By Bhikkhu Khantipalo: http://www.bps.lk/wh054-u.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri <...> #107142 From: "Rob" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 1:35 am Subject: Re: The role of samatha for insight rrobinrb2000 Alex & Ken H, KH: > > No, it doesn't seem right. Every citta has a samadhi cetasika, >which enables it to remain focused on its object. > T_A> So what is the difference between micchasamadhi and samma-samadhi? > If we are all and always possess samadhi, then why did Buddha taught about reaching and training in samadhi? We always possess citta ekagatta, but not samadhi. Samadhi only occurs when there is effort to suspend the Five Hidrances. One there is this effort; then there is parikamma samadhi. Here is quotation from The Noble Eightfold Path, The Way to the End of Suffering by Bhikkhu Bodhi Chapter VII: Right Concentration (Samma Samadhi) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/waytoend.html#ch7 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "However, samadhi is only a particular kind of one-pointedness; it is not equivalent to one-pointedness in its entirety. A gourmet sitting down to a meal, an assassin about to slay his victim, a soldier on the battlefield ? these all act with a concentrated mind, but their concentration cannot be characterized as samadhi. Samadhi is exclusively wholesome one-pointedness, the concentration in a wholesome state of mind. Even then its range is still narrower: it does not signify every form of wholesome concentration, but only the intensified concentration that results from a deliberate attempt to raise the mind to a higher, more purified level of awareness." ~~~~~~~~~~~ Alex: >Then how can the mind ever be restless and possess uddhacca cetasika? >Restlessness and one-pointedness/unified mind are mutually exclusive. You seem to be thinking like me. It is like the difference in opinion about khanika samadhi. I think the common scatter brained person has khanika ekagatta. However, the attention might jump from one object to another with no skillfulness. The mind might be not pliant, not fluid, not supple. The stream of mind might be bumpy or jerky. like rapids. Khanika Samadhi, is discussed by Bhikkhu Bodhi as follows: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The kinds of concentration discussed so far arise by fixing the mind upon a single object to the exclusion of other objects. But apart from these there is another kind of concentration which does not depend upon restricting the range of awareness. This is called "momentary concentration" (khanika-samadhi). To develop momentary concentration the meditator does not deliberately attempt to exclude the multiplicity of phenomena from his field of attention. Instead, he simply directs mindfulness to the changing states of mind and body, noting any phenomenon that presents itself; the task is to maintain a continuous awareness of whatever enters the range of perception, clinging to nothing. As he goes on with his noting, concentration becomes stronger moment after moment until it becomes established one-pointedly on the constantly changing stream of events. *Despite the change in the object, the mental unification remains steady,* and in time **acquires a force capable of suppressing the hindrances to a degree equal to that of access concentration**. This *fluid, mobile concentration* is developed by the practice of the four foundations of mindfulness, taken up along the path of insight; when sufficiently strong it issues in the breakthrough to the last stage of the path, the arising of wisdom." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Bodhi writes long paragraphs, but his material is engaging, so my eyelids do not get too heavy. At any rate, he is saying that khanika samadhi differs from ordinary khanika consciousness, because there is dharana, a steadiness, developed because the 5 hindrances are being suspended. I do not think too many people want to hear about suspending the Five Hindrances, not even for 20 minutes. Maybe Cittas rise and fall rapidly, faster than light speed. Yet even uneducated people manage to string together enough thoughts, with enough continuity, to carry out complex tasks. When we say we can not do this or that; then we are giving into hindrances. If I thought that way; then I would still be helplessly hopelessly lying in bed, drooling on my pillow. palms together {being able to raise my hands to do that without pain is pleasant} robin #107144 From: "retro77@..." Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 2:19 am Subject: Re: Little selves? retro77... Greetings Ken, Thank you for sharing SN 22.94 with us. I just went and read the sutta in full and it seems to me that the key aspect of the aggregate in question is "that it is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change", and on that condition it is rightly said to exist. In other words, there IS a caveat - namely, the "impermanent, suffering, and subject to change" nature of the aggregates (and in turn, conditioned dhammas). Any statement which simply says all things "exist" (without qualification), falls into the error specified in SN 12.15 of attaching to the polarities of existence. The polarity between "exists" and "does not exist" is transcended when one acknowledges the anicca, anatta and dukkha nature of all things (which of course can be also represented by means of the standard dependent origination sequence). Therefore to say the "green-ness" of a leaf exists, so long as we caveat that with acknowledgement of the fact this green-ness is subject to change, and will in time, turn yellow, and turn brown. Does this accord with your understanding? Metta, Paul :) #107145 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 2:49 am Subject: Re: Little selves? ptaus1 Hi KenH, KenO, Thanks very much for your replies. I think I understand what you are saying, and thanks for a good quote KenH. I think you're right and I might have taken the "exist/doesn't exist" analogy too far. My trouble is still though with what it really means when the term "exist" is used here or in the texts. E.g. the way Paul asked ("exists inherently, in and of itself, with no qualification or caveats required") seemed to go beyond anatta, anicca and conditionality, so I'm trying to understand this issue with more precision. So far, my understanding is that the term "exist(ence)" of a dhamma actually refers to (and is bound with) its: 1. conditioned nature 2. function - individual characteristic 3. general characteristics (tilakkhana) Imo these three together are still not equivalent to Paul's wording of the existence of a dhamma, so, am I still missing something in the above list? I mean, would you say that there's anything else beyond the three points above that would refer to and define the existence of a dhamma? Thanks. Best wishes pt > I think you will find it is thoughts such as "I exist" and "I do not exist" that have to do with wrong views. (As in the Brahmajala Sutta.) > > On the other hand, "dhammas exist" has to do with right view. > > Here's a quote from SN22:94 Flowers: > > "And what is it, bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as > existing, of which I too say that it exists? Form that is impermanent, > suffering, and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. Feeling ... Perception... Volitional formations...Consciousness that is is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists." #107146 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 2:51 am Subject: Re: The role of samatha for insight kenhowardau Hi Alex, ------------ <. . .> KH: > > Every citta has a samadhi cetasika, >which enables it to remain focused on its object. A: > So what is the difference between micchasamadhi and samma-samadhi? ------------- Miccha-samadhi arises with path consciousness. It is a form of kusala samadhi. Kusala samadhi performs the same basic functions as akusala samadhi, but in a wholesome way, not in an unwholesome way. --------------------------- A: > If we are all and always possess samadhi, then why did Buddha taught about reaching and training in samadhi? --------------------------- When the texts talk about samadhi they are usually referring to samma-samadhi. It's similar with ditthi, when the texts talk about it they are usually referring to miccha-ditthi. ------------------- A: > If lets say a person (like Devadatta) committed heinous crimes, does it follow that every citta of his has samadhi? ------------------- Yes. -------------------------- A: > What about cittas in hell realm? Does it possess samadhi? -------------------------- Yes. ----------- <. . .> A: > Then how can the mind ever be restless and possess uddhacca cetasika? Restlessness and one-pointedness/unified mind are mutually exclusive. ----------- In an akusala citta, restlessness (uddacca) is directed at the object of consciousness, not at some other object. This is because samadhi keeps it directed there. Ken H #107147 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:09 am Subject: Re: Character encoding ptaus1 Hi all, Part 8 - Macro editor and creating your custom macros 1. You can enter the editor by clicking in Word: Tools -> Macro -> Macros and then on "Edit" or "Create" buttons. 2. Once you are in the editor (and if you created previously a macro that changes å to a- as discussed in part 7) you'll see that the basic Find-Replace macro is just a few lines of script that looks like this (this example changes å to a-): Sub Macro name() Selection.Find.ClearFormatting Selection.Find.Replacement.ClearFormatting With Selection.Find .Text = "å" .Replacement.Text = ChrW(&H0101) .Forward = True .Wrap = wdFindAsk .Format = False .MatchCase = False .MatchWholeWord = False .MatchWildcards = False .MatchSoundsLike = False .MatchAllWordForms = False End With Selection.Find.Execute Replace:=wdReplaceAll End Sub 3. If you want to add another character change, then: - copy the whole script except the first and last line - so copy the script between "Sub Macro name()" and "End Sub" lines - paste what you copied in between the last two lines of the existing script (so just above the last "End Sub" line) -correct the letter which you want replaced within the quotation marks in the line: .Text = "å" -correct the letter which you want to change in the line: .Replacement.Text = ChrW(&H0101) The tricky bit there is that in the second line you need to enter the Hex number equivalent of the Unicode pali letter with a diacritic - so, in the above example "(&H" means that you're entering in Hex, and the "0101)" means you want "a-". 4. So, if you want to replace "ò" with "n.", you'd enter (&H1E45) since 1E45 is the Hex number for "n.". Here is the full code for changing two letters: Sub Macro name() Selection.Find.ClearFormatting Selection.Find.Replacement.ClearFormatting With Selection.Find .Text = "å" .Replacement.Text = ChrW(&H0101) .Forward = True .Wrap = wdFindAsk .Format = False .MatchCase = False .MatchWholeWord = False .MatchWildcards = False .MatchSoundsLike = False .MatchAllWordForms = False End With Selection.Find.Execute Replace:=wdReplaceAll Selection.Find.ClearFormatting Selection.Find.Replacement.ClearFormatting With Selection.Find .Text = "ò" .Replacement.Text = ChrW(&H1E45) .Forward = True .Wrap = wdFindAsk .Format = False .MatchCase = False .MatchWholeWord = False .MatchWildcards = False .MatchSoundsLike = False .MatchAllWordForms = False End With Selection.Find.Execute Replace:=wdReplaceAll End Sub 5. To add more letters, just keep doing the copy-paste of the script and then correct the characters you want to change. Here is a list of all the hex number for Pali letters: ?` 00D1 ñ 00F1 A- 0100 a- 0101 I- 012A i- 012B U- 016A u- 016B D. 1E0C d. 1E0D T. 1E6C t. 1E6D L. 1E36 l. 1E37 M. 1E42 m. 1E43 N. 1E46 n. 1E47 N. 1E44 n. 1E45 If you need any other characters, you can go to your Character Map (or Character Palette on mac) to find out which character corresponds to which Hex number. In this way you can create any sort of macro you need, for characters, words, etc. Now, I'm pretty sure that there is a way to do this even simpler, i.e. instead of making a separate macro for each letter over and over, you could write everything in an array, but I don't know Visual Basic (script for making macros in Word) that well - if someone does, please let me know - I' guessing it should look similar like the OpenOffice macros linked in point 7 below. 6. Of course, there are macros people made before, which you might be able to just copy-paste into your macro editor and use. You just have to make sure that it replaces the actual characters you need, which you can do by chekcing the script. On the Pali yahoo group, there is a package with 8 Microsoft Word macros that "comprising to/from pairs for each of four font encodings: Unicode, DPalatino, VRI Roman Pali and Normyn." There are also good instructions on what to do with the file - the file is called "Pali Font Conv Macros.zip " and you can get to it by Going to the "Files" section in the Pali group and then to the "Fonts" folder. If those macros don't really do what you want, you can just replace the characters in them with the ones you need. 7. If you are using OpenOffice instead of Microsoft Word, you can find a macro array here: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pesala/Home/html/openoffice.html#Macros Next time a small conclusion to the series on encoding. Best wishes pt #107148 From: Kevin F Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The role of samatha for insight farrellkevin80 Dear Ken, I understand what you are saying. But could you explain how samatha works as a basis of insight for those with samatha ( I am just curious). Thanks, Kevin #107149 From: Kevin F Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The role of samatha for insight farrellkevin80 Dear Alex, You've got some strange views. This, however, I agree with: " Ex: when you are in an airplane, the constant sound will eventually be less noticeable. But when it suddenly starts or stops, than it is noticeable. Things in contrast are perceived much better. It is much easier to see dukkha of aggregates comparing to the bliss of Jhana." Nevertheless, even with mastery of eight jhanas, without accumulated wisdom and insight, no penetration would occur. That doesn't mean jhana isn't very helpful. It just means that it is not the path itself. kevin Alex wrote: Dear Kevin, All, This question is very interesting to me. >K:I had a thought about samatha. Many people think that deep >concentration, serenity, makes it easier to "see" dhammas for what >they are. In brief: A) If hindrances can't be temporary suppressed, then how can they be permanently eradicated? Before you can run, you need to be able to walk. It seems strange for me to claim that a person never has attained Jhanas and cannot attain it, and yet become an Arahat (who has permanently let go of same hindrances that obstruct entry to Jhana). B) By temporary removing the hindrances, insight can do its job un-hindered. AN5.51 and other suttas clearly state that hindrances obstruct wisdom. Immediately After Jhana, the hindrances may still be supressed, one is super alert and mindful and from that clear state considering the Dhamma may be much more effective then when one is restless and thinking about various sensual thoughts. >K:I think it makes it easier for the mind to compare the difference >between when one is in a deep state of serenity, with the mind >unified, with when one has "exited" the deep state and the mind is >going wild again off sense-objects and impressions Right. Jhanas give a direct experience that can and should be used within the context of 4NT. You get into the Jhana by following 3rd NT, and the bliss that follows is a very important thing to consider. The skills needed to temporary let go of hindrances, may carry over into a skill that permanently eradicates them. Some more: 1) When one does deep samatha, one focus all one's attention at a small area in nama. The more one magnifies something (quality) the less other things (quantity) are present. Picture it as putting a sample under a microscope. You see less area, but in greater detail. That is done to see clearer a certain aspect of nama, something that cannot be seen when the mind is distracted among 6 senses. For example: A sand beach from a distance may look like one huge piece of earth. However when you come close, you will see that it is made of sand particles. Look closer and with greater magnification (using a magnifying glass, or even a microscope) and you see that particles ultimately do not even touch. Look under greater magnification and sand particles are seen as energy balls that are almost empty of matter... Emptiness filled with energy! Then you apply that knowledge (of the mind and mental processes) to other experiences in past and future. Example: A bottle filled with salt or sugar that is diffused in it. With one taste and knowledge of certain laws you can know how all water in that bottle tastes like. When you taste a bit of ocean, you can be reasonably certain that all ocean tastes like that (assuming that nothing else is added to it). So in this way samatha is very important for direct experience that may not be directly seen otherwise. I mean all, even non-Buddhists can see impermanence (ebb and flow of water. Flowers growing, waning and dying. sounds appearing and disappearing) . Yet these facts don't make one Enlightened. Maybe the things perceived in daily life, or in 6 senses taken together are too coarse. Putting 100% attention to one sense door (such as the mind) may reveal much more previously unseen detail than putting 16.7% (100/6) attention to the mind. 2nd) Samatha pacifies hindrances (such as lust or hatred), and the deeper/longer the Samatha the more hindrances are temporary pacified. Thus without hindrances, vipassana can proceed much better. Don't worry, vipassana or insight can examine previous instances of hindrances. So one isn't missing the contemplation on hindrances. Considering the amount of hindrances we have today, this is an important point to consider. Even if some ascetics may have reached maggaphala with very limited past absorption concentration, their ascetic practices suppressed the hindrances almost as well as jhanic or post jhanic state of a meditator. 3) By comparing and contrasting the bliss of Jhana one can experientially witness the less-then-perfectio n of experiencing ordinary aggregates. Thus, more insight into dukkha (1st NT). By the absence of a certain thing (and then it's reappearance into awareness) a discerning person can learn quite a bit about it. A turtle that always lived in water cannot really know much what it means to be wet and dry. Only if it were able to go to the dry land, and then back into the water, then it would gain much more understanding of what water is. Learn through contrast. Something that is always present may become more deadened to awareness. Ex: when you are in an airplane, the constant sound will eventually be less noticeable. But when it suddenly starts or stops, than it is noticeable. Things in contrast are perceived much better. It is much easier to see dukkha of aggregates comparing to the bliss of Jhana. If a person cannot temporary let go of defilements and enter Jhana, then what makes you think that you can get rid of them permanently for awakening to occur?! IMHO, With metta, Alex #107150 From: Kevin F Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:41 am Subject: Dely in recieving sent email farrellkevin80 Sometime I push the button but my e-mail don't go. Later it comes by. Why is that? ; < Kevin #107151 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:41 am Subject: Re: Character encoding ptaus1 Hi all, The series on encoding is now finished, I tried to put down what I understand on the subject so far. If anyone has anything to add or correct, please do. Of course, if you have some questions, please ask, on-list or off-list, whatever you prefer. A small update about turning off Auto-detection of encoding in Firefox in order to keep it in Unicode (UTF-8) all the time - while it seems to work fine on the mac I have, on the pc (with XP) it doesn't seem to work too well. Every time I quit Firefox, it seems to loose the encoding settings. What I mean is - when I open Firefox, even though Auto-select is set to off, it will still try to auto-detect the encoding of a new page, and will usually settle on "Western" encoding of some sort, and then when I manually switch it to Unicode, it will stay in Unicode every time that particular page is visited, but only until I quit Firefox. I'm not sure what's this issue about, probably something in the properties. Explorer 8 on pc seems to work fine in that regard. Best wishes pt #107152 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:48 am Subject: Re: Dely in recieving sent email ptaus1 Hi Kevin, > K: Sometime I push the button but my e-mail don't go. Later it comes by. Why is that? ; < > Not sure, I think it has to do with the traffic on yahoo servers. Usually if the message is longer it takes a bit longer for it to go through. Though, once it took 12 hours for my message to go through even though it wasn't long. Also, messages do get lost completely, so you can repost it if you think it's lost. If it reappears later, you can always delete the duplicate. Best wishes pt #107153 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 6:39 am Subject: Re: The role of samatha for insight kenhowardau Hi Robin and Alex, -------- <. . .> KH: > > Every citta has a samadhi cetasika, >which enables it to remain focused on its object. > <. . .> R: > We always possess citta ekagatta, but not samadhi. Samadhi only occurs when there is effort to suspend the Five Hidrances. One there is this effort; then there is parikamma samadhi. Here is quotation from The Noble Eightfold Path, The Way to the End of Suffering by Bhikkhu Bodhi Chapter VII: Right Concentration (Samma Samadhi) ------------- I think my explanation was more in line with the Abhidhamma. Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary also agrees that samadhi is a universal cetasika. As I read Bhikkhu Bodhi's explanation it seems more in line with modern-day meditation schools than with the Theravada texts. I remember your having a discussion with Sarah on this essay. You should continue it; Sarah will set you straight. ------------ <. . .> A: > > Restlessness and one-pointedness/unified mind are mutually exclusive. R: > You seem to be thinking like me. It is like the difference in opinion about khanika samadhi. I think the common scatter brained person has khanika ekagatta. However, the attention might jump from one object to another with no skillfulness. The mind might be not pliant, not fluid, not supple. The stream of mind might be bumpy or jerky. like rapids. Khanika Samadhi, is discussed by Bhikkhu Bodhi as follows: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "The kinds of concentration discussed so far arise by fixing the mind upon a single object to the exclusion of other objects. But apart from these there is another kind of concentration which does not depend upon restricting the range of awareness. This is called "momentary concentration" (khanika-samadhi). To develop momentary concentration the meditator does not deliberately attempt to exclude the multiplicity of phenomena from his field of attention. Instead, he simply directs mindfulness to the changing states of mind and body, noting any phenomenon that presents itself; the task is to maintain a continuous awareness of whatever enters the range of perception, clinging to nothing. As he goes on with his noting, concentration becomes stronger moment after moment until it becomes established one-pointedly on the constantly changing stream of events. *Despite the change in the object, the mental unification remains teady,* and in time **acquires a force capable of suppressing the hindrances to a degree equal to that of access concentration**. This *fluid, mobile concentration* is developed by the practice of the four foundations of mindfulness, taken up along the path of insight; when sufficiently strong it issues in the breakthrough to the last stage of the path, the arising of wisdom." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Bodhi writes long paragraphs, but his material is engaging, ------------ I was appalled to read that extract, Robin. I feel sure none its information is contained in the original Theravada texts. ------------------- R: > so my eyelids do not get too heavy. At any rate, he is saying that khanika samadhi differs from ordinary khanika consciousness, because there is dharana, a steadiness, developed because the 5 hindrances are being suspended. I do not think too many people want to hear about suspending the Five Hindrances, not even for 20 minutes. Maybe Cittas rise and fall rapidly, faster than light speed. Yet even uneducated people manage to string together enough thoughts, with enough continuity, to carry out complex tasks. When we say we can not do this or that; then we are giving into hindrances. If I thought that way; then I would still be helplessly hopelessly lying in bed, drooling on my pillow. -------------------- You have completely misunderstood the teaching of momentary ultimate reality (Abhidhamma). So has B Bodhi, which is why he insists the Abhidhamma Pitaka was a later text (fraudulently) added on to the originals. I hope you will stay at DSG for a while, and at least learn what it is you are disagreeing with. :-) Ken H #107154 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 7:38 am Subject: Re: Little selves? kenhowardau Hi Paul, -------------- P: > Thank you for sharing SN 22.94 with us. I just went and read the sutta in full and it seems to me that the key aspect of the aggregate in question is "that it is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change", and on that condition it is rightly said to exist. --------------- I don't have the full sutta in front of me, but I remember it began with a monk asking the Buddha, "Some teachers say there are things that exist, while other teachers say there are not things that exist, which of those two types of teacher are you?" Or words to that effect. So, as I remember it, the sutta was about whether or not there were things that ultimately existed (absolute realities). It was not about any conditions or provisos under which absolute realities might be said to exist. ------------------------- P: > In other words, there IS a caveat - namely, the "impermanent, suffering, and subject to change" nature of the aggregates (and in turn, conditioned dhammas). -------------------------- Sorry to interrupt, but I wonder why you said "in turn". The aggregates *are* conditioned dhammas, aren't they? ---------------------------------- P: > Any statement which simply says all things "exist" (without qualification), falls into the error specified in SN 12.15 of attaching to the polarities of existence. The polarity between "exists" and "does not exist" is transcended when one acknowledges the anicca, anatta and dukkha nature of all things (which of course can be also represented by means of the standard dependent origination sequence). Therefore to say the "green-ness" of a leaf exists, so long as we caveat that with acknowledgement of the fact this green-ness is subject to change, and will in time, turn yellow, and turn brown. Does this accord with your understanding? ----------------------------------- No, I wouldn't put it that way at all. To ask whether the greeness of a leaf exists or does not exist is to have wrong view. It ignores the Buddha's teaching of anatta. The changing colour of a leaf is at best a simile that can be used for teaching purposes. In reality there are only dhammas (no atta's, no leaves etc.). Only dhammas bear the anicca characteristic. Mere concepts have no characteristics. As you acknowledged in an earlier post, disagreement over ultimate reality goes very deep. It was the cause of a schism led by Nagarjuna. Once you reject the ultimate reality of dhammas the next step is to accept the existence of a Mayahana concept known as the Ocean of Being. Are you familiar with that term? From what I know of it, it is seriously bad kamma. :-) Ken H #107155 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:18 am Subject: Re: The role of samatha for insight kenhowardau Hi Kevin, -------------- K: > I understand what you are saying. But could you explain how samatha works as a basis of insight for those with samatha ( I am just curious). --------------- As I understand it, it doesn't. Or rather, it can, but only in exceptionally rare circumstances. In the Buddha's time there were (1) some arahants who had practised jhana before they ever practised vipassana, (2) others who practised jhana after vipassana, (3) still others who practised jhana and vipassana in tandem, and (4) the remainder of arahants, who never practised jhana at all (except maybe after arahantship). The third group were the only ones who could be said to have samatha "work as a basis of insight." And they were a tiny minority made up of the Buddha and his chief disciples. (Outside a sasana that group also includes pacceka-Buddhas.) The first group differed from the second in that they sometimes had stronger samma-samadhi, depending on the level of jhana they had attained at the time of their first samma-sammadhi (Stream Entry). The second group had samma-samadhi at the level of the first jhana irrespective of whatever level they may have attained. So did the fourth group. I hope someone will correct any mistakes I may have made in there. Ken H #107156 From: "retro77@..." Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:55 am Subject: Re: Little selves? retro77... Greetings Ken, P: If you do get the chance to review the sutta in full, I would recommend it and be interested in your thoughts. I'm disinclined to think it's explicitly about paramatta dhamma since that's not a sutta concept. K: Sorry to interrupt, but I wonder why you said "in turn". The aggregates *are* conditioned dhammas, aren't they? P: Yes, that's what I meant. It is one, thus it is the other. K: No, I wouldn't put it that way at all. To ask whether the greeness of a leaf exists or does not exist is to have wrong view. It ignores the Buddha's teaching of anatta. P: I was just speaking conventionally to draw the scope of the colour in question. Indeed, the concept of leaf is a formation conditioned by ignorance. K: Only dhammas bear the anicca characteristic. Mere concepts have no characteristics. P: Don't you think the concept of 'leaf' has the anatta, anicca, dukkha characteristics too, though? Mind-consciousness is no more of less real than the other five-consciousnesses. To that extent I suspect I consider this separation of "concept" and "reality" to be of less significance than you. K: Once you reject the ultimate reality of dhammas the next step is to accept the existence of a Mayahana concept known as the Ocean of Being. Are you familiar with that term? From what I know of it, it is seriously bad kamma. :-) P: I've not heard the term and don't really care to, having no interest in the grandiosity of Mahayana. The only dhammas that interest me are that which constitute the loka (world) of experience. How can one actually know "leaf"? By sound, by sight, by touch, by smell, by taste, by thought. There is no other way. To me it is those ignorant formations of "leaf" which is what "dhammas" are. The objective physical leaf in the external/objective scientific/worldling sense (which I guess you would call rupa, and consider paramattha dhamma) is irrelevant in the context of the Dhamma beyond the extent to which it provides raw input into the senses. Well that is how I understand it, at least. It would seem that this take on "dhammas" is probably not how "dhammas" are understood in contemporary Abhidhamma circles. Nor I suspect has it anything to do with "the Ocean of Being". Thank you for the civil dialogue on the Dhamma. Metta, Paul. :) #107157 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:02 am Subject: Re: Little selves? kenhowardau Hi pt, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > > > Hi KenH, KenO, > > Thanks very much for your replies. I think I understand what you are saying, and thanks for a good quote KenH. I think you're right and I might have taken the "exist/doesn't exist" analogy too far. > > My trouble is still though with what it really means when the term "exist" is used here or in the texts. E.g. the way Paul asked ("exists inherently, in and of itself, with no qualification or caveats required") seemed to go beyond anatta, anicca and conditionality, so I'm trying to understand this issue with more precision. > > So far, my understanding is that the term "exist(ence)" of a dhamma actually refers to (and is bound with) its: > 1. conditioned nature > 2. function - individual characteristic > 3. general characteristics (tilakkhana) > > Imo these three together are still not equivalent to Paul's wording of the existence of a dhamma, so, am I still missing something in the above list? I mean, would you say that there's anything else beyond the three points above that would refer to and define the existence of a dhamma? Thanks. > ------------- I'm not sure about that list, you probably know more about it than I do. You are one of those people like Scott who come to DSG knowing less Abhidhamma than I do and then, five minutes later, knowing twice as much as I do. :-) The way I remember it, dhammas are said to be real because they bear their own sabhava (intrinsic nature). That would include both their specific characteristics and the three general characteristics. Very importantly (to my mind) it includes their characteristic of being kusala or akusala (etc). I find that important because it means good and evil are not just matters of opinion. Kusala dhammas are kusala no matter what anyone may think, and so are akusala dhammas akusala. But most importantly (as I was trying to tell Paul), the ultimate reality of dhammas explains how the world is without self. If dhammas were no more ultimately real than concepts then we would be back where we started, not knowing a middle way between eternalism and annihilationism. Ken H #107158 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 11:12 am Subject: Re: Phra Dhammadharo on weak sati. szmicio Dear Nina, Very helpful. I forgot this. Best wishes Lukas > > And this kind of consideration will bring its fruits later on. > > Development of right understanding is very very slow and gradual. > -------- > N: Quite right. I listened to a Thai recording and heard Phra > Dhammadharo's voice. He spoke about weak sati. I thought about your > report, telling us that you went out with friends and realised that > there was forgetfulness. > Bhante Dhammadharo: When one begins one has to accept that sati is > weak, and it is not right to be annoyed about that. But even being > annoyed is conditioned. Weak sati is a reality that is not self, it > is conditioned. No need to wonder about it why it is weak, it has > gone already. > Questioner: There are several realities appearing at the same time, > such as cold and hardness, but I cannot separate them. > Dh: Do not try to separate them. They have fallen away, do not try to > know specifically cold or hardness. We do not know what appears next. > It is cold in this room, but the characteristic of cold is not a > place. We still have an idea of something that is cold. That is > thinking, it is not knowing the characteristic of cold. > Usually sati does not arise because we do not understand that it is > anattaa. It is of no use to force its arising. A beginner who > develops satipa.t.thaana is not free from wrong view. One does not > want to know what has arisen already, one wants to know what has not > arisen. One should not select objects of awareness. Satipa.t.thaana > is directed towards detachment, but nobody likes detachment. Lobha > likes objects, it does not detach. > > -------- > Nina. > > > #107159 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 2:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] how to avoid falling into pubbekatahetuvada? nilovg Dear Kevin, Op 23-apr-2010, om 20:50 heeft Kevin F het volgende geschreven: > Akusala may indirectly condition kusala. In fact, I think it > conditions papanca which can be a condition for kusala (maybe Nina > can interject and correct if wrong). ------- N: I quote from my Condiitons, Pakatupanissaya paccaya: Akusala can also be a natural decisive support-condition for kusala. Because of aversion towards akusala vip?ka or attachment to kusala vip?ka someone may perform good deeds. He may regret the akusala he performed in the past and then, in order to counteract it, he performs kusala. We read in the ?Pa??h?na? (same section, ? 423, V): ?After having killed, (one) offers the offering, undertakes the precept, fulfils the duty of observance, develops jh?na, develops insight, develops Path, develops superknowledge, develops attainment, to counteract it.? The same is said with regard to other kinds of evil deeds, they can be a natural decisive support-condition for kusala. ---------- Nina. #107160 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 2:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Carry over of accumulations., nilovg Dear Alex, Op 24-apr-2010, om 20:45 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > >"Rob" wrote: > > Some talked about cittas arising and falling rapidly with no > carry >over. I wondered about this because there is a continuity. > IIRC, the >verbal root cit even means to accumulate. Nina writes in > her book >that bhavanga-citta is the continuity, so there is a > carry over? >However, I got the impression that the bhavanga-citta > is the same as >the initial rebirth citta. If so, how is it, > through samma vayama, >one cultivates wholesome cetanas? How is > there ever citta bhavana? > > A: Interesting question. If I understand correctly what I've read > in CMA, > bhavanga serves as preserving a continuity between cittas. ------ N: Even when there are no sense-impressions and no thinking there must be citta; otherwise there would be no life. The type of citta which arises and falls away at those moments is called bhavanga- citta. Bhavanga literally means ``factor of life''; bhavanga is usually translated into English as ``life-continuum''. The bhavanga- citta keeps the continuity in a lifespan, so that what we call a ``being'' goes on to live from moment to moment. That is the function of the bhavanga-citta....When we are asleep and dreaming akusala cittas and kusala cittas arise, but even when we are in a dreamless sleep there still has to be citta. There are bhavanga-cittas at such moments. Also when we are awake countless bhavanga-cittas arise; they arise in between the different processes of citta. It seems that hearing, for example, can arise very shortly after seeing, but in reality there are different processes of citta and in between these processes bhavanga-cittas arise. The conditions for all kusala and akusala accumulations go on from one citta to the next citta, and that refers not only to the bhavangacittas, but to all cittas arising and falling away, succeeding one another. ------------ > > A: In compendium of miscelleneous (guide to #9) it is said that > rebirth-linking, life-continuum (bhavanga), and death consciousness > are the same??? ------- N: During one life. The same type of citta and experiencing the same object, namely similar to the object arising just before the dying- citta of the previous life. -------- > > A. Then how can there be any change from, lets say, double to > triple rooted rebirth consciousness? -------- N: There can be. The last javanacittas just before the dying citta are conditioned by the kamma that will produce the next life. There is still the dying-citta similar to all bhavanga-cittas in the life that is going to end, and then the dying-consciousness is succeeded by the rebirth-consciousness of the next life that may be different, arising in a different plane, depending on the kamma that produces it. --------- > A: How can anything accumulate into bhavanga within one lifetime? > How can anything accumulate into bhavanga within multiple lifetimes? --------- N: Perhaps this is clear because of the above? Let me know if not yet. -------- > > A:Does stream of Bhavanga changes when a good worldling becomes an > Arahant in that life? ------- N: There are no more latent tendencies, they are all eradicated. No more conditions for kusala nor akusala, since he cannot perform kamma that produces result. But we should think of the accumulations in each citta, as I said before. ------ Nina. #107161 From: Kevin F Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 2:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dely in recieving sent email farrellkevin80 Hi Pt, It would be better if I was not so attached to the messages. Maybe that will be decisive support condition for me to study the Dhamma. ;p kevin ________________________________ From: ptaus1 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, April 24, 2010 11:48:06 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: Dely in recieving sent email Hi Kevin, > K: Sometime I push the button but my e-mail don't go. Later it comes by. Why is that? ; < > Not sure, I think it has to do with the traffic on yahoo servers. Usually if the message is longer it takes a bit longer for it to go through. Though, once it took 12 hours for my message to go through even though it wasn't long. Also, messages do get lost completely, so you can repost it if you think it's lost. If it reappears later, you can always delete the duplicate. Best wishes pt #107162 From: Kevin F Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 2:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The role of samatha for insight farrellkevin80 Hi Ken H, Thank you very much for typing out that post. I had always been under the impression that somehow jhana was used as a basis for insight by most jhana-labhis. So I am amusing that was a wrong understanding on my part. Thanks, Kevin ________________________________ From: kenhowardau To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sun, April 25, 2010 4:18:40 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: The role of samatha for insight Hi Kevin, ------------ -- K: > I understand what you are saying. But could you explain how samatha works as a basis of insight for those with samatha ( I am just curious). ------------ --- As I understand it, it doesn't. Or rather, it can, but only in exceptionally rare circumstances. In the Buddha's time there were (1) some arahants who had practised jhana before they ever practised vipassana, (2) others who practised jhana after vipassana, (3) still others who practised jhana and vipassana in tandem, and (4) the remainder of arahants, who never practised jhana at all (except maybe after arahantship) . The third group were the only ones who could be said to have samatha "work as a basis of insight." And they were a tiny minority made up of the Buddha and his chief disciples. (Outside a sasana that group also includes pacceka-Buddhas. ) The first group differed from the second in that they sometimes had stronger samma-samadhi, depending on the level of jhana they had attained at the time of their first samma-sammadhi (Stream Entry). The second group had samma-samadhi at the level of the first jhana irrespective of whatever level they may have attained. So did the fourth group. I hope someone will correct any mistakes I may have made in there. Ken H #107163 From: Kevin F Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 2:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] how to avoid falling into pubbekatahetuvada? farrellkevin80 Nina, You are a mine of information. Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu! Tyvm, Kevin ________________________________ From: Nina van Gorkom To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sun, April 25, 2010 10:13:03 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] how to avoid falling into pubbekatahetuvada? Dear Kevin, Op 23-apr-2010, om 20:50 heeft Kevin F het volgende geschreven: > Akusala may indirectly condition kusala. In fact, I think it > conditions papanca which can be a condition for kusala (maybe Nina > can interject and correct if wrong). ------- N: I quote from my Condiitons, Pakatupanissaya paccaya: Akusala can also be a natural decisive support-condition for kusala. Because of aversion towards akusala vipåka or attachment to kusala vipåka someone may perform good deeds. He may regret the akusala he performed in the past and then, in order to counteract it, he performs kusala. We read in the "Paììhåna" (same section, § 423, V): "After having killed, (one) offers the offering, undertakes the precept, fulfils the duty of observance, develops jhåna, develops insight, develops Path, develops superknowledge, develops attainment, to counteract it." The same is said with regard to other kinds of evil deeds, they can be a natural decisive support-condition for kusala. ---------- Nina. #107164 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 2:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The role of samatha for insight nilovg Dear Kevin, Op 24-apr-2010, om 18:02 heeft Kevin F het volgende geschreven: > I had a thought about samatha. -------- N: I just want to add something I found interesting. In the Thai series I am listening to, Kh Sujin goes over all the samatha subjects and now it is parts of the body. She said that when the Buddha spoke about samatha subjects it was not separated from satipa.t.thaana. In each sutta it is implied that samatha should be developed together with the factors leading to enlightenment. The aim is not upacara samaadhi nor appana samaadhi. When someone recollects the foulness of the body and is calm with this subject, he should be aware of the characteristic of calm. She quotes from the Dispeller of Delusion about hair, nails. We find the body so important, see it as a whole instead of being aware of realities. I shall report more as I listen on. Nina. #107165 From: "Rob" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:27 pm Subject: Re: The role of samatha for insight rrobinrb2000 Ken H. KH:> You have completely misunderstood the teaching of momentary ultimate reality (Abhidhamma). So has B Bodhi, which is why he insists the Abhidhamma Pitaka was a later text (fraudulently) added on to the originals. > I do not know that he would consider it fraudulent. If I understand correctly, the Sarvastivada Abhidharma, as well as references to those of the Sautrantika and Vaibhashika, survive in Chinese translations. I think the authors of these texts thought they were speaking with the Buddha's Voice. KH> I hope you will stay at DSG for a while, and at least learn what it is you are disagreeing with. :-) That is my intention. Disagreements over interpretations do not bother me in the least. I have worked at developing non-attachment to fixed views for quite a while. Some of the views presented to me are quite a bit different from anything I have been exposed to. I also need to expand my Pali vocabulary quite a bit. I have been this, discussing Buddhism, for quite a while. There are some points on which people are just going to disagree; hopefully in a collegial manner. I think a lot of disagreements occur because people misunderstand one another, or else they use words in a different way. Sometimes they attribute ulterior motives to one another. robin #107166 From: Ken O Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 4:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? ashkenn2k Dear Paul >Therefore to say the "green-ness" of a leaf exists, so long as we caveat that with acknowledgement of the fact this green-ness is subject to change, and will in time, turn yellow, and turn brown. > KO:? when you perceive greeness at that moment, does greeness exist at that moment.? Though greeness of a leaf undergo changes due to impermanence, so when it is yellow, does yellow exist at that moment of seeing yellow, likewise for?brown.? So does greeness, yellow and brown exist at the moment of seeing or does not exist??? If green or yellow or brown does not exist, then what exist.? Even? the characteristics of anatta, anicca and dukkha exist, if not how do one knows and understand it. cheers Ken O #107167 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 4:07 pm Subject: The important role of samatha for insight truth_aerator Dear Kevin, all, >K:You've got some strange views. You can mention the specifics and we will talk about them. > This, however, I agree with: " Ex: when you are in an airplane, the >constant sound will eventually be less noticeable. But when it >suddenly starts or stops, than it is noticeable. Things in contrast >are perceived much better. It is much easier to see dukkha of >aggregates comparing to the bliss of Jhana." Right. Furthermore in deep Jhana (as Ajahn Brahm teaches) cetana is temporary suspended and one SEES no-control. So not only the Jhanas offer insight into 4NT, they also show anatta as in "no-control". > Nevertheless, even with mastery of eight jhanas, without >accumulated wisdom and insight, no penetration would occur. Right. MN106 says that even if you reach 8th jhana, if you still cling to equinimity of it, then you won't achieve nibbana. However the fault is NOT in Jhana or Aruppa Jhana's, the fault is in clinging. >That doesn't mean jhana isn't very helpful. It just means that it >is not the path itself. > > kevin Right in a sense that it is part of N8P. With metta, Alex #107169 From: Ken O Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 4:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? ashkenn2k Dear pt >Thanks very much for your replies. I think I understand what you are saying, and thanks for a good quote KenH. I think you're right and I might have taken the "exist/doesn' t exist" analogy too far. > >My trouble is still though with what it really means when the term "exist" is used here or in the texts. E.g. the way Paul asked ("exists inherently, in and of itself, with no qualification or caveats required") seemed to go beyond anatta, anicca and conditionality, so I'm trying to understand this issue with more precision. > >So far, my understanding is that the term "exist(ence) " of a dhamma actually refers to (and is bound with) its: >1. conditioned nature >2. function - individual characteristic >3. general characteristics (tilakkhana) > >Imo these three together are still not equivalent to Paul's wording of the existence of a dhamma, so, am I still missing something in the above list? I mean, would you say that there's anything else beyond the three points above that would refer to and define the existence of a dhamma? Thanks. KO:? Paul believe in existence is an extreme point of view which happens to many practitioners and most of them?follow the Mahayana path of such nature.??? IMHO their view, since everything is anicca, anatta and dukkha, green should not exist at all since it is impermanent.? this line of thought is basically a wrong view towards annihilistic view, nothing exist.? However. they?do always said annicca but they?forget impermanence exist, if it does not exist, how do one knows of it.? Even when one is day dreaming, the thinking exist, if the thinking does not exist how do one day dream. Similiar if the five aggregates do not exist, Buddha would not be able to describe it.? Dhamma is visible is meant, it can be know, since it can be know, it has to exist, if not how do one knows or how do Buddha explain dhamma if it does not exist at all. Another argument, Buddha said before 4NT exist whether there is arisen or no arisen of Buddha.? This shows the 4NT exist, dhamma exist just that it does not belong to anyone :-) Cheers Ken O #107170 From: Ken O Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 4:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The role of samatha for insight ashkenn2k Dear Alex > >> This, however, I agree with: " Ex: when you are in an airplane, the >constant sound will eventually be less noticeable. But when it >suddenly starts or stops, than it is noticeable. Things in contrast >are perceived much better. It is much easier to see dukkha of >aggregates comparing to the bliss of Jhana." > >Right. Furthermore in deep Jhana (as Ajahn Brahm teaches) cetana is temporary suspended and one SEES no-control. So not only the Jhanas offer insight into 4NT, they also show anatta as in "no-control" . KO:? pse quote source that cetana is temporary suspended.? I am quite concern when practitioners start having their own ideas.? Anatta cannot be see, can only be understood by panna?and that could only happen when one is emerge from jhanas.? > >Right. MN106 says that even if you reach 8th jhana, if you still cling to equinimity of it, then you won't achieve nibbana. However the fault is NOT in Jhana or Aruppa Jhana's, the fault is in clinging. > KO:? yes the fault is in clinging but what eradicate clinging - jhanas or panna cheers Ken O #107171 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 12:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Paul) - In a message dated 4/25/2010 12:02:27 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ashkenn2k@... writes: Dear Paul >Therefore to say the "green-ness" of a leaf exists, so long as we caveat that with acknowledgement of the fact this green-ness is subject to change, and will in time, turn yellow, and turn brown. > KO: when you perceive greeness at that moment, does greeness exist at that moment. Though greeness of a leaf undergo changes due to impermanence, so when it is yellow, does yellow exist at that moment of seeing yellow, likewise for brown. So does greeness, yellow and brown exist at the moment of seeing or does not exist? If green or yellow or brown does not exist, then what exist. Even the characteristics of anatta, anicca and dukkha exist, if not how do one knows and understand it. cheers Ken O =================================== Just a thought: Why should we think so much about "exists" or "doesn't exist," and so much about modes of existing, when freedom lies in relinquishing, in unclasping the grasping fist, in letting go and letting be, and letting become? Nothing is actually graspable, nothing holds still for a nonexistent "I" to grab onto. As the great sage, John Lennon, said, "Let it be!" ;-) With metta, Howard /"Monks, suppose there were a river, flowing down from the mountains, going far, its current swift, carrying everything with it, and - holding on to both banks - kasa grasses, kusa grasses, reeds, birana grasses, & trees were growing. Then a man swept away by the current would grab hold of the kasa grasses, but they would tear away, and so from that cause he would come to disaster. He would grab hold of the kusa grasses... the reeds... the birana grasses... the trees, but they would tear away, and so from that cause he would come to disaster. "In the same way, there is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person - who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma - assumes form (the body) to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. That form tears away from him, and so from that cause he would come to disaster. "He assumes feeling to be the self, or the self as possessing feeling, or feeling as in the self, or the self as in feeling. That feeling tears away from him, and so from that cause he would come to disaster. "He assumes perception to be the self, or the self as possessing perception, or perception as in the self, or the self as in perception. That perception tears away from him, and so from that cause he would come to disaster. "He assumes (mental) fabrications to be the self, or the self as possessing fabrications, or fabrications as in the self, or the self as in fabrications. Those fabrications tear away from him, and so from that cause he would come to disaster. "He assumes consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness. That consciousness tears away from him, and so from that cause he would come to disaster."/ (From the Nadi Sutta: The River) #107172 From: Ken O Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 4:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? ashkenn2k Dear Paul > >P: I've not heard the term and don't really care to, having no interest in the grandiosity of Mahayana. The only dhammas that interest me are that which constitute the loka (world) of experience. How can one actually know "leaf"? By sound, by sight, by touch, by smell, by taste, by thought. There is no other way. To me it is those ignorant formations of "leaf" which is what "dhammas" are. The objective physical leaf in the external/objective scientific/worldlin g sense (which I guess you would call rupa, and consider paramattha dhamma) is irrelevant in the context of the Dhamma beyond the extent to which it provides raw input into the senses. Well that is how I understand it, at least. It would seem that this take on "dhammas" is probably not how "dhammas" are understood in contemporary Abhidhamma circles. Nor I suspect has it anything to do with "the Ocean of Being". Thank you for the civil dialogue on the Dhamma. KO:? DO could be apply?even to concept irregardlness of whether it has the characteristic or not.? Leaf exist as a mental object, if it does not exist, could one experience this mental object.?? What does not exist?-?that this leaf does not?belong to anyone.? It is just a leaf, an object of the mind.? Concepts do not have inherent characteristic but that does not mean it cannot?help one to understand the?characteristic of anatta, anicca and dukkha.? Even Universe itself, would eventually have to cease to exist and then another one will reappear.? Does Universe belong to anyone :-) Cheers Ken O #107173 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 4:51 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Little selves? truth_aerator Dear KenO, Paul, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Paul > > >Therefore to say the "green-ness" of a leaf exists, so long as we caveat that with acknowledgement of the fact this green-ness is subject to change, and will in time, turn yellow, and turn brown. > > > KO:? when you perceive greeness at that moment, does greeness exist >at that moment. We could say that what exists is not greeness but SANNA of recognition of green. "Same color" can be viewed as differently by a normal sighted person and color blind person. >If green or yellow or brown does not exist, then what exist.? What is experienced is primarily Sanna with all relevant aggregates. In any case what exists is namarupa. IMHO concepts are a function of nama. Since nama is conditioned and dependently arisen with all anicca-dukkha-anatta - same with concepts. They are anicca, dukkha, anatta. With metta, Alex #107174 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 5:00 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The role of samatha for insight truth_aerator Dear KenO, all, > KO:? pse quote source that cetana is temporary suspended. It is what Ajahn Brahm says. As I understand it, cetana is focused on maintaining/coordinative jhana factors for the duration of jhana during all the cittas that arise. It doesn't alter its function unless one exits that Jhana. >KO:? yes the fault is in clinging but what eradicate clinging - >jhanas or panna Samatha eradicates active clinging (raga), Panna eradicates avijja. Both these things happen during maggaphala. With metta, Alex #107175 From: Kevin F Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 5:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? farrellkevin80 Dear Howard, You said: "As the great sage, John Lennon, said, "Let it be" Kevin: John Lennon is not Buddha. Kevin #107176 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? upasaka_howard Hi, Kevin - In a message dated 4/25/2010 2:00:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, farrellkevin80@... writes: Dear Howard, You said: "As the great sage, John Lennon, said, "Let it be" Kevin: John Lennon is not Buddha. ------------------------------------------------- Oh, geez! Gosh, I just get confused at times! ;-) ------------------------------------------------ Kevin ============================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #107177 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 11:06 pm Subject: Re: Little selves? kenhowardau Hi Paul, ----------- P: > If you do get the chance to review the sutta in full, I would recommend it and be interested in your thoughts. I'm disinclined to think it's explicitly about paramatta dhamma since that's not a sutta concept. ------------- Thanks, I will when I get the chance. Meanwhile, however, I see all suttas as being explicitly about paramattha dhammas. As the Buddha explains in some suttas (sorry no ref) his use of conventional terminology is purely for the practical purposes of teaching. When he refers to a sentient being, for example, he is actually talking about the five khandhas (momentary, conditioned namas and rupas). ------------------- <. . .> P: > I was just speaking conventionally to draw the scope of the colour in question. Indeed, the concept of leaf is a formation conditioned by ignorance. ------------------- Yes, usually it is conditioned by ignorance. But let's not forget that wholesome consciousness also can create concepts. Even arahants have concepts of "leaf". --------------------------- <. . .> P: > Don't you think the concept of 'leaf' has the anatta, anicca, dukkha characteristics too, though? ---------------------------- No, as I understand inherent characteristics (lakkhana), they are absolute. When panna finally gets to experience anicca, for example, it will see an absolute kind of impermanence. Conditioned dhammas will be seen to have no lastingness whatsoever. Or they will be seen to last for less than the briefest imaginable period of time. As the Buddha said in another sutta about nama, nama is so brief (changes so quickly) that there is no adequate simile for describing how quickly it changes. So the gradual fading of a leaf's colour is not annica. At best it could be used as a very rough simile. ---------------- P: > Mind-consciousness is no more of less real than the other five-consciousnesses. To that extent I suspect I consider this separation of "concept" and "reality" to be of less significance than you. ---------------- There is a common mistranslation of suttas that leads students very much astray. Many translators render "concepts" or "ideas" as dhammadhatu (mind-object elements). Concepts are mind objects, but they are not elements, and they should not be included in the fourth foundation of mindfulness, as they often are by those translators. This is fundamentally important! -------------- <. . .> P: > The only dhammas that interest me are that which constitute the loka (world) of experience. How can one actually know "leaf"? By sound, by sight, by touch, by smell, by taste, by thought. There is no other way. -------------- Yes, but it is important to know that satipatthana will never be developed by examining concepts (leaf, green etc). It will be developed only by knowing dhatu (elements, dhammas). -------------------- P: > To me it is those ignorant formations of "leaf" which is what "dhammas" are. The objective physical leaf in the external/objective scientific/worldling sense (which I guess you would call rupa, and consider paramattha dhamma) is irrelevant in the context of the Dhamma beyond the extent to which it provides raw input into the senses. Well that is how I understand it, at least. It would seem that this take on "dhammas" is probably not how "dhammas" are understood in contemporary Abhidhamma circles. --------------------- I haven't quite understood your explanation of dhammas. And I am not sure what you mean by "contemporary" Abhidhamma circles. But I think we agree that the original Abhidhamma circles (made up of Theras) are the ones we should be learning from. Ken H #107178 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 11:19 pm Subject: concepts can lead to awakening truth_aerator Hi KenH, all, >KenH: There is a common mistranslation of suttas that leads students >very much astray. Many translators render "concepts" or "ideas" as >dhammadhatu (mind-object elements). Concepts are mind objects, but >they are not elements, and they should not be included in the fourth >foundation of mindfulness, as they often are by those translators. > > This is fundamentally important! > Yes, but it is important to know that satipatthana will never be >developed by examining concepts (leaf, green etc). It will be >developed only by knowing dhatu (elements, dhammas). What about satipatthana sutta instructions regarding anapanasati: 31 bodyparts contemplation 10 corpses of decay? 1] "There is the case where a monk ? having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building ? sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect and setting mindfulness to the fore [lit: the front of the chest]. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out. [4] "Furthermore...just as if a sack with openings at both ends were full of various kinds of grain ? wheat, rice, mung beans, kidney beans, sesame seeds, husked rice ? and a man with good eyesight, pouring it out, were to reflect, 'This is wheat. This is rice. These are mung beans. These are kidney beans. These are sesame seeds. This is husked rice,' in the same way, monks, a monk reflects on this very body from the soles of the feet on up, from the crown of the head on down, surrounded by skin and full of various kinds of unclean things: 'In this body there are head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, gorge, feces, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, skin-oil, saliva, mucus, fluid in the joints, urine.' [6] "Furthermore, as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground ? one day, two days, three days dead ? bloated, livid, & festering, he applies it to this very body, 'This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate'... "Or again, as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground, picked at by crows, vultures, & hawks, by dogs, hyenas, & various other creatures... a skeleton smeared with flesh & blood, connected with tendons... a fleshless skeleton smeared with blood, connected with tendons... a skeleton without flesh or blood, connected with tendons... bones detached from their tendons, scattered in all directions ? here a hand bone, there a foot bone, here a shin bone, there a thigh bone, here a hip bone, there a back bone, here a rib, there a breast bone, here a shoulder bone, there a neck bone, here a jaw bone, there a tooth, here a skull... the bones whitened, somewhat like the color of shells... piled up, more than a year old... decomposed into a powder: He applies it to this very body, 'This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate.' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.than.html Aren't these concepts? But they are still included in satipatthana sutta and they can lead to awakening! With metta, Alex #107179 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 11:50 pm Subject: Re: The role of samatha for insight kenhowardau Hi Robin, ------------- <. . .> R: > I do not know that he would consider it fraudulent. If I understand correctly, the Sarvastivada Abhidharma, as well as references to those of the Sautrantika and Vaibhashika, survive in Chinese translations. I think the authors of these texts thought they were speaking with the Buddha's Voice. ------------- To be fair to B Bodhi, I admit he didn't use the word "fraudulent." In the essay I am thinking of he acknowledged that most of the material in the Abhidhamma Pitaka was known from the earliest days of the Buddha's teaching. But he did say the Abhidhamma Pitaka was added later. Now, since the Tipitaka *claims* to be the original teaching as recorded at the time of the First Council, that claim can only be either true or fraudulent, can't it? But the point I was trying to make was that conventional understandings of the Dhamma will never sit well with the Abhidhamma. People (like BB) who see the Dhamma as a list of things to do will never be able to reconcile their understanding with a teaching of momentary reality (in which there is no time for us to do anything). And so the easiest way is to pretend the Abhidhamma is not fundamentally important. The people behind Access To Insight, for example, make a few condescending remarks about what an interesting work the Abhidhamma Pitika is, and then omit it entirely from their web site - on the basis that it is "not helpful to meditation." ------------------ R: > Disagreements over interpretations do not bother me in the least. I have worked at developing non-attachment to fixed views for quite a while. Some of the views presented to me are quite a bit different from anything I have been exposed to. I also need to expand my Pali vocabulary quite a bit. I have been this, discussing Buddhism, for quite a while. There are some points on which people are just going to disagree; hopefully in a collegial manner. I think a lot of disagreements occur because people misunderstand one another, or else they use words in a different way. Sometimes they attribute ulterior motives to one another. ------------------ I agree entirely. I also suspect that most of the disagreements we have at DSG will continue to our graves. But it would be good if we could at least know what "the other side" was saying. Ken H #107180 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 12:59 am Subject: Re: The role of samatha for insight kenhowardau Hi Kevin --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kevin F wrote: > > Hi Ken H, > > Thank you very much for typing out that post. I had always been under the impression that somehow jhana was used as a basis for insight by most jhana-labhis. So I am assuming that was a wrong understanding on my part. ----------- I think it was, Kevin, and I think nearly all of us have been under that wrong impression at some stage. Especially as there are so many suttas on the subject of jhana! Even when the Buddha developed samatha and vipassana in tandem, that only meant that he took jhana factors as objects of his right understanding. It didn't mean that the panna arising with samatha-citta contributed to vipassana. Samatha-panna cannot know the tilakkhana. Ken H #107181 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The role of samatha for insight upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Kevin) - In a message dated 4/25/2010 8:59:23 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Kevin --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kevin F wrote: > > Hi Ken H, > > Thank you very much for typing out that post. I had always been under the impression that somehow jhana was used as a basis for insight by most jhana-labhis. So I am assuming that was a wrong understanding on my part. ----------- I think it was, Kevin, and I think nearly all of us have been under that wrong impression at some stage. Especially as there are so many suttas on the subject of jhana! Even when the Buddha developed samatha and vipassana in tandem, that only meant that he took jhana factors as objects of his right understanding. It didn't mean that the panna arising with samatha-citta contributed to vipassana. Samatha-panna cannot know the tilakkhana. Ken H ====================================== AN 4.170 PTS: A ii 156 Yuganaddha Sutta: In Tandem translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu _© 1998-2010 _ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.170.than.html#F_termsOfUse\ ) On one occasion Ven. Ananda was staying in Kosambi, at Ghosita's monastery. There he addressed the monks, "Friends!" "Yes, friend," the monks responded. Ven. Ananda said: "Friends, whoever - monk or nun - declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of four paths. Which four? "There is the case where a monk has developed insight preceded by tranquillity. As he develops insight preceded by tranquillity, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it - his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity preceded by insight. As he develops tranquillity preceded by insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it - his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity in tandem with insight. As he develops tranquillity in tandem with insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it - his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated. In him the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it - his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. "Whoever - monk or nun - declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of these four paths." ____________________________________ With metta, Howard Path to Full Awakening /Skillful virtues have freedom from remorse as their purpose and reward. Freedom from remorse has joy as its purpose and reward. Joy has rapture as its purpose and reward. Rapture has serenity as its purpose and reward. Serenity has pleasure as its purpose and reward. Pleasure has concentration as its purpose and reward. Concentration has knowledge & vision of things as they actually are as its purpose and reward. Knowledge & vision of things as they actually are has disenchantment as its purpose and reward. Disenchantment has dispassion as its purpose and reward. Dispassion has knowledge & vision of release as its purpose and reward./ (From the Kimattha Sutta) #107182 From: "Mike" Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:17 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Little selves? mikenz66 Hi Kevin, Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kevin F wrote: > > Dear Howard, > > You said: > > "As the great sage, John Lennon, said, "Let it be" > > Kevin: John Lennon is not Buddha. > > Kevin True, and it also seems well-documented that Paul McCartney wrote that particular song: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_It_Be_%28song%29 Mike #107183 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 12:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? upasaka_howard Hi, Mike - In a message dated 4/25/2010 11:18:27 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, mikenz66@... writes: Hi Kevin, Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kevin F wrote: > > Dear Howard, > > You said: > > "As the great sage, John Lennon, said, "Let it be" > > Kevin: John Lennon is not Buddha. > > Kevin True, and it also seems well-documented that Paul McCartney wrote that particular song: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_It_Be_%28song%29 --------------------------------------------- Omigod! An error more grievous than confusing John with the Buddha! ;-) ---------------------------------------------- Mike =========================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #107184 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:08 am Subject: Re: concepts can lead to awakening szmicio Dear Alex, > 1] "There is the case where a monk ? having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building ? sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect and setting mindfulness to the fore [lit: the front of the chest]. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out. > ... ......... ... > "Or again, as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground, picked at by crows, vultures, & hawks, by dogs, hyenas, & various other creatures... a skeleton smeared with flesh & blood, connected with tendons... a fleshless skeleton smeared with blood, connected with tendons... a skeleton without flesh or blood, connected with tendons... bones detached from their tendons, scattered in all directions ? here a hand bone, there a foot bone, here a shin bone, there a thigh bone, here a hip bone, there a back bone, here a rib, there a breast bone, here a shoulder bone, there a neck bone, here a jaw bone, there a tooth, here a skull... the bones whitened, somewhat like the color of shells... piled up, more than a year old... decomposed into a powder: He applies it to this very body, 'This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate.' > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.than.html > > > Aren't these concepts? But they are still included in satipatthana sutta and they can lead to awakening! L: This is what I've tried to tell you, concepts can condition understanding/development. They only impinge on mind-door. We can know, how after hearing Dhamma, the concepts influance right understanding. Without No-Self, without any controler. You have doubts, this is mental cetasika. I think I need to hear more on doubts, what's the characteristic of doubt? Best wishes Lukas #107185 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:54 am Subject: Abhidhamma Series, no 10. Life-continuum. nilovg > Dear friends, > > Life-continuum, bhavanga-citta. > > There are moments when there are no sense-impressions, when one > does not think, when there are no akusala cittas or kusala cittas. > Even when there are no sense-impressions and no thinking there must > be citta; otherwise there would be no life. The type of citta which > arises and falls away at those moments is called bhavanga-citta. > Bhavanga literally means ``factor of life''; bhavanga is usually > translated into English as ``life-continuum''. The bhavanga-citta > keeps the continuity in a lifespan, so that what we call a > ``being'' goes on to live from moment to moment. That is the > function of the bhavanga-citta. > There are countless bhavanga-cittas arising at those moments when > there are no sense-impressions, no thinking, no akusala cittas or > kusala cittas. When we are asleep and dreaming akusala cittas and > kusala cittas arise, but even when we are in a dreamless sleep > there still has to be citta. There are bhavanga-cittas at such > moments. Also when we are awake countless bhavanga-cittas arise; > they arise in between the different processes of citta. It seems > that hearing, for example, can arise very shortly after seeing, but > in reality there are different processes of citta and in between > these processes bhavanga-cittas arise. > When an object contacts one of the five senses the stream of > bhavanga-cittas is interrupted and there is a sense-cognition. > However, there cannot be a sense-cognition immediately. When sound, > for example, impinges on the earsense, there is not immediately > hearing. There are still some bhavanga-cittas arising and falling > away before the pa~nca-dvaaraavajjana-citta (five-door-adverting > consciousness) adverts to the sound through the ear-door and > hearing arises. The bhavanga-cittas do not perform the function of > adverting to the sound which contacts the earsense, they do not > experience the sound. They have their own function which is keeping > the continuity in a lifespan. > In the ?Atthasaalinii?, the commentary to the first book of the > Abhidhamma, the Dhammasangani, the parable of the Mango is given, > explaining a process of cittas after the stream of bhavanga has > been arrested. We read (Expositor II, 271, part X, no 2, Discourse > on the moral result of the sensuous realm) that a man went to sleep > under a mango-tree. A ripe mango fell down, grazing his ear. > Awakened by the sound he looked, stretched out his hand, took the > fruit, squeezed it, smelt it and ate it. We read: ?What does this > simile signify? The function of the object striking the sentient > organism. When this happens there is the function of adverting by > the five doors just agitating the life-continuum, the function of > just seeing by visual cognition, of just receiving the object by > the resultant mind-element [N: receiving-consciousness], of just > the examining of the object by the resultant element of mind- > cognition [N: investigating-consciousness], the determining of the > object by the inoperative element of mind-cognition (the > kiriyacitta which is determining-consciousness). But verily only > the apperception [N: the series of javanacittas] enjoys the taste > of the object. > Processes of cittas occur at this moment: seeing, attachment to > what is seen, thinking about it and taking it for a person or > thing. It seems that when there is seeing we think at the same time > of a person or thing, but each citta cognizes only one object at a > time. It is beneficial to learn about the different processes of > cittas that succeed one another extremely rapidly. When one has not > studied the Dhamma one confuses the different doorways and the > different objects, one ?joins? them together. One is inclined to > believe that there is a self who coordinates all the different > expriences. In reality there are only different cittas arising > because of their appropriate conditions that experience different > objects one at a time. > When we look at people they seem to last, and this is because we > think for a long time of shape and form of people and of things. > There are many different moments of thinking and these fall away. > Thinking is a paramattha dhamma, but the concepts that are the > objects of thinking are not paramattha dhammas. We can learn to > discern when we are in the world of concepts and when in the world > of paramattha dhammas. > > ******* > Nina. > #107186 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 6:28 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fives (321, 24) and commentary. nilovg Dear friends, Walshe DN 33.2.1(24) 'Five elements making for deliverance (nissara.niiyaa dhatuyo): (a) Here, when a monk considers sense-desires, his mind does not leap forward and take satisfaction in them, fix on them or make free with them, *1097 but when he considers renunciation it does leap forward, take satisfaction in it, fix on it, and make free with it. And he gets this thought [iii 240] wel-set, well-developed, well raised up, well freed and disconnected from sense-desires. And thus he is freed from the corruptions (aasavaa), the vexations and fevers that arise from sense-desires, and he does not feel that [sensual] feeling. This is called the deliverance from sense-desires. And the same applies to (b) ill-will, (c) cruelty, (d) forms (ruupa), (e) personality (sakkaaya). 321. (Pa~nca nissara.niyaa dhaatuyo. Idhaavuso, bhikkhuno kaame manasikaroto kaamesu citta.m na pakkhandati na pasiidati na santi.t.thati na vimuccati. Nekkhamma.m kho panassa manasikaroto nekkhamme citta.m pakkhandati pasiidati santi.t.thati vimuccati. Tassa ta.m citta.m sugata.m subhaavita.m suvu.t.thita.m suvimutta.m visa.myutta.m kaamehi. Ye ca kaamapaccayaa uppajjanti aasavaa vighaataa pari.laahaa [vighaatapari.laahaa (syaa. ka.m.)], mutto so tehi, na so ta.m vedana.m vedeti. Idamakkhaata.m kaamaana.m nissara.na.m.) ---------- N: As to the word element, dhaatu, in five elements (making for deliverance), its meaning is being of the nature (sabhaava) that is empty of self (attasu~n~na). Tiika: it is without soul or life: nijjiiva. Co:As to the words, a monk considers sense-desires, his mind does not leap forward, this means that for the monk who has emerged from jhaana with foulness as subject, he investigates the citta involved in sensuousness and abandons it, after he has, as it were, taken a medicine, viewing it as poison. He does not take confidence in it, does not remain established on it, he is not determined on it. Tiika: He thinks, ?since the citta is now based on renunciation, why should the thought of sense-desire arise?? Co: As to considering renunciation, nekkhamma, leaping forward etc, the co. states that by means of the first jhaana with the subject of the ten kinds of foulness (asubha), the citta leaps forward to renunciation. We read in the sutta; ?And thus he is freed from the corruptions (aasavaa)?. the co adds: the aasavas that are caused by kaama, sensuousness (kaamahetukaa). N: The aasavas are the intoxications of sensuousness, of existence, of wrong view and of ignorance. The Co explains that he is freed from sensuousness by asubha-jhaana. The Tiika adds, he is freed by suppression (vikkhambana). N: The temporary suppression of the five hindrances by jhaana. Co: However, after having taken jhaana as a basis and thoroughly known conditioned dhammas (sa?nkhaare), he reaches the third Path, sees nibbaana with the phalacitta (fruition) of the anaagaami, and knows that there is no longer sensuousness. His citta is absolutely liberated. Tiika: After having spoken of the escape from sensuousness by suppression he shows escape that is by complete eradication. Co: As to the other elements making for deliverance, this is similar. But as to the second element, mettaa-jhaana leads to escape from illwill. As to the third, karu.naa-jhaana leads to escape from cruelty. As to the fourth, the stages of aruupajhaana lead to escape from materiality, ruupa. But complete deliverance is in the fruition of arahatship. Tiika: the first four elements of escape have samatha as vehicle (samatha- yaanika), and as to the fifth, the co speaks about considering mere conditioned dhammas (suddhasa?nkhaare) with reference to the person who develops dry insight. Co: As to the fifth element making for deliverance, the co. speaks about a person who develops dry insight (sukkhavipassaka), who has considered mere conditioned dhammas and comprehended these, has reached arahatship, and after fruition, turns towards the five khandhas of grasping, investigating them. After he has realised nibbaana by the arahatta magga-citta and arahatta phala-citta he is delivered from sakkaaya, personality. For him there is no more sakkaaya. N: This means: no more rebirth as another personality. The co. reminds us that it is only an element devoid of self that develops the five ways of deliverance from sensuousness. It is due to accumulated conditions whether someone takes jhaana as a basis for insight or develops dry insight, without jhaana attainments. There is no doer, only conditioned elements. By means of jhaana there is suppression of sensuousness, and only by insight up to the stage of the anaagaami, sensuousness is completely eradicated. No matter whether one develops jhaana or not, in order to reach enlightenment it is necessary to develop understanding of the conditioned dhammas that appear through one of the six doorways. --------- Nina. #107187 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 6:27 am Subject: Re: Little selves? kenhowardau Hi Howard, -------- H: > Just a thought: Why should we think so much about "exists" or "doesn't > exist," and so much about modes of existing, when freedom lies in > relinquishing, -------- Because relinquishing is a function of panna, and panna is knowing all about "exists" and "doesn't exist" and modes of existing. :-) Ken H #107188 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 12:06 am Subject: Devotion is Delight! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Genuine Devotion is a rare Delight! Homage to that Perfectly Self-Enlightened One! Thus, indeed, is that the Blessed One: He is the worthy One, fully enlightened, endowed with clear vision and virtuous conduct, sublime, the knower of worlds, the incomparable leader of men to be tamed, the teacher of gods and men, awakened and blessed. Forever do I reverence for the Buddhas of the past, those of the times to come, those Buddhas of the present time... No other refuge do I seek: The Buddha is my only true refuge. By this Truth may peaceful victory be mine! I revere with my head the dust on his holy feet. If I have wronged the Buddha, may the Buddha bear with me. Until life?s end, to the Buddha I go for saving refuge. Who is the foremost speaker among mankind, The Sakyan Sage, O Holy One, whose task is done, gone beyond, possessed of supreme power and energy! To you, the wellcome wellgone One, I go for refuge ! Homage to that perfectly formulated Dhamma! The Dhamma of the Blessed One is perfectly explained, to be seen here and now, inviting one to come and see, leading onward to Nibbana; to be known by any wise, each for himself. Homage to that Dhamma leading out of this suffering, out of samsara! The Dhamma of the ages past, the Dhamma of the times to come, the Dhamma of the present time, forever do I reverence. No other refuge do I seek, the Dhamma is my true refuge. By this Truth: May peaceful victory be mine! I revere with my head this triple Dhamma of the three supreme qualities: Morality, Concentration and Understanding... If I have wronged the Dhamma: May the Dhamma bear with me. Until life?s end to the Dhamma I go for refuge. Freed from lust, cleared of craving, sorrow-free: An absolute Law, gracious, gratifying and satisfying, sweet, potent, profound, an analytic science... To this very Dhamma I go for refuge ! Homage to that Great Sangha Community of the Eight Noble persons. The Sangha of the Blessed One?s disciples has entered on the good way; the straight way; the true way ; on the direct way, that is to say: the 4 pairs of men, the 8 types of persons. This Sangha of the Blessed One?s disciples is fit for gifts, fit for hospitality, fit for offerings, and fit for reverential salutation with joined palms, as an incomparable field of merit in the world. Forever do I reverence: The Sanghas of the past ages, those of the times to come, and the Sanghas of the present time. No other refuge do I seek. The Sangha is my true refuge. By this very Truth: May peaceful victory be mine! I revere with my head this peerless Sangha. If I have wronged this Sangha: May the Sangha bear with me. Until life?s end, to the Sangha I go for refuge. Whatever is given to the four pure pairs of persons and these eight kind of people, who have realized the Truth, this bears great fruit...! To this very Sangha I go for refuge ! <...> Source: BPS Wheel no 54 (Edited Excerpt): The Mirror of the Dhamma. A Manual of Buddhist Devotional Texts. By Narada Thera and Bhikkhu Kassapa. Revised By Bhikkhu Khantipalo: http://www.bps.lk/wh054-u.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri <...> #107189 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 7:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] concepts can lead to awakening nilovg Dear Alex, Op 26-apr-2010, om 1:19 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > Aren't these concepts? But they are still included in satipatthana > sutta and they can lead to awakening! ------- They remind us of elements that are impermanent, dukkha, non-self. Heard from a recording: 'If one only knows it is a hand or foot, or skull, it is not satipa.t.thaana. All these items should not be separated from the four great Elements. It is the foulness of these elements shown here.' And what is element? What has the nature of non-self. Nina. #107190 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 7:43 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Phra Dhammadharo on weak sati. szmicio Dear Nina, Excellent! I read it few times. If you hear more Bhante on Thai tapes please share it. Best wishes Lukas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Lukas, > Op 23-apr-2010, om 20:14 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > > > And this kind of consideration will bring its fruits later on. > > Development of right understanding is very very slow and gradual. > -------- > N: Quite right. I listened to a Thai recording and heard Phra > Dhammadharo's voice. He spoke about weak sati. I thought about your > report, telling us that you went out with friends and realised that > there was forgetfulness. > Bhante Dhammadharo: When one begins one has to accept that sati is > weak, and it is not right to be annoyed about that. But even being > annoyed is conditioned. Weak sati is a reality that is not self, it > is conditioned. No need to wonder about it why it is weak, it has > gone already. > Questioner: There are several realities appearing at the same time, > such as cold and hardness, but I cannot separate them. > Dh: Do not try to separate them. They have fallen away, do not try to > know specifically cold or hardness. We do not know what appears next. > It is cold in this room, but the characteristic of cold is not a > place. We still have an idea of something that is cold. That is > thinking, it is not knowing the characteristic of cold. > Usually sati does not arise because we do not understand that it is > anattaa. It is of no use to force its arising. A beginner who > develops satipa.t.thaana is not free from wrong view. One does not > want to know what has arisen already, one wants to know what has not > arisen. One should not select objects of awareness. Satipa.t.thaana > is directed towards detachment, but nobody likes detachment. Lobha > likes objects, it does not detach. > > -------- > Nina. > > > #107191 From: Ken O Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] concepts can lead to awakening ashkenn2k Dear Nina >------- >They remind us of elements that are impermanent, dukkha, non-self. >Heard from a recording: 'If one only knows it is a hand or foot, or >skull, it is not satipa.t.thaana. All these items should not be >separated from the four great Elements. It is the foulness of these >elements shown here.' >And what is element? What has the nature of non-self. >Nina. KO:? the text does say that understanding of foulness leads to understanding of greed.? so we cannot said understanding of foulness is not satipatthana.? Satipatthana does not distinguish concepts and paramatha dhammas.? If one look at satipatthana sutta, breathing is a concept and used for development of jhanas then into basis of insight into nama and rupa.? The text does not support this type of saying that concepts cannot be used as a development of satipatthana.?If you wish to say that, then please show what is written in the commentaries of satipatthana or anapasati is wrong that breathing is actually nama and rupa.? In fact if we look at Abhidhamma closely, it helps us to understand dhamma, how the various dhammas works,? Even when it states that dhamma has bear its own characteristics, it still did not and never reject concept as development of understanding.? It does not diminish the use?of concepts, it just explain that dhamma are impt to the development of understanding.? Till date i have yet meet any Abhidhamma text or in any commentaries commenting that concepts cannot be used as a development of understanding just because is does not bear its own characteristics.? Unless you could prove your statement, we should make such statements that are not gounded on the texts. thanks Ken O #107192 From: Ken O Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The role of samatha for insight ashkenn2k Dear Ken H >----------- > >I think it was, Kevin, and I think nearly all of us have been under that wrong impression at some stage. Especially as there are so many suttas on the subject of jhana! > >Even when the Buddha developed samatha and vipassana in tandem, that only meant that he took jhana factors as objects of his right understanding. It didn't mean that the panna arising with samatha-citta contributed to vipassana. Samatha-panna cannot know the tilakkhana. > >Ken H > KO:? Where do you get this idea that the panna at samatha citta does not contribute to vipassana.?In the text, clear comprehension is the development of panna.?? Development of panna is to develop the understanding of?understand anatta, anicca and dukkha.?? If it cannot be used, then the commentaries in satipatthana would be wrong because breathing leads to jhanas which becomes a basis of insight.?? The panna of samantha must be develop to understand the tilakhana until there is ?direct penetration at the vipassana nana stage. Kind regards Ken O #107193 From: Ken O Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The role of samatha for insight ashkenn2k Dear Alex > >> KO:? pse quote source that cetana is temporary suspended. > >It is what Ajahn Brahm says. As I understand it, cetana is focused on maintaining/ coordinative jhana factors for the duration of jhana during all the cittas that arise. It doesn't alter its function unless one exits that Jhana. > KO:? Why do you listen to Ajhan Brahim and not to the text.? No dhamma can alter its function, because dhamma is anatta, likewise for the jhanas factors, they never alter their functions so do that? mean?they are temporary suspend.? If they are temporary suspended,?then what is jhanas. ? To be very frank, this show a lack of understanding of how dhamma works.? And everytime?when jhana citta?arise, cetana also arise,? cetana?is the?chief co-coordinator to the?object of the jhanas cittas.?? ?I am willing to make such a statement because it is the truth,? If you think it is not, then you quote me source of your understanding and not just someone say this and it is right.? All statements of the doctrines must be grounded on the text and not on ones interpretation.? I also make mistake but we should be careful.? We also cannot claim dhamma is not in the text.??It is all written in the texts, what we could do is to try to explain what is the?text but not try to have one own idea or interpretation?of the text.? >>KO:? yes the fault is in clinging but what eradicate clinging - >jhanas or panna > >Samatha eradicates active clinging (raga), >Panna eradicates avijja. > KO:? Only panna can eradicate clinging and not samatha.? Samatha even though has alobha and adosa,?they dont eradicate clinging because if it eradicate then people who practise jhanas before Buddha would have become Arahants,? Or Buddha in his previous life when he attain jhanas, he would have become Buddha many lifetimes ago. Kind regards Ken O #107194 From: Ken O Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The role of samatha for insight ashkenn2k Dear Robin I agree with Ken H.? There are instances of Abhidhamma quoted in the suttas,? ? Also it if it not impt why were they incorporated in the 3rd council where they were Arahants and the true doctrine still prevails. Abhidhamma is very impt to the understanding of dhamma, without it one cannot differentiate what is dhamma, their function, characteristics, classification.? Personally, one should learn Abhidhamma after one read the suttaa, without Abhidhamma it is easy to misunderstand the usage of dhamma terms used in the suttas. Do you want to listen to B Bodhi or to the? Arahants that?are in the 3rd council that endorse Abhidhamma.? Likewise for all the teachers in modern times, do you prefer to listen to them or the Arahants,.? Think about it kind regards Ken O #107195 From: Ken O Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? ashkenn2k Dear Alex > >We could say that what exists is not greeness but SANNA of recognition of green. "Same color" can be viewed as differently by a normal sighted person and color blind person. KO:? Colour is a rupa that could be seen by a seeing citta.? Yes different people see differently that does not mean they do not see colour even for a colour blind person.? The colour blind person still see colour.? Sanna dont see colour, sanna only remember or mark the object being seen. > >>If green or yellow or brown does not exist, then what exist.? > >What is experienced is primarily Sanna with all relevant aggregates. KO:? Only citta experience directly.? Sanna only partake the experience of the object and mark it as green or red etc Cheers Ken O #107196 From: Ken O Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Little selves? ashkenn2k Dear Howard >============ ========= ========= ===== >Just a thought: Why should we think so much about "exists" or "doesn't >exist," and so much about modes of existing, when freedom lies in >relinquishing, in unclasping the grasping fist, in letting go and letting be, and >letting become? Nothing is actually graspable, nothing holds still for a >nonexistent "I" to grab onto. As the great sage, John Lennon, said, "Let it >be!" ;-) KO:? To me it is good to explain this so one will not fall into believing because of conditionality nothing really exist, that is to me? not a correct view.?? Honestly understand conditionality or dhamma exist?or characteristics are real do not imply about grasping, on the other hand it helps?to develop understanding it is just dhamma?at?work, the cause or the condition and lead?to develop the understanding of anatta of dhammas.? With this understanding or correct view, then one will let go or detach as one realise there is no self at all in dhamma even aksuala dhammas are also anatta. Kind regards Ken O #107197 From: Ken O Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The role of samatha for insight ashkenn2k Dear Kevin On samatha, if you do not understand?pse read,?Dispeller of Delusion,?Visud and commentaries of satipatthana which you could find online.? samatha is not simple at all, it is not just about concentration, it requires, virture, sati, panna and seclusion.? Any of it missing, it would not work,? And it is always these first before starting?concentration, if not, the mind will be restless and agitated and unable to concentrate.? To start meditation without?these factor?is like building a house without the pillars and foundation.? So why meditate :-), one should?develop understanding first Cheers Ken O #107198 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] concepts can lead to awakening truth_aerator Dear Nina, Thank you for your reply to this and other posts. With metta, Alex #107199 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:26 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The role of samatha for insight truth_aerator Dear KenO, all, > Dear Alex >No dhamma can alter its function, because dhamma is anatta, likewise >for the jhanas factors, they never alter their functions so do that? >mean?they are temporary suspend.? If they are temporary >suspended,?then what is jhanas. What I've meant to say is that cetana does the same specific function for every citta that arises in that particular jhana. It is like an arrow that was shot. It flies into one direction. In same way, cetana focuses on performing only the functions relevant to that jhana, and it doesn't alter its course. In that way it is suspended from focusing on many different things that happen in a restless mind. IMHO. With metta, Alex